fosforus, (edited )

The latter part is kinda wrong. Article 17 of UDHR.

  1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
  2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

And also kinda article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.


I’m pretty sure OP is advocating for limits to these cited rights.


Oh ok. Fuck OP then :)


That’s a weird take. All rights have limits, why should this be any different?


You’re pro-hoarding? Are you a dragon?


Compost homeless - get free fuel and fertiliser!


Compost billionaires - get free fuel and fertiliser!


Not enough of them. They also don’t live off benefits, so…


Maybe they don’t live off of benefits, but they get massive tax benefits. In fact, the government loses way more revenue by not taxing billionaires properly than by helping homeless people.


If the government loses even a penny, all the hell will break loose.


Your sure about that?




I haven’t read up on official human rights. Who made them? Did someone bother to ask most humans?

This is a Sunday-morning coffee post, not a detailed world-view. Feel free to ask, but refrain from shooting things down. It’s not like I’ve spent hours on this.

How are they defined, human rights? I’d say anyone in my way to spread my genes keeps me from being a human.

As a pragmatist, I’d say breathing and eating, and perhaps warmth and caring are human rights. We can’t do any of them on our own after being born, and without them some really crappy humans emerge. Breathing should be top tier. Anyone disturbing that should be under heavy focus. Can’t do anything without air.

After that, once we are fairly independent, doing things to keep people keeping me from growing up and procreating should be my right.

Killing someone else would keep them from doing that, so not being killed by other humans seems like one. Killing others would disqualify me from being human, and I would give up my rights by that act. Straightforward stuff.

Mix in social structures, and it becomes complicated.

Being homeless? Build a commune somewhere. Why insist on being near that techno-tribe with internet. It’s nothing but a tribe, has nothing to do with survival or being human. Having modern amenities can’t be a right. Other humans invented them at some point.

Which leads to something no human should have a right to: owning land. Because owning land keeps humans from realizing their purpose and keeps them from being free to be human.

Housing is a right? That’s ridiculous. That’s a technological achievement from other people. So is monetary wealth. How can those be a right. If nobody came along inventing them, nobody would have them. Can’t be a right. At all. That is just the consequences of capitalism and ownership of natural resources.

Grayox, avatar

Let me spell it out for you bub, i want to: Abolish Private Property


You do? I wonder how that would work. Can’t see it, personally.

Grayox, avatar

Probably important to point this out: private property is not personal property.

E.g. An apartment building rented to tenants is the landlords private property. They have exclusive rights to the decisions, especially economic ones, regarding the building and the profits of the rent.

A car, book, house, pizza, are all your personal property so long as you don’t owe a lender anything for them.

So no private property might look like:

The people who live in an apartment building own the building collectively and have the full right therein, but the individual units are each their own personal property.


Housing is not a human right as humans can exist in the wild without a house.


By that logic, nothing is a human right since you can find food, water and shelter in the wild.

The problem with that logic is that you assume everyone to be physically able and knowledgeable to live off the land.


That’s right. Nothing is a human right. Many humans have rights outlined in their countries constitutions but even those are easily stomped on with usually little consequence


And you’re saying that shouldn’t be the case right ? Right ?

I’d insert that Anakin Padme meme here if I had one ready.


I’m just saying what is. If you want what I think should be, I’m a non Randian libertarian. Big on personal responsibility and the risk of consequences and consequences of risk, less on being a whiny bitch about everything.


Well, it takes some time to grow up to be able to find food and water. How long until we can walk even?

Food, water and means to provide an upbringing until offspring can care for themselves, those could be considered basic rights.

Housing is so far into the technological advancements, building up on so many other systems, I fail to see how that can be a right.

Air and food on the other hand, and sensible means to acquiring those. Well. There certainly is room for discussion. When people start owning land, keeping others to effectively do those things, they should have to provide alternatives. Or we have to abolish ownership of natural resources at all. Both can’t work together. That’s ineffective, of course, and makes planning and advancement difficult.

The price of capitalism and ownership of nature should be compensation. Nothing natural about social structures. If they want to continue those money games, they need to play by the rules of nature. Or they’ll go down with chopped-off heads at some point.

iquanyin, avatar

it’s illegal. the blm will come with guns and force you out. i know this for a fact. not can i just find some land and grow my food and raise animals. it’s either owned by someone or it’s govt land.


Absolutely. So instead of building up on that, declaring everyone may own something, making them mini billionaires in principle; yeah, make owning land illegal. That would be the natural conclusion.

You are basically saying: other people owning things and keeping me from building a house and a live should be illegal. Your solution: Make everyone own something, so they can build a house! Houses for everyone, hurray! But hey, my family is twice as big as yours, my house should, by right, be bigger. And hey, my farm supplies for ten families, it should, by right, be bigger. You don’t want to farm, let me buy your land and provide for you. And so the circle begins.

I’d say, that thinking is what got us here in the first place.

iquanyin, avatar

i’m pretty sure that native americans were able to not own land and work this out. i do think owning land is absurd. also, all i need to do is look around to know that how we are doing things has to change if our species wants to keep living. i don’t mean what you think but it’s the wee hours here, the key word being “wee” as that’s why i got up for a sec. so…back to sleep it is.

HiddenLayer5, (edited )

Appeal to nature fallacy. Just because something is a certain way in nature doesn’t automatically mean it’s good because nature has no concept of good or bad. Living in “the wild” has a far higher mortality rate than any of us should accept today. By your logic nothing should be a human right because we can always just die if we don’t have it, just as nature intended.

Also, humans originated in the African savannah, which is much warmer than the places most humans now live. And even in the savannah at the dawn of our species we were nest building animals that instinctively would make shelters for ourselves. Housing is as natural to humanity as hives are to bees.


Very well put. Thank you. :)


Article 25 of the declararion of himan rights: Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family

Seriously, do you think human rights are somehow just a feeling what should be? They are written down and you can look them up.

fosforus, (edited )

Yeah, the practical problem with that of course is that if you have more humans than houses, it’s impossible to immediately fulfil the “human right”. This is a fine goal though, but the implementation matters quite a lot.


It has also never happened, there has never been a time in all of history. And the declaration of human rights isn’t broadly accepted either.


I can’t believe so many of you are upvoting a post about murdering homeless people. You monsters!


Still waiting for that to happen…


Would have been a better joke without the “all”. Then the meaning is ambiguous.


Prove that OP doesn’t wanna be a billionaire.


in feudal times ordinary people would have wanted to be a king or a lord, it doesn’t make it right and it doesn’t mean they didn’t want, fought for, and died for a revolution.

rivermonster, (edited )

EDIT: Abridged for clarity

Throughout history, plenty of people have sought out and been fine with a life of subsistence and, where possible, peace. It’s actually more telling when someone can NOT conceive of a life that’s completely soaked in foul consumption and exploitation. Not everyone would want to be a king or lord. Lots would NOT.



  • Loading...
  • rivermonster,

    Your comment adds lots of value and clearly reflects your character.



  • Loading...
  • Powerpoint,

    Jesus Christ are you advocating for feudal times or something? What the fuck is this shit.


    “This shit” is a sign you need to go back to school

    los_chill, (edited )

    It’s time to think beyond personal enrichment. That kind of greed got us into this mess.


    I think homeless people are a little less psyched about it.

    FlashMobOfOne, avatar

    Not in the USA it isn’t.

    Neither party has done a damn thing to address housing scarcity, and in a few months, you’re all going to vote for the same assholes who ignore it.


    Oh don’t worry.

    The billionaires will make sure the homeless don’t exist soon enough.




    Bro, billionaires can’t be black! (/s omg)

    CollisionResistance, avatar

    They Have Money For War But Can’t Feed The Poor



    When the rich wage war its the poor who die.

    -Mike Shinoda

    FlyingSquid, avatar

    The poor go to war, to fight and die for the delights, riches, and superfluities of others.

    – Plutarch

    CE 45 - ~CE 119

    This has literally been said by people for at least two millennia.


    Preach 🙏

    Gerula, (edited )

    Rights are something that the society you live in and contribute to, grants you!

    There are no inherent human rights to be had! Even being alive is a happening not a right! You’re born because your parents fucked, there was nothing special about it!

    L.E. I see a lot of snowflakes are bothered by what I said, good. Maybe you start thinking once about what you have, instead of whining about what you would like!

    c0mbatbag3l, avatar

    I’m starting to think most of lemmy is populated by a bunch of kids who just read Marx and have no actual world experiences cause they’re 14.


    Let’s not forget that the only reason states exist is to serve those within them. If that state should fail to serve its people sufficiently, it’s been common throughout history that they’ve been dismantled by the people.

    You are correct about natural rights. They are fought for. Many rights, such as workers’ rights, were strongly fought for and founded on blood (pretty much all of them in fact). However, when talking about rights, one remember the original meaning of the word: that which is morally good or honorable. The legal entitlement is preceded by the philosophical definition. In a just society legal rights should reflect moral rights as closely as possible.

    Housing is necessary for life, and so depriving an individual of housing when housing is unutilized is equatable to murder, an injustice. This is why the post communicates that housing is a human right.


    Corect, but if the state is or isn’t serving those within, is a decision to be taken by the same individuals. Up to now those who are considering this are a small subset of the citizens which agrregate in underground forums and not actively trying to change the society and have a positive impact.

    Housing is necessary for life but it was never a right in that society. Also necessary for life are water, clothing, food, medical assistance, etc. None of them are rights of the people within that society. It may not correct but it is what it is.


    I don’t think housing should be considered a human right, unless being homeless is made illegal. But, being homeless is practically illegal everywhere, so here we are, agreeing with one another.

    I try to think to myself - at what point do we call for things to be considered human rights? At what point in human history did we start considering clean water to be a human right? – Generally once we had massive cheap, clean, unfettered access to it, right?

    Companies and corporations, want their workers healthy, housed, disease free, etc. So – if they want those things, they should be considered ‘rights’ and we should collect taxes on making sure those rights are distributed, shouldn’t we?


    I don’t think housing should be considered a human right, unless being homeless is made illegal

    Why not?


    I edited my reply to expound upon my thoughts. But mostly it comes down to – because houses require vast resources to build. You need people in the steel industry, wood/lumber industries, a set of housing standards, architects, etc.

    Unless these things become so cheap that they’re basically costless, ensuring a house for everyone free of charge is a monumentally burdensome task.


    “It’s too expensive and too hard” are not good reasons to reject a right


    Absolutely it is. Because our “rights” are just invented bullshit brought about by the society we’ve created. You don’t have the right for me not to murder you in the lawless nothingness of nature. Therefore, if it’s difficult as a society to supply it – we can, AND DO, reject things as human rights.

    As it is, clean water is not a human right. Housing is not a human right. You WANT it to be, but your feelings here obviously don’t have a speck of reality within them.


    What kind of backwards arsed ayn rand bullshit is this.

    You do realise society actually only came into existence in and of itself via a loose collective agreement of behaviours, yes? These behaviours were not determined by whether or not they fit into a too hard basket, but whether or not they ensured the social strucuture remained intact for the good of the collective. Those eventually became codes of laws, and now relatively recently the conceept of human rights.

    No shit housing was never ranked a right or even on the radar until recently, it wasn’t an issue that affected enough of the population that it started to threaten social cohesion. It is now.

    You’re acting like lawless nature should dictate our actions when the sole fuckin’ reason we’re the dominant species is our ability and innate nature that works outside these parameters. It’s laughable


    Money is fake. It doesn’t exist. Your labor has value. You can use your labor to make other people’s lives easier. They can use their labor to make your life easier. Like building stuff? Cool. I’ll make your wardrobe if you build my house. No banks or real estate agents necessary.


    A reasonably stable currency is incredibly useful as an abstraction for value. Do you farm potatoes? Do you need a difficult medical procedure? I guarantee you, the surgeon, support staff, and the hospital are not much interested in being paid in a sufficient amount of potatoes.

    BolexForSoup avatar

    “Because it’s expensive” never stopped us from things we have been motivated about basically ever. All I’m hearing is a fantastic jobs creation program.

    Zagorath, avatar

    Something shouldn’t have to be free to be a human right. That’s an extremely right-wing American point of view, where they only believe in so-called “negative” rights.

    A right to housing wouldn’t mean builders and their suppliers have to work for free. That’s the same kind of nonsense reasoning libertarians and conservatives use to argue against free healthcare.

    A right to housing would impose an obligation on governments to do everything they can to ensure housing is readily available to anyone who wants it. Whether by ensuring that everyone can afford housing (economic policies that lower the cost of housing and/or put more money on people’s pockets) or by directly ensuring the government itself can give people a place to live if they can’t afford it. Ideally a mix of both.


    What you described there is not what a human right consists of. Sure, governments should do exactly what you say, but something considered a ‘human right’ has much higher standards. It MUST be met. It’s not an optional strive-to-do-our-best situation.

    Zagorath, avatar

    Umm, no. That’s just not correct. A human right is anything a human should have the right to. End of.

    The practicalities of how we achieve that are a separate concern.


    A human right is anything a human should have the right to.

    In that case, you have no rights at all. Not even to speech, or the right not to be killed. “Rights” are invented by the society we live in. You have literally none in the natural world. As it exists, “Rights” are a religious idea. (Hence, “God-given rights”)

    The practicalities are of the utmost concern, because those practicalities are governed by the society which recognizes them as rights. As of now, there is no “human right to shelter”.

    Zagorath, avatar

    you have no rights at all


    Not even to speech, or the right not to be killed


    “Rights” are invented by the society we live in


    You have literally none in the natural world


    As it exists, “Rights” are a religious idea

    Lol what? Where did you even get that idea?


    Govt. does its best to ensure citizens aren’t murdered, yet it still happens.

    Shouldn’t housing be similarly considered a right like the right to life?


    Housing isn’t free. Not killing someone is.


    The 800,000+ police officers in the United States certainly come at a cost, no?


    That’s enforcement, those police officers don’t need to exist for you not to kill someone…

    Or do they?


    I mean healthcare is definitely a human right, but there is always more we could be doing. That’s a kind of arbitrary distinction that I don’t think adds anything to the discussion here.

    Basic human needs are basic human rights. I really do think it’s as simple as that.


    Healthcare is not a human right. It’s a societal right granted to you by those around you.


    Deep in that American politique, eh?


    It’s called philosophy. You should try it sometime. Understanding the worlds truths at a deeper level allows you to more precisely consolidate them into a unified opinion of things. Helps to be concise and rigorously authentic to their principles.


    I’m not sure blasting adhoc justifications for what you feel is really philosophy, but if that’s what we’re doing… My mistake. Philosophy then. So tell me, Socrates, what is a human right?

    BolexForSoup avatar

    Being dehydrated isn’t illegal yet we consider it a human right. Not sure I follow your logic.

    Zagorath, avatar

    I don’t think housing should be considered a human right, unless being homeless is made illegal.

    Huh? I don’t see how that follows.

    Freedom of speech is widely regarded as a human right. But you still have the right not to express yourself.

    Shelter is literally a human need. It’s like, number 4 on the list after air, water, and food. Maybe before food, even. Being necessary for life should be a sufficient condition to qualify as a human right.


    Speech doesn’t require anything tangible though. Big difference. Same with the right to water – it has more to do with not infringing the rights of others (by dumping waste into the water, etc) than it does actually attaining something tangible; mostly due to how widely available it is, causing it to be essentially free as well. That’s why those are already codified rights basically – because they’re easy to attain and ensure.


    Water is tangible though. Clean, safe drinking water isn’t cheaply and widely available (in the USA, anyway) by accident: it’s a huge endeavor that requires tax money to maintain public infrastructure. See the ongoing crises in places with tainted water to see how challenging it is to maintain.

    Housing is harder than water, but public water and sanitation systems are incredibly expensive, so I wonder what the comparison would be like against more public housing.


    Clean, safe drinking water isn’t cheaply and widely available

    Literally rain. It’s literally free, and literally “widely” available. As I said, water rights have more to do with not polluting fresh water sources than actually attaining physical water.


    Hahaha awesome, do you get the majority of your clean water via collecting rain? Do you think it’s a viable source for folks living in dense metropolitan areas?

    thantik, (edited )

    do you get the majority of your clean water via collecting rain?

    Yes, I do. It’s called a well. Millions of people do the same. You can drill a well almost anywhere, and drink clean rain water. There are some exceptions of course, but as I stated before – “the right to clean water” – has more to do with keeping large corporations, etc from polluting those water sources than it does physically attaining water.

    Do you think it’s a viable source for folks living in dense metropolitan areas?

    No, but that’s their choice to live there. That’s the same reason why it’s illegal to fish in dense populated areas.


    My apologies, since wells are hardly “free” to build and maintain I had assumed you were talking about collecting it directly via a harvesting system. I’ve used wells the majority of my life.

    My general point is that wells or direct capture is not viable for dense urban areas, and while you’re saying it’s a choice, the majority of folks in the USA live in urban areas. Big urban centers aren’t going away any time soon, so we should consider how to meet people where they are, when possible. The larger point I wanted to make though is that we (at least in the USA, and all the Latin American nations I’ve lived in) have good public sanitation and water systems precisely because it’s seen as a right. And those systems aren’t cheap, but we do it. As I argue we should do more for re: housing.

    That’s the crux of the biscuit: I just think more should be done to help people afford these basic necessities. I think we should (as a nation/planet) fundamentally rethink the way we approach housing, for the same reasons water and food are subsidized (and they should be further subsidized IMHO, but that’s another point entirely). I’m not going to claim I know the answers, or that it would be easy or cheap, but I think it’s something we should all try seriously to solve.


    Wells are essentially free. They used to dig them by hand…you still can, in fact. They’re one of the most commonly used pre-technological age way of getting water with the exception of simply living next to a freshwater source.

    You don’t need metal, you don’t need electrical, you don’t need pumps, you don’t need anything except some rocks, clay, and something to dredge water up with.

    It’s wonderful how in most places on this earth you can simply…dig…and get water.

    I’d call that about as free as something could ever be achieved, gets.

    KrasMazov, (edited ) avatar

    Just why? Every single human being deserve to have access to housing, water, food, education, etc. We NEED those things.

    Companies and corporations, want their workers healthy, housed, disease free, etc.

    No they don’t. They want to pay as little as possible for you to produce as much as possible, it’s literally the logic of the system. Corporations don’t care about their workers, customers or anyone but their owners and investors.

    If they could slave people they would. And look at that, they actually do.

    Just realized its a .world user, they can’t see my comment lol.


    Power to the people ☭

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • rosin
  • Backrooms
  • khanakhh
  • magazineikmin
  • mdbf
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • tacticalgear
  • hgfsjryuu7
  • ngwrru68w68
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • InstantRegret
  • DreamBathrooms
  • provamag3
  • thenastyranch
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cisconetworking
  • modclub
  • Durango
  • osvaldo12
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • tester
  • anitta
  • normalnudes
  • Leos
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines