You Can’t Have Individual Rights Where Communal Responsibility is Mandated
The individual cannot be subject to the community in a society that prioritizes individual freedom.
Modern-day activists (and I’m not throwing any compliments here) believe that individual rights hinge on some fuzzy idea of community well-being.
Now, Yuval Noah Harari takes it up a notch, saying human rights aren’t a real thing — just a creation of our imaginations.
Basically, your rights are as legit as those of a field-grazing cow, a jungle-dwelling monkey, or a plain-roaming buffalo.
And get this, the guy who casually calls a portion of the population ‘useless class’ is the one dishing out these ideas.
Not exactly shocking, is it?
Speaking of perspectives, let’s delve into the contrasting notions of social and individual responsibility.
Social vs Individual Responsibility
When you think about ‘community,’ does a quaint village where everyone pitches in willingly come to mind?
Or is it more like a grim, Bolshevik Revolution kind of scenario, dark and bloody?
Maybe it takes on a modern twist, with climate activists urging everyone to defer to scientists to save the world.
However you picture it, the concept of community has gotten pretty polarized, especially in the last 150 years.
For some, it’s a chance to claim political ground. Others see it as the collective vibe of friends, family, and neighbors. Then there are those who think it’s just evil dressed up as good.
My take is straightforward — you can’t have individual rights when communal responsibility is mandated.
How you participate in society is totally up to you. You decide when, what, and how much you want to be a part of things.
But first, boundaries need to be set between the individual and the community. What is the individual and how do they fit in larger society?
Do Individuals Exist Anymore?
In the past, communities worked because looking out for each other was just something we naturally did. No need for anyone to strong-arm us into it.
If we were pushed to give more than we were okay with, we called it tyranny.
It feels like living the life of an individual is a crime now. Everything has to be linked to your contribution to the so called ‘greater good.’
What is this greater good anyway? Who defines it?
Society seems to be headed to a certain direction, but we can’t really put a finger on who’s directing this movement, can we?
We’re becoming more polarized in our beliefs as the diversity of those beliefs continue to disappear. Or the tolerance of them which is quite ironic because apparently tolerance defines our age.
Just by reading most people’s bios these days, you can pretty much sum them up perfectly without even trying, and it’s scary.
How come in the age of information, all that we know and believe has been compartmentalized into two main categories? Is this really what diversity looks like?
Same beliefs, talking points, triggers, same everything!
And this isn’t a dig on political ideologies. It’s a challenge on humanity. A challenge on what we have become.
The Dilemma of Defining the Individual
So, what makes an individual? Definitely not solo meditation in a cave for all eternity — just throwing that out there!
Pinning down the essence of an individual is a bit of a puzzle. I see it as a puzzle because, in my view, it’s the creator who defines who you are. Your creator shapes your identity and lays down the moral code you live by.
This creator determines not just your worth or rights but also sets boundaries on your free will.
I’m talking about the decisions where you have a say and the ones where you don’t. Take it literally or philosophically; I think it stands up either way.
For Christians and Muslims, their individual identity gets a divine definition.
That’s why you’ll notice Christians and Muslims often prioritize (though not exclusively) the rule of law more than many other groups. In Christianity, God puts a strong emphasis on individual responsibility.
God holds each individual accountable for their actions, regardless of the events that led up to those actions. He prioritizes the individual before He looks at the community.
Then there are some creators who claim you have no free will — you’re essentially just reacting to your environment.
And guess what? That’s the prevailing thought in a lot of modern perspectives: no individual responsibility.
Psychologists jump into the mix, explaining away individual responsibility, suggesting that every choice we make is simply a product of our environment. It’s like this overpowering force we can’t overcome.
If someone displays even a slightly unusual behavior, it’s swiftly labeled a mental illness, and prescription meds are handed out like candy in Halloween.
And then there’s those that believe that God in a literal sense doesn’t exist, and reason is the governing philosophy of their lives.
At least that’s what they think. They believe that morals are relative, and the survival of the human species is why we are here.
So, they label themselves ‘the saviors of humanity,’ and anyone who stands in the way of that ambition be damned. Delusion if you ask me.
With this many perspectives and creators, literal and metaphorical, I think aligning with truth is the best way to define the individual.
Whatever perspective you conform with, everything ultimately comes down to whether your beliefs of who you are and the role you play in existence aligns with the truth.
By truth I mean objective truth. Everything cannot be subjective otherwise nothing is true. If you’re not sure, well, that’s an adventure of a lifetime.
One I’m glad I’m on.
The pursuit of truth.
