I know some places are more progressive in this regard. But from the U.S., I’d like to see every person entitled to:

  • shelter
  • food
  • healthcare
  • education and higher education

(As an aside, not sure “right” is the best term here, I think of these more as commitments that society would make because we have abundance. One advantage of the word “right” is that a person is justified in expecting it - it’s not welfare/ a benefit / a privilege)

  • Erikatharsis@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago
    • The right to solidarity, i.e. all should be allowed to partake in solidary action during a strike.
    • The right of initiative and right to recall.
    • The right to free software, or freedom from proprietary software.
    • The right to a third place, i.e. ready access to physical spaces that allow for socializing with strangers.
    • Freedom from eviction (mainly wrt rent strikes and squatting.)
    • The right to democratic education.
    • The right to cross borders.
    • The right to be forgotten.
    • The right to purpose, or freedom from meaningless labor. This includes the right to an employee fund.

    And there are of course other things. I just think that under the world’s current paradigm, these, at least individually, seem relatively attainable without a literal revolution.

  • MossBear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Others have covered it pretty well. Food, shelter, healthcare would be the highest immediate priorities I would think. We have the means, we just don’t have the will or the culture (collectively speaking anyhow).

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Once food, water, shelter, clothing, and health care are covered (or alternatively, a universal basic income that covers these needs), I’d like to see us start establishing rights for intelligent animals.

  • Izzy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Digital privacy. It should be illegal to track and store data on people without their consent.

    • fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hmm. If you were to assault me, and my friend took your picture while you’re doing it, should you be allowed to forbid my friend from publicly posting that picture?

      A picture of you is certainly data about you. And you’d presumably prefer that they not publish evidence that you assaulted me. However, I think it’s in the public interest that my friend should get to publish their photo even without your consent.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s where the reasonable expectation of privacy provision usually comes into play. It is already illegal to go up to the window of someone’s home and take pictures of them, why then is it legal for companies like google to gather information about your activity, such as browsing habits, without asking or even notifying you. Microsoft is another really bad offender here, modern versions of Windows collect and transmit massive amounts of telemetry regarding everything from what hardware you’re using to what programs you run and how often, just as a basic part of the operating system.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t understand why people always talk about Microsoft. ALL mainstream operating systems track everything you do. If anything, Microsoft were the last to join the party.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m still mad about what they did to netflix. I should have the right to not have to delete IE when I get a new computer. I mean netscape.

            • Aux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              First of all, most people are using their mobile devices for the most time, so tracking in Android and iOS is a lot more important. Also more people have phones than desktops.

              Second, Linux distros have tracking too. Ubuntu for example.

              • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I won’t argue that tracking on mobile isn’t more important, but I will argue that it shouldn’t be allowed at all, or at least not without an informative opt in for those systems who insist on having one. And when I say informative I mean telling the user exactly what information is being gathered, why, how often, and who else can see or gets sold it.

                • Aux@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I agree, but once again - why so much hate towards Microsoft specifically? They have less invasive tracking of all, which can easily be disabled. Unlike what you’re getting from Google and Apple.

        • Schmedes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Often you don’t know a crime has been committed at the time, which is why businesses are expected to have data retention periods for legal reasons.

          But everyone keeps pointing to any data retention as some sort of big brother boogeyman.

      • xenspidey@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, innocent until proven guilty. The picture would be logged in as evidence to the authorities.

      • Izzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        A single picture is circumstantial. I’m more talking about mass collections of information for some kind of data analysis.

  • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.comM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think you’re using the word right correctly, ultimately you’re pointing out things that you think people should have inherently and that shouldn’t be based on merits or taken from someone based on crimes. I generally agree with your list, though to add on I think that the right to transportation is fundamental to enabling most opportunities in a society and that the United States could greatly improve upon their public transit system.

    • sumofchemicals@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess the tricky part is when we think of something like freedom of speech, in order to exercise the right, a person can just start talking. If we think of the right to shelter, it’s difficult for a person to just, have a place to live. It requires more active intervention by the government. And I think that intervention should happen. I only point it out because there does seem to be a distinction that could trip up the conversation. But I don’t have a better term than “right.” Anything less seems vulnerable to attack and gradual chiseling away by its opponents.

      • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Anything less seems vulnerable to attack and gradual chiseling away by its opponents.

        Almost like you’re arguing for an aggressive policy agenda that a lot of people don’t support. How about just discuss said policy instead of trying to find language that actively makes discussion more difficult?

        • sumofchemicals@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not public opinion I’m necessarily concerned about, it’s attacks by those who benefit from the way things are.

          Also, choosing language that strengthens your position is the logical approach for anyone advocating for change. I’m not trying to obscure my position, I’m trying to make it clear.

  • banana_meccanica@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A living wage for every human. This society have the money to cover all, but still we accept to let other humans die on poverty because “they don’t contribute to the capitalism”. Fucking disgusting everyday.

  • since someone already said digital privacy il pick : one free domestic flight per month if have certain conditions like being blind or deaf and being under 5 or over 62 or missing 1 to 2 arms ir legs

  • macniel@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Irrevocable right of bodily expression

    Irrevocable right to abortion

    Irrevocable right to euthanasia

    No tax exemptions for any type of religion.

  • herbicarnivorous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The right to die. At least in the US, the way we treat end of life is absolutely backwards and often the opposite of patient care. If someone wants to die despite therapy and health intervention, who are we to deny them?

    • synack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Canada’s MAID program is a step in the right direction, where next year even people with non-terminal mental illnesses will be eligible for assisted suicide.

      • Eavolution@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not comfortable with mental illnesses being included, because I think especially in the past (but more recently too) suicide being easy and accepted would’ve encouraged me to go ahead with it, which is something I’m glad I haven’t done so far.

    • iByteABit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree 100%, but it’s important to note that it’s a very difficult issue. Whether someone actually wants to die or if they’re mentally ill and are making a terrible irreversible mistake is often quite a tough line to draw, making this a very complex problem to solve.

    • UtiAnimi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I absolutely agree when the person has an incurable physical illness, but I’m unsure where to draw the boundary for people with psychological illnesses.

      • TheFriendlyDickhead@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        For me it’s the age of the person. If it’s a 20 year old, their health can still get better. If it’s an 80 year old who has lost his whole family and friends and is depressed that’s a whole other thing. That’s something that is probably not going to get fixed.

    • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s the same here in the UK. Even terminally ill people are not allowed to end their lives and end up having to go to Dignitas.

      There was a story of one guy who was severely disabled. He needed 24-hour care and was just utterly miserable. He appealed for the right to end his life early to put an end to his suffering but the government denied him. He ended up just starving himself to death.

  • DreamButt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    surprised no one has brought this up, but freedom from religion. Shouldn’t have your life incessantly bombarded by people trying to pressure you into what amounts to a socially acceptable cult

    • pepperonisalami@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are some countries (Indonesia) which it is mandatory to have a religion, at least it must be listed in your ID. Atheists will just list any (official) religion they want on it and don’t practice. Sucks that it’s so easy to discriminate people based on that.

  • ashok36@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A 7 year limit on having old posts, videos, writings, or other records of your words and opinions used against you. This includes no more lifetime bans on anything. If you change your ways and keep your nose clean for seven years, society can no longer use your past actions against you.

    This does not apply to criminal sentencing of course, though that whole mess should be reexamined much more frequently.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You could just not tweet something racist? Also how the hell do you plan on enforcing this? If I want to not be your friend because of something I know you did how are you going to force me?

    • Criminal sentencing should be the same as the posts, IMO. Prison should be rehabilitating, not just punishment/legal slavery. There should be punishment, yes, but even parents who spank their children usually tell their kids why they got spanked and how not to get spanked again. Prisons seem to forgo that second part of it, and focus entirely on the spanking aspect.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s frustrating is there’s an obvious and effective way to incentivise that too. You don’t even need to give up private prisons.

        Just split the payment. The prison gets paid say 20% up front. The rest is paid out over the 10 years post release. If the inmate ends up back in prison, the rest of the payments are lost.

        Basically, 80% of their income is made by keeping the inmates from reoffending. Kicking them to the kerb with no skills becomes a big loss. Job training, and a robust post release support network are suddenly money makers, rather than sinks.

          • cynar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not American. The prison system over here, while FAR from perfect, is an order of magnitude or more better than the US system. I’d rather not let private prisons get a foothold over here.

  • TootSweet@latte.isnot.coffee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I believe in “to each according to need,” (or to put it into the language of a “right,” the right to fulfillment of your needs.) but I don’t trust “countries” to do that. There’s a long history of governments saying they’re doing that while perpetuating the worst atrocities.

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, let’s not revive the abysmal policy of that good for nothing stain on American history that was too much of a worthless sack of shit to even figure out how to do something as basic as walking