Should internet be a human right?

[hulkgor]

No.

This makes no sense.

[Underverse]

But in that case all rights are social rights and therefore "social rights" is redundant.

Not necessarily. Some rights can be national rights. Others can be universal (social) rights.

[Grapemask]

In the United States, we can't even get people to agree that shelter should be a basic right. The internet as a right will never fly.

[Underverse]

I don't see a meaningful different between "universal right" and "human right" in a situation where we only recognize ourselves as belonging to our class of being. You're still just describing the membership required for these rights.

As I said before, 'human right' implies something that is intrinsic to being human - along the same lines of a natural right or a God-given right. Gods and nature do not give rights.

Labeling universal rights as social rights will allow people to recognize that these rights come from each other, not some outside force. This is not only more accurate to that actual source of the rights, but also has a better chance at fostering a sense of societal belonging and empathy, whereas the inverse is more likely to foster individualism and egoism.

[Mistame]

Boobies should be a human right before the internet.

[Alvito]

No. The notion of "rights" that someone else has to provide and pay for is nonsense. This is an incredibly modern conception of rights that is fundamentally incoherent. Even relatively modern philosophers like Locke didn't recognize "rights" as being things that other people have to give you, but things that can't be rightfully taken away.

This pretty much sums up the entitlement people feel. I want/need/deserver "X" it is my right!

- - - Updated - - -

No internet isn't a human right, nor has pretty much any other technology progression. Radio, the mail or television weren't rights back when they were the top of their medium.

[Underverse]

I think you are attributing way too much influence for popular beliefs to the exact expression of the right, while discounting a long philosophical tradition of asserting that rights have some existence outside of our own imaginations.

I'm intentionally discounting the tradition we have that rights are outside of our control, because I have yet to see evidence that fairy tales are real.

[Juvencus]

Unrestricted access on the internet, yes. Otherwise it's a violation of freedom of expression, of which many countries are guilty of, even 1st world ones that paint themselves as free, like the USA and the UK.

But the internet provision itself cannot be made into a human right. At least at the moment.

[Deleted]

Uh, maybe, not sure. I do agree that there's a lot of stuff learned through the internet but I am not sure if it'd be positive to have everyone access to the internet, looking at Mark Zuckerberg, he is already trying to make the everyone in the world connect to the internet, maybe it'll be possible in the future.

[Very Tired]

In the United States, we can't even get people to agree that shelter should be a basic right. The internet as a right will never fly.

You realize what labeling shelter as a human right would mean, right? It would require the United States to put a roof over the head of every man, women, and child, in it's country for free. Refusing or being unable to do so would be a volition of human rights.

[Grapemask]

You realize what labeling shelter as a human right would mean, right? It would require the United States to put a roof over the head of every man, women, and child, in it's country for free. Refusing or being unable to do so would be a volition of human rights.

It would have to provide shelter for those incapable of it, the way it provides plenty of other things. Only in the US (and okay, a limited few other countries) do we see this as a bad thing; most cultures actually view it as socially offensive to let others live in homelessness.

[Very Tired]

It would have to provide shelter for those incapable of it, the way it provides plenty of other things. Only in the US (and okay, a limited few other countries) do we see this as a bad thing; most cultures actually view it as socially offensive to let others live in homelessness.

It would be a nice thing, but the reality is someone would have to pay for it. And since it's a human right, not just a US right, it would require people paying thousands of dollars to house the millions of poor and homeless people in 3rd world countries. It would essentially be one giant tax on the entire world, which is why a human right should never be something someone has to pay for, they are only focused on things people can't do to you.

[Grym]

It would have to provide shelter for those incapable of it, the way it provides plenty of other things. Only in the US (and okay, a limited few other countries) do we see this as a bad thing; most cultures actually view it as socially offensive to let others live in homelessness.

Is there any countries that don't have homelessness at all?

[Mistame]

Is there any countries that don't have homelessness at all?

Nope. And he's actually a bit off. The US does have shelter programs to house those less fortunate. The thing is, they actually have to seek out those programs.

[Deleted]

Unrestricted access on the internet, yes. Otherwise it's a violation of freedom of expression, of which many countries are guilty of, even 1st world ones that paint themselves as free, like the USA and the UK.

But the internet provision itself cannot be made into a human right. At least at the moment.

lol since when has the UK expressed freedom the only country that does is america cos they ram it down your throat all the time, dnt confuse us brits with those over patriotic fools in america

- - - Updated - - -

You realize what labeling shelter as a human right would mean, right? It would require the United States to put a roof over the head of every man, women, and child, in it's country for free. Refusing or being unable to do so would be a volition of human rights.

housing for free isnt that jsut prison cos they dnt pay for that i know tax payers do

[Juvencus]

lol since when has the UK expressed freedom the only country that does is america cos they ram it down your throat all the time, dnt confuse us brits with those over patriotic fools in america

That was not my point. At all.

[Naxere]

Short answer: No.

[Xada]

The answer is simple, just ask yourself "could we live without internet?" You will arrive to another question "without internet, how will I shit post? Would I even be alive?" and the answer will be clear. You can't consider yourself alive without internet, thus it is a right.