Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T14:41:37.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Individual versus Group Rights in Western Philosophy and the Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2012

Elazar Barkan
Affiliation:
Claremont Graduate University
Nyla R. Branscombe
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Bertjan Doosje
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

Western societies and the law primarily recognize individual identity, rights, responsibility, and guilt. It is cognizant though that people also belong to social groups, including nations, ethnicities, religions, a gender group, and they suffer from poverty or enjoy affluence, all of which can determine the course of the individual's life more than any individual attributes or characteristics. This is particularly true when it comes to large-scale group-based atrocities, crimes, and discrimination. The victims of genocide share a group identity that is more significant than any individual characteristic in terms of shaping their survival or demise. Similarly when a minority (or a majority, as in the case of apartheid in South Africa) is subjected to oppression that has everything to do with the group and nothing to do with individual action.

Like responsibility and guilt, privileges and rights are also a matter of group membership. Few aspirational statements are more fictional than “all men are created equal or free.” Politically, most of the rights individuals enjoy are as individuals who are members of specific groups, rather than in terms of universal or natural rights. Most obvious are the rights enjoyed through citizenship. Lack of individual rights is not merely a matter of oppression, but of the conventional social order. We are citizens of a state, not members of humanity, as far as our rights are concerned. This simple observation seems to escape much of the public discussion surrounding human rights where aspirations are confused with political reality.

Type
Chapter
Information
Collective Guilt
International Perspectives
, pp. 309 - 319
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barkan, E. (2000). The guilt of nations. New York: W. W. Norton
Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×