The Dole Is Not Your Birthright
... to live in peace, justice and security is!
There is no automatic right to any of society's benefits to which we did not fairly contribute (although even as children we may already have paid a hefty price through the absence of working parents. There is also a case for humaneness regarding the strong and the weak, but that consideration is unnecessary to the point to be made here.)
So what other possibility is there without paid work and with no birthright to the dole?
Rights always involve responsibilities, and they are always limited by the equality of rights of all others, and by the rights of future generations. A lifestyle that respects rights and responsibilities is a just lifestyle.
Access to such a lifestyle is the right and responsibility of all.
We have the right to choose to live with others, in a group or a family, or we may choose to live alone.
We also have the right to enjoy the fruits of our chosen lifestyle, provided that lifestyle is balanced and its fruits are just and equitable, depriving nobody of anything they have a right to expect.
So how does one gain access to such rights, and what responsibilities must be met?
These are human rights, and to gain them one simply has to be born. They can be lost by being irresponsible.
To live at all, we must have food, shelter and clothing. We may get these things by any just means. We may choose to work for someone doing just, equitable and balanced work. For this we are paid and can thereby buy what we need to live. Alternatively we may even decide barter our product or service.
But, we have no obligation to take either of these choices. We do not have any obligation to work for anyone to acquire our right to live. To live is a right, and there is no responsibility to provide for our needs by working for any other person for payment or exchange.
However, neither do we have any right to have others provide anything for us … unless we are working for them, or except if we are their dependent.
To provide for our own needs by working directly with the gifts of nature is the only other possibility, and, while few may choose it, it must remain a right to have this option.
LAND
Since food, shelter and clothing all come directly from the land, then access to land where the individual can provide for themselves must be a right, limited of course by the rights of all others, as expressed for example in just and equitable building regulations, etc. (This right of access to land for survival must also necessarily limit the right any other person may have to hold title over land for any other purpose).
Society seems to have forgotten about this right, except in an around-about rather weak & compromised way through our public housing system. Unfortunately, public housing is now seen as a charity by many who are independent through wages or business - it certainly has a 'non-birthright' even ‘welfare’ component to it. The labour and building materials paid for by the taxpayer may be the reason for this, but land itself is another element to public housing and it is fundamental. It is this element which we say is an inalienable human right. So we see the Dept of Housing as the best potential for a national reform which would restore the opportunity for people to choose to provide for themselves.
SKILLS
Unfortunately not only have we forgotten that it is our right to choose how we will provide for ourselves, we have also forgotten how we could manage to provide for ourselves from the land, even if appropriate access was restored. Others now build our homes, grow our lettuces, and still others grow our tomatoes. We did not give up our right of access to land, or the skills that would make this right useful. They were accidentally eroded by a system of specialisation and industrialisation beginning at school and before. If we should choose to reclaim our right or those skills, the system which deprived us of them would have a moral duty to help us to regain them, to establish ourselves, and to rightfully live on the land.
Compare this to the situation today where an unemployed person must either manage to find a job they want, or, if they cannot find one that is suitable, they must be willing to work in any job which the system dictates that they work in. If not, they will be deprived of the financial support they need for food, shelter and clothing, and will have no human right to live by. Does this seem right to you?
In these circumstances where there is the denial of a birthright by which a person can live, that person would seem to acquire a different type of right to the basics from that system - the dole.
RIGHTS & RESPONSIBILITIES
There is one way by which rights and responsibilities could be assured.
With appropriate education support through TAFE to learn practical skills, and by applying them in a co-operative model lifestyle, a group of around 10 unemployed people could demonstrate the benefits for the entire community that would flow from a restoration of natural rights and responsibilities.
NEIGHBOURHOODS THAT WORK
Through access to land and the development of skills for sustainable development, participants could provide for their basic needs, and in fair exchange for the advantages received as part of the larger society, could make a meaningful contribution out of their activities and experience. This would be a project for Neighbourhoods That Work ... see http://landrights4all.weebly.com/neighbourhoods-that-work.html
@landrights4all
... to live in peace, justice and security is!
There is no automatic right to any of society's benefits to which we did not fairly contribute (although even as children we may already have paid a hefty price through the absence of working parents. There is also a case for humaneness regarding the strong and the weak, but that consideration is unnecessary to the point to be made here.)
So what other possibility is there without paid work and with no birthright to the dole?
Rights always involve responsibilities, and they are always limited by the equality of rights of all others, and by the rights of future generations. A lifestyle that respects rights and responsibilities is a just lifestyle.
Access to such a lifestyle is the right and responsibility of all.
We have the right to choose to live with others, in a group or a family, or we may choose to live alone.
We also have the right to enjoy the fruits of our chosen lifestyle, provided that lifestyle is balanced and its fruits are just and equitable, depriving nobody of anything they have a right to expect.
So how does one gain access to such rights, and what responsibilities must be met?
These are human rights, and to gain them one simply has to be born. They can be lost by being irresponsible.
To live at all, we must have food, shelter and clothing. We may get these things by any just means. We may choose to work for someone doing just, equitable and balanced work. For this we are paid and can thereby buy what we need to live. Alternatively we may even decide barter our product or service.
But, we have no obligation to take either of these choices. We do not have any obligation to work for anyone to acquire our right to live. To live is a right, and there is no responsibility to provide for our needs by working for any other person for payment or exchange.
However, neither do we have any right to have others provide anything for us … unless we are working for them, or except if we are their dependent.
To provide for our own needs by working directly with the gifts of nature is the only other possibility, and, while few may choose it, it must remain a right to have this option.
LAND
Since food, shelter and clothing all come directly from the land, then access to land where the individual can provide for themselves must be a right, limited of course by the rights of all others, as expressed for example in just and equitable building regulations, etc. (This right of access to land for survival must also necessarily limit the right any other person may have to hold title over land for any other purpose).
Society seems to have forgotten about this right, except in an around-about rather weak & compromised way through our public housing system. Unfortunately, public housing is now seen as a charity by many who are independent through wages or business - it certainly has a 'non-birthright' even ‘welfare’ component to it. The labour and building materials paid for by the taxpayer may be the reason for this, but land itself is another element to public housing and it is fundamental. It is this element which we say is an inalienable human right. So we see the Dept of Housing as the best potential for a national reform which would restore the opportunity for people to choose to provide for themselves.
SKILLS
Unfortunately not only have we forgotten that it is our right to choose how we will provide for ourselves, we have also forgotten how we could manage to provide for ourselves from the land, even if appropriate access was restored. Others now build our homes, grow our lettuces, and still others grow our tomatoes. We did not give up our right of access to land, or the skills that would make this right useful. They were accidentally eroded by a system of specialisation and industrialisation beginning at school and before. If we should choose to reclaim our right or those skills, the system which deprived us of them would have a moral duty to help us to regain them, to establish ourselves, and to rightfully live on the land.
Compare this to the situation today where an unemployed person must either manage to find a job they want, or, if they cannot find one that is suitable, they must be willing to work in any job which the system dictates that they work in. If not, they will be deprived of the financial support they need for food, shelter and clothing, and will have no human right to live by. Does this seem right to you?
In these circumstances where there is the denial of a birthright by which a person can live, that person would seem to acquire a different type of right to the basics from that system - the dole.
RIGHTS & RESPONSIBILITIES
There is one way by which rights and responsibilities could be assured.
With appropriate education support through TAFE to learn practical skills, and by applying them in a co-operative model lifestyle, a group of around 10 unemployed people could demonstrate the benefits for the entire community that would flow from a restoration of natural rights and responsibilities.
NEIGHBOURHOODS THAT WORK
Through access to land and the development of skills for sustainable development, participants could provide for their basic needs, and in fair exchange for the advantages received as part of the larger society, could make a meaningful contribution out of their activities and experience. This would be a project for Neighbourhoods That Work ... see http://landrights4all.weebly.com/neighbourhoods-that-work.html
@landrights4all