Each year on December the 10, the United Nations and world community recognizes International Human Rights Day. In the aftermath of two World Wars and tremendous global upheaval as a backdrop, formal ratification of the International Bill of Rights occurred in 1948. It passed in the general assembly by a margin of 48 yes votes, eight abstentions, and two non-voting member States.
Comprised of 30 articles and spawning several subsequent Covenants, the preamble to the declaration begins by stating, "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world."
The theme for year’s International Human Rights Day is, “Dignity, Freedom, and Justice for All”, while the call to action is one that has become familiar to us in recent years, #StandUp4HumanRights! For the next calendar year the United Nations will be reflecting, reviewing and renewing the appeals to freedom and self dignity espoused by the Declaration.
Eleanor Roosevelt served as chair of the UN Commission on Human Rights, whose role in crafting the declaration was invaluable. In a speech given not long after the declaration's passage she would say, "Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination."
While we are in agreement on the significance and impact the declaration has had on advancing basic human dignity and respect, and will join the United Nations in helping to recognize these truths this year, what if we asked in our own community, "Where, after all, do universal human rights begin?"
One answer can be found in Article 25 of the Declaration, which asserts:
"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."
If we accept first Lady Roosevelt's affirmation and look at home, we see one of the most pressing issues which our region faces today is the need for adequate housing. The United Nations defines adequate housing as, "the basis of stability and security for an individual or family. The center of our social, emotional and sometimes economic lives, a home should be a sanctuary—a place to live in peace, security and dignity."
Some of the key elements that are identifiable in terms of adequate housing are: (1) Security of Tenure; (2) Availability of Services; (3) Affordability; (4) Habitability; (5) Accessibility; (6) Location; and (7) Cultural Adequacy.
The United Nations fact sheet on adequate housing particularly cautions against forced evictions, which are defined as the, “permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection.” Safeguards against this include:
An opportunity for genuine consultation
Adequate and reasonable notice
Availability of information on the proposed eviction in reasonable time
Presence of government officials or their representatives during an eviction
Proper identification of persons carrying out the eviction
Prohibition on carrying out evictions in bad weather or at night
Availability of legal remedies
Availability of legal aid to those in need to be able to seek judicial redress
Without doubt there are other issues that could and should demand our attention, no less than the crisis in child protective services and foster care, human trafficking, poverty, education, and at least a half dozen other areas of critical need. Nevertheless, the lack of readily available adequate housing only compounds these problems.
Adequate housing is not a privilege, convenience or commodity; adequate housing is a basic fundamental human right that should be afforded to all. Most nations have mutually agreed that adequate housing should be recognized and supported under UN principles and International Law.
The recent issue with the Budgetel hotel residents being relocated must be a teachable moment. Under International Law the residents should have been afforded eviction protections. We must also be mindful that moving on the drop of a dime is not possible for some people because even while searching for available housing you often times must have the funds to pay for application fees, pass background screenings, are placed on long waiting list, and must have additional funds for deposits, utilities, and other miscellaneous issues that are certain to arise. We also know from several reports that housing is not affordable for at least a significant portion of our population.
We must also find more ways to assist the agencies that contend with this need on the ground each day. The Regional Homeless Coalition, Red Cross, Salvation Army, Union Gospel Mission and many other charitable organizations need our continued support in order to aid those most in need.
Housing is an essential aspect of one's security and sustainability; housing is a basic necessity; housing is a key to one's health and economic stability; housing is not a privilege but a basic and fundamental human right.
This is what the theme of International Human Rights Day means when it expresses Dignity, Freedom, and Justice for All. This is the rationale behind the charge on this year, #StandUp4HumanRights!
Respectfully, Eric Atkins
* * *
Anytime someone has a right to something, Mr. Atkins, it means someone else can be forced to provide that thing. In America we have a right to be left alone, a right to be free from force and fraud. We don't have a right to anything but a trial by jury, which is why Americans can be forced to serve jury duty and jailed if they refuse. Once we grant someone a right to something, it means the property or liberty rights of someone else must be violated.
Housing, food, clothing, healthcare, etc. are goods or services that should be purchased or voluntarily donated, not forcibly taken from one American and then given to another American the government deems more deserving. Charity is worthy and good, but turning voluntary charity into forced redistribution makes things worse in the long run and harms everyone, including the poor.
Andy Walker
* * *
Mr. Walker stated his point correctly and briefly. I would only add this:
In a discussion about socialism, a friend who is a progressive reminded me I have social security. I explained to him it was not by choice. Beginning in 1964, I had money confiscated from my first part time job paycheck for social security and it continued until I retired a number of years later. Then a government bureaucracy determined what the amount returned to me would be.
If I had resisted paying into the system, agents of my government would have either taken it or me into custody. That’s socialism.
Ralph Miller
* * *
Mr. Eric Atkins statement, "This is what the theme of International Human Rights Day means when it expresses Dignity, Freedom, and Justice for All." contains a major error in fact.
The theme of International Human Rights Day does not advocate Dignity, Freedom, and Justice for All. The theme of International Human Rights Day advocates Dignity, Freedom, and Justice for Some but not All. The International Human Rights Day Mr. Eric Atkins is talking about is sponsored by practitioners of a two class society called socialism.
All socialist societies are founded on a submissive working class controlled by the dictates of an elitist socialist royalty class.
Mr. Andy Walker and Mr. Ralph Miller are right.
Socialism is government monopoly control of private property. Communism is government monopoly ownership of private property. Both socialism and communism implement crony monopoly capitalism.
Donald O'Connor
* * *
"Anytime someone has a right to something, Mr. Atkins, it means someone else can be forced to provide that thing."
But isn't that exactly what Chattanooga along with other cities were doing? Confiscating the property of low and moderate income homeowners over exaggerated code violations. Some of those homes owned outright, and reselling them for pennies on the dollar to buyers, who went in did a little cosmetic work here or there; then rented, leased or flipped the property? Selling the confiscated homes for thousands, hundreds of thousands even? All the while, leaving the original homeowner, entire families homeless and destitute, living on the streets or extended stay hotels?
There's always been socialism for the wealthy, well-to-do, well connected. The poor just gets the left over crumbs, after others have fatten up off the feast.
Ralphie Miller shows up, as expected: Ralph did you consider it socialism when Chattanooga was handing out as much as 25 grand, no questions asked-no repay, to purchase homes they'd confiscated from Chattanooga homeowners, instead of using the money to uplift the citizens already here? Or offering skills training that would ready them for an ever advancing and changing job market. Some of those confiscated homes were shabbily repaired, placed on Section 8 and rented back out perhaps to some of the very people who'd lost them due to needing minor repairs in the first place.
The homeless crisis here and across the nation has been a long time coming. Decades long. The full impact is only now registering.
Brenda Washington
* * *
I wonder if the people who are against "forced charity" for individuals unable to afford the basic necessities of life are also against forced charity for the oil, tobacco and pharmacy industries that we subsidize every year with tax money. I wonder if they object to corporate welfare in the form of subsidies for Amazon, Microsoft and Boeing.
Federal subsidies to corporations cost the American public $100 billion a year. But the only people who get taken to task for being recipients of welfare are poor people. We're talking about a drop in the ocean. Strain at a gnat, swallow a camel I guess.
Darlene Kilgore
* * *
I think we may have missed Eric Atkins greatest appeal, giving up our United States of America sovereignty and yielding to the dictates of the United Nations. It’s more than just Socialism, it’s a call for Communism.
When is the last time you saw a Communist country abide by the UN, unless it’s by their dictates. The United Nations is at best a sham and it’s not united.
I’m all for helping the person/family who can’t provide for themselves. However, the welfare roles are full of people who game the system.
Let’s not be fooled by Eric Atkins respectful letter. Let’s take care of those whom it is justified. Let’s not give up our sovereignty.
J. Pat Williams