Freeman

ARTICLE

Communitarians and Slavery

Protecting Individual Rights Helps to Secure the Common Good

JULY 01, 1997 by TIBOR R. MACHAN

Dr. Machan, who teaches political philosophy and business ethics, is the author of Private Rights and Public Illusions (Transaction Books, 1995). He is at work writing books on generosity, individualism, and business-bashing

A recent report in the New York Times tells how in Ghana many preteen girls are subjected to slavery, supposedly to atone for their parents’ or other family members’ sins.

What usually happens is that a priest keeps a girl as a sexual servant until she no longer satisfies him, after which the family has to replace her with a new virgin—on and on until the atonement is completed.

A Ghanaian priest, cited as defending the practice, says that the practice stems from a world view that sees justice and punishment in communal rather than individual terms; an individual who has no connection to a crime may be punished to spare others.

Some Western intellectuals claim there is no way to judge such practices because each community sets its own standards for justice. These intellectuals view reform efforts as corrosive individualist imperialism.

By this reasoning, the forced female circumcision in Africa, the censoring of objectionable literature in some Muslim cultures, and the killing of unwanted wives in India are okay, too.

Individualists counter that there are basic human rights which must be protected. Any form of slavery is a violation of justice. The common good is secured when individual rights are secured. Organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are properly invoking universal principles.

Many widely published communitarians claim justice is a matter of balancing individual rights and the common good, while expressing horror at the Ghanaian practice. Yet it is difficult to see how a communitarian could object. After all, if the community has accepted a practice, what could be wrong with it?

Communitarians say that everyone ought to respect the different traditions of varied human communities around the globe. But if there are no basic principles that apply to all, why should we respect everything a community might do?

Of course, there aren’t any easy remedies for victims of human rights violations around the world. Barging into a society with zealous enthusiasm for reform has seldom done much good. Education and the art of diplomacy are important when it comes to changing bad community practices.

But we must be clear that violating human rights is wrong wherever it happens.

ASSOCIATED ISSUE

July 1997

comments powered by Disqus

EMAIL UPDATES

* indicates required
Sign me up for...

CURRENT ISSUE

July/August 2014

The United States' corporate tax burden is the highest in the world, but innovators will always find a way to duck away from Uncle Sam's reach. Doug Bandow explains how those with the means are renouncing their citizenship in increasing numbers, while J. Dayne Girard describes the innovative use of freeports to shield wealth from the myriad taxes and duties imposed on it as it moves around the world. Of course the politicians brand all of these people unpatriotic, hoping you won't think too hard about the difference between the usual crony-capitalist suspects and the global creative elite that have done so much to improve our lives. In a special tech section, Joseph Diedrich, Thomas Bogle, and Matthew McCaffrey look at various ways these innovators add value to our lives--even in ways they probably never expected.
Download Free PDF

PAST ISSUES

SUBSCRIBE

RENEW YOUR SUBSCRIPTION