Human Rights

148 readers

14 users here now

About

!humanrights@lemmy.sdf.org is a safe place to discuss the topic of human rights, through the lens of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Rules

Live the UN UDHR
- Treat everyone with dignity.
Remain Objective
- Opinions posted here should be fact-based.
Spirit of Brotherhood
- Presume that we are all here for interesting discussions and to share thoughtful opinions and ideas regarding the UN UDHR

Tips

set your default sort to scaled
if you post, aim for a 2:1, resource:news ratio
this community is still new, so upvote liberally and comment when you downvote

Removal Policy

0-tolerance for breaking all three rules at once

founded 5 months ago

MODERATORS

kashifshah@lemmy.sdf.org

If we are forced to patronize a bank, does that violate Art.20 of the UDHR? (links.hackliberty.org)

submitted 1 month ago by soloActivist@links.hackliberty.org to c/humanrights@lemmy.sdf.org

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://links.hackliberty.org/post/38945

Question about #humanRights— Article 20 of the #UDHR¹ states:

“① Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

② No one may be compelled to belong to an association.”

How does that apply in the context of forced banking? If a government forces you to enter the marketplace and register for a bank account, does that qualify as being compelled to belong to an association?

¹UDHR: Universal Declaration of Human Rights

#askFedi

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sqw@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, for cases like you are illustrating here, seems to me that is forcing some association as you argue. Then again, it doesn't force a /specific/ association, as long as there is a free marketplace for banking with real options. However, even then it does still make a compulsory partition in that way.

[–] sqw@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 weeks ago

Hmm, now that I think of it, in USA the supply of cash flows from banks and thus supply of cash, whether directly or indirectly, requires some association with them too... the alternatives seem to be barter, scrip, etc. But if it's illegal to freely trade directly between suppliers and the needful for basic necessities, that does at least seem objectionable.

I'm also thinking about "banking hours"/bank requirements constraining the ability of even bank account holders to garner those necessities freely.