You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Not long after toddlers first say “mama” or “dada,” they say, “That’s not fair” or “I have a right.”
Even toddlers quickly pick up on the idea that they deserve fairness and certain entitlements as part of their socialization, reflecting the broader culture’s emphasis on individual rights.
Rights consciousness—an awareness and emphasis on individual rights, personal freedoms and protections—is deeply embedded in American life. Even at an early stage of development, children pick up on societal norms that emphasize personal agency and the protection of freedoms, learning that certain actions and behaviors are their due, much like adults assert civil or political rights.
This early adoption of rights language in children demonstrates how fundamental the concept of individual entitlements is in American culture, where freedom, fairness and justice are emphasized at every level of society. It shows how rights consciousness is passed down, not just through formal education or legal systems, but as a cultural practice, deeply interwoven into everyday experiences, conversations and social interactions.
How, we might ask, did rights consciousness become enshrined in American culture?
The history of rights is often depicted in Whiggish terms as a steady progression toward justice, rooted in the growing acceptance of certain universal moral principles. However, this narrative is wrong. It is fundamentally ahistorical.
Rights are won, not given—they emerge through struggle, resistance and negotiation.
Rather than viewing the growth of rights as driven largely by the unfolding of abstract ideas, it’s essential to recognize that ideas do not evolve in a vacuum but are the product of material conditions, power struggles and human agency. Not merely the expression of intellectual shifts, today’s rights consciousness reflects the influence of economic forces, social hierarchies and political conflicts.
The evolution of rights—from older notions of status-based privileges, immunities and entitlements and natural law, with duties and obligations existing within a collective framework emphasizing community, hierarchy and a divinely established social order, to the Enlightenment notion of natural rights and modern-day civil and human rights—reflects not just the unfolding of certain philosophical ideas, but it is the outgrowth of struggles of marginalized groups and social movements that contested exclusion.
Rights have been negotiated at the intersection of political power and various forms of activism and struggle, underscoring a basic fact: Progress is neither linear nor inevitable.
The intellectual, philosophical and theological history of rights has deep roots in classical antiquity, early religious traditions and evolved significantly into modernity.
In classical Greece and Rome, the notion of rights primarily centered on duties and privileges associated with citizenship. Rights were less about individual entitlements and more about one’s role in a civic community.
Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics developed early reflections on justice, duty and natural law, which were influential in shaping later ideas about rights. Roman law, in particular, contributed to the notion of legal rights through the concept of ius—a body of laws that applied to citizens and defined their legal standing within the state. Roman legal principles such as jus gentium (law of nations) also laid early groundwork for ideas about universal principles of justice applicable to all humanity.
The Judaic and early Christian traditions brought a moral dimension to these ideas. In Judaism, the concept of law (Torah) emphasized the covenant between God and humanity, framing moral obligations that transcended the civic space. Christianity furthered this idea by introducing the notion that all humans are created equal in the eyes of God, thus carrying an inherent dignity. While these moral frameworks did not explicitly promote rights as we understand them today, they contributed to a worldview that recognized individual worth, which later informed rights-based discourse.
During the Christian Middle Ages, the philosophy of natural law became central to the development of the concept of rights. Thinkers like Thomas Aquinas argued that natural law, derived from divine reason, governed both the moral order and human society. This provided the foundation for the idea that individuals possess certain inherent rights simply by virtue of being human. Natural rights were considered universal and derived from an understanding of the moral and natural order. Rights were seen as a form of moral entitlement grounded in the nature of humanity and these ideas became pivotal in later political and legal discourse.
The Enlightenment marked a turning point in the history of rights, as philosophers began to articulate rights as belonging to the individual rather than being defined by social or religious duties. Thinkers such as John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Montesquieu framed rights in terms of individual liberty, equality and the social contract.
Locke’s theory of natural rights, especially, became foundational in arguing that individuals have inherent rights to life, liberty and property. These rights were seen as prepolitical and inviolable and governments existed primarily to protect them. This period saw the transition from natural law to natural rights and introduced the notion of inalienable rights—a key influence on both the American and French revolutions.
The Age of Revolution, particularly through the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, codified these Enlightenment ideas into political documents that emphasized individual rights as central to the social order. The language of rights began to expand beyond property and political participation to include broader conceptions of liberty and equality, shaping the development of modern civil and political rights.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, the concept of rights continued to evolve, expanding from political and civil rights to include social and economic rights. Movements for the abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage and labor rights underscored the need for a broader conception of rights that extended beyond property and political participation.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, represents the culmination of centuries of thought about rights. It sought to articulate a set of rights that applied universally to all human beings, marking the global adoption of human rights as a framework for justice and equality.
Today, rights consciousness has expanded to include issues of gender equality, racial justice, LGBTQ+ rights, environmental rights and the rights of marginalized groups. While the language of rights has become more inclusive and global, the debate over the nature and scope of these rights remains a central issue in political and social discourse.
Contemporary movements continue to contest and negotiate the meaning of rights, reflecting the ongoing dynamic between philosophical principles and lived experiences.
In sum, the concept of rights has transformed from ancient notions of civic duty and moral order to the modern understanding of universal human rights, shaped by religious traditions, philosophical inquiry, political revolutions and ongoing social struggles.
An alternate history of rights emphasizes the role of struggle, conflict and negotiation in shaping the concept of rights. Rather than emerging smoothly from abstract ideas, rights have been forged through lived experiences and political challenges, often under conditions of exclusion and oppression.
In classical antiquity, rights were largely tied to status. In ancient Greece, rights were typically privileges of male citizens, while women, slaves and foreigners were excluded from political life. However, even within these limits, struggles for inclusion existed. For example, the Plebeian struggle in ancient Rome resulted in the Conflict of the Orders, a series of social and political confrontations between the plebeians and the patricians that eventually granted the former greater political representation through the creation of the Tribune of the Plebs. This demonstrates that the expansion of rights often stemmed from resistance rather than philosophical reflection alone.
During the Middle Ages, the struggle for rights became even more evident with the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. Far from an abstract conception of justice, the Magna Carta was the result of political conflict between King John of England and his rebellious barons. While the document primarily protected the interests of the nobility, it laid the groundwork for future legal guarantees that would later be extended to broader segments of society. The Magna Carta’s influence on the evolution of due process and legal rights in England exemplifies how rights arose from political bargaining and coercion rather than purely ideological evolution.
The early modern period saw other moments of negotiation that were pivotal in the development of rights. The English Civil War (1642–1651) led to the execution of King Charles I and the temporary establishment of a republic. Though the war initially centered around political power, it also generated discussions about popular sovereignty and individual liberties. Political factions like the Levellers, who advocated for expanded suffrage and equal rights, fought to include broader social classes in the conversation about political representation. Their efforts underline the contested and nonlinear development of rights.
The American and French Revolutions in the 18th century further illustrate the dynamic between lived experience and abstract principles. While the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen articulated Enlightenment ideals about natural rights and liberty, these revolutions were also driven by real grievances: taxation, economic inequality and political exclusion.
These documents emerged not from theoretical debates alone but from violent conflict and revolution. The Haitian Revolution (1791–1804), which began as a revolt by enslaved people against colonial rule, drew on the French revolutionary rhetoric of equality while exposing the contradictions between such ideals and the reality of slavery.
Colonialism, imperialism and slavery further complicate the story of rights consciousness. While European colonists often justified their conquests through appeals to “civilization” and Enlightenment ideals, the people they colonized and enslaved were systematically denied those same rights. Anticolonial movements in the 19th and 20th centuries, such as the Indian independence movement led by figures like Mahatma Gandhi and slave revolts such as the successful uprising in Haiti, demanded the recognition of rights not as abstract principles but as urgent, lived experiences of oppression.
Women’s suffrage movements, particularly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, also demonstrate the tension between rights as philosophical ideas and rights as demands for inclusion. Women like Emmeline Pankhurst in Britain and Susan B. Anthony in the United States led protests, endured imprisonment and faced violent resistance in their fight for the right to vote. These movements were not simply rooted in ideas of equality but were also responses to the lived realities of exclusion from political life.
The expansion of civil rights in the 20th century, particularly in the United States, further exemplifies the centrality of struggle in the evolution of rights. The civil rights movement, led by figures like Martin Luther King Jr., was a direct response to the systemic exclusion of African Americans from full citizenship. While grounded in the ideals of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, the movement’s achievements—such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964—were won through protests, boycotts and legal battles, not the gradual acceptance of philosophical principles.
Thus, the development of rights is not merely the unfolding of abstract ideas but the product of conflict, negotiation and resistance. Marginalized groups, through direct action and collective struggle, have fought for the recognition of rights, challenging those in power to include them within the broader political and social frameworks. Rights have been contested, not gifted, and their expansion reflects the complex interplay between ideas, politics and lived experiences.
The Whiggish interpretation of history, particularly prominent in 19th-century England, viewed history a linear progression toward greater rights and liberties. According to this perspective, English history was a story of accumulated freedoms, with landmark events such as the Magna Carta (1215), which established limits on royal authority, and the Glorious Revolution (1688), which reinforced Parliamentary sovereignty and various Parliamentary reforms that expanded suffrage, marking key moments in this process. The narrative suggests that English political history was a continuous development toward constitutional democracy, emphasizing the gradual expansion of individual liberties and representative governance.
The Whiggish narrative downplays periods of regression, such as the suppression of rights under monarchs like Henry VIII or Charles I and underestimates the contested nature of many of these historical advances, which were often fraught with conflict, setbacks and opposition.
The Whiggish focus on English history marginalizes the experiences of non-European societies and the contradictions within British imperialism. For instance, while English political institutions were evolving toward democracy, Britain was also building an empire based on exploitation, inequality and oppression. The Whiggish narrative fails to address how imperialism and colonialism conflicted with the ideals of liberty and rights.
By implying that there is an inevitable trajectory toward modern democracy and liberty, this narrative overlooks the contingent nature of historical developments and assumes that progress is preordained rather than the product of complex social, political and economic factors. It risks portraying democracy and rights as the natural outcome of history rather than hard-won achievements resulting from political struggle and negotiation.
This alternative to abstract and teleological approaches to rights consciousness grounds discussions in the concrete social realities and historical contingencies that shape rights claims. Rights can be viewed as dynamic, contingent and contested rather than following a straight path toward progress. Instead of a linear story, we focus on conflicts, resistances and social struggles that define rights in various contexts, emphasizing the back-and-forth nature of rights expansion and retraction.
Examining the lived experiences of marginalized groups—enslaved peoples, women, laborers, Indigenous communities—allows us to see that the development of rights is not just about lofty ideals but the material conditions and power struggles that have defined who can claim rights and who is excluded. This perspective opens up a view of history as filled with negotiations, compromises and contradictions rather than inevitable advances.
This approach also recognizes that rights claims are often reactive—born out of specific injustices or crises, such as the aftermath of wars, revolutions or economic upheavals. Rights consciousness may ebb and flow, with moments of backlash or regression, such as the erosion of Reconstruction-era rights for African Americans in the post–Civil War South or the setbacks faced by LGBTQ+ rights movements at various points in history. These reversals complicate the idea that rights consciousness is a steadily rising force and suggest that it is often fragile and dependent on the political and cultural climate.
Furthermore, this approach emphasizes the role of economic and political power in shaping the landscape of rights. For instance, colonialism, capitalism and empire building have profoundly influenced the way rights have been distributed—or denied—across different populations. The rights granted to one group often come at the expense of another, and the unequal distribution of power and resources frequently shapes who can access rights and whose rights are subordinated.
This framework also lends itself to a more intersectional analysis, where issues of race, gender, class and nationality intersect to shape different experiences of rights and citizenship. By exploring how rights consciousness interacts with other forms of social identity, we can see that rights are not universally distributed or experienced, but are often tailored to particular social hierarchies and contexts.
This approach encourages a more critical view of history that accounts for the messiness, contradictions and reversals that have shaped rights development over time. It shifts the focus away from abstract principles and toward the real-world struggles that give rise to rights claims, making it clear that rights are not just bestowed but fought for—and often unevenly achieved.
This society’s emphasis on rights, including gun rights, is not an unmixed blessing. While essential for defending individual liberties, a preoccupation with individual rights creates many challenges, overshadowing communal responsibilities and leading to social fragmentation where individuals prioritize personal claims over collective well-being.
This can foster a sense of entitlement rather than mutual accountability. When everyone is focused on asserting their own rights, it can become difficult to find common ground, especially when competing rights (such as free speech versus safety) come into conflict.
An overemphasis on rights also encourages a legalistic approach to problem-solving, where every issue becomes a matter of legal adjudication rather than democratic negotiation, cooperation or compromise. This makes governance more rigid and less adaptive to complex societal challenges.
In addition, rights consciousness tends to frame social and political issues in individual terms, potentially obscuring structural problems such as economic inequality or systemic injustice. When individual rights are seen as paramount, it often leads to a neglect of broader issues of social justice or policies that benefit the common good.
This focus on individual rights can also create a paradoxical situation where the expansion of rights for some groups may be perceived as infringing upon the rights of others, contributing to polarization. For instance, debates around LGBTQ+ rights, religious freedoms and gun ownership often result in sharp divisions, as each side views the issue through the lens of their own rights being threatened.
Addressing these tensions requires a balance between individual rights and shared societal responsibilities.
The evolution of rights is far more than the gradual unfolding of philosophical ideas; it is a testament to human agency and the power of collective action.
History shows us that rights are won through struggle, resistance and negotiation, often in the face of entrenched power. While moral ideals provide crucial frameworks, it is the determination of people—those who contest exclusion and demand recognition—that drives real change.
This dynamic, nonlinear process underscores the ongoing need to fight for justice, reminding us that rights must continually be claimed and defended.
