Rights or Self-Government?

Thomas Schneider asserts that rights are strange. Has the notion of what a right is ever been fully explained? He adds that a paradox is wrapped in Americans’ general familiarity with the term: The only way rights can be enforced is by the authority they are also meant to limit. The idea that individuals have protection from authority in the form of a right presupposes some degree of self-government on the part of citizens, a presupposition that makes rights inherently political. In a compact assessment of the “strangeness of rights,” Schneider explores the relationship between justice and self-interest. He concludes that “rights have increased the danger of confusion that arises from justice itself.” The danger of confusing the two was a real concern for the framers of the Constitution, who desired to correct the preoccupation with rights rampant among their fellow patriots. The prominence of rights in the American political tradition has cultivated an awareness of being wronged over the possibility of doing wrong, and Schneider raises the question of whether the manner in which we think of rights is in conflict with the aspiration toward self-government.