According to the author's opinion in the composition, individuals'
rights should be protected. However, if the individuals violate the
interests of society, the latter one should be concerned first. Every
individual definitely has his or her rights and freedom. Nevertheless, there is
a prerequisite that a person must not do harm to the well-being and safety of
other people, or he or she will be considered giving up the rights that a
normal person originally have. People shouldn't always take care of individuals'
rights and ignore the whole.
In present world, everyone lives in a big society. It
is impossible to live without any connection among other people. In other
words, everything a person does may bring about some influence to the people
around him or her. Something is nothing. However, some may causes serious
problems among people. When the conflict between individual and society relates
to fundamental rights or public interests, things will be more complicated. In
the composition I mention, a boy committed a crime and his rights might be
deprived. It seemed like the punishment or cost after his crime. But, if a
person, or people, who didn't commit any crime, suffering the threat to basic
rights from society, what's going on? In the case of Wen-Lin Yuan(文林苑), Wang
family lived in their old house. However, their house was planned as urban
renewal area. Wang family refused that. They hoped their house could be removed
from the renewal area. However, the construction company didn't agree with it.
In addition, there were thirty six householders who were willing to cooperate
with renewal plan and moved out. With the deadlock between Wang family and
construction company, the whole plan fell into difficulty. Those thirty six householders waited for several years and had no houses. Later, Wang family's
house was pulled down, and the urban renewal kept going. In fact, there was no
one got benefited in this case. Every individual has right of habitation.
Nevertheless, Wang family's and other householders' right were all violated.
The Wen-Lin Yuan(文林苑) case proclaims that the dispute between society and individuals. Everyone just wanted to defend their rights and interests. Who was wrong? Who was right? Or the laws and policies had problems right from the word go? In normal condition, there is no free benefit. For the society's well-being and safety, individuals have to pay or sacrifice sometimes. This is inevitable. It is not only building new houses for inhabitants but also furthering public safety (fire prevention and renovation of public facilities) In my opinion, take the thirty six householders in Wen-Lin Yuan case for example, they gave up their habitation rights and remove out. However, they knew they would get new houses. There are some intersection between society's and individuals' interests. After all, under the common situation, individuals can't just live for his or herself and have to contribute for the society if necessary.Source: Kozlov, J. (1997). Society's rights should often take priority over individuals'. Retrieved from http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/1997/06/19/societys-rights-should-often-take-priority-over-individuals
Nobody opposes to the thought that individual shouldn't do harm to the society,while what's the most crucial factor to define individual's hostility?The power and system.As we can see various oppression from examples of Dapu,Lo Sheng,Huaguang,and Tainan Railway.Thanks for exemplifying your points via Wang's.This is important,for we won't reach conclusion only in the debate on abstract ideas. Because you use this contemporary social issue,I think it is fair to remind you government manipulates false confrontation between Wang's and 36 households.Administration for urban renewal shouldn't legalize the project.There is absence of legitimacy(Some parts of law for urban renewal are against Constituion;Contractor樂揚was fined due to donating too much money to candicates.) To conclude,''individual has to sacrifice for development is a lie.''As stressing on ''sacrifice'' is a strategy to evade obligation to find a more proper approach to problem,if our debate is situated in the context of era of neoliberalism.(Government consists of many ''elites'' ,and it should have tools like public policy)Stressing the sacrifice is just an effective way to benefit the capitalists.
回覆刪除