I don't understand the question. There are clearly two kinds of rights afforded by any civilized political system.

>>907929
so like limiting the rights of individuals in relation to the rights of minority groups.
I guess it boils down to multiculturalism vs melting pot.

>>907947
I still don't understand. So take for example the freedom of speech. We can think of hate speech laws as infringing upon non-minorities right to speak for the sake of improving the life of the minority. I think it makes sense in a particular historical context, for example, in post-war Germany because of the aim of denazification.

>>907947
Are you aware of the concept of "pseudo-random generated numbers"?
Basically in a software program, if something has 25% chance of occurring, in order to make it really "feel" like 25%, to make it "feel" random to the user, you dont use random generation, since that would permit for cases like 6 times in a row, or 10 times without success.
Instead you increase the chance each time you dont get the event, and reduce it back to a base (here probably around 17%) when you do get the event. That way the user feels that indeed, this is a 25% chance to happen event, even if the actual chance is more like 27-28%.

Similarly, in order to achieve true equality some people suggest that extreme cases NOT be given equal rights, with extremely unfortunate people be given more rights in order to push them towards the norm, where they will have equal rights to the majority, and with extremely successful people be given less rights, again to push them to the norm.
This unequal equality is the situation that feels the most equal to most participants in the system.

You can argue about the ethical and moral implications, but I imagine this is what you are asking. If we should give certain groups privileges and other groups penalties, in order to achieve long term equality by forcefully, and via unequal means, removing the biases and inequality between these groups.

I think that no, we shouldnt. I feel that people who cant lead a decent live, and cant provide decent lives for their children or mentally ill people at their care, should be forced into employment by the state, akin to slavery if you want to be vulgar. Are you unemployed? Instead of getting handouts to make your life decent, you should be forced, on fear of jail time even, to either find a job within 3 months or come work at the construction company doing the city's streets project for this secure wage, that half is provided buy the company, half by the state.

>>907976
During commie times this was used in jails. When you were in prison (or gulags, work camps, however you call them) you were forced to work as part of your sentence.
When you are done serving you are let go, and you are given whatever money you earned while force working (lower than market wage), and you are given a certificate that you spent this much time doing this kind of work, so you can have an easier time seeking employment and thus staying away from crime. You get out of jail with enough money to rent an apartment if nobody wants you anymore, and you have skills and papers to prove them.

Not that this would fly today, but its fun to theorycraft.

>>907906
Rights don't exist

>>907986
Does that mean slavery is ok?

>>907990
Slavery is getting a bad rap, but its a much better way to punish crimes and debts. You turn garbage into productive work power.

>>907998
>Slavery is getting a bad rap

>>907990
"ok" doesn't exist

>>908002
>le spook meme