Necessitous Men Are Not Free Analysis

Necessitous Men Are Not Free

On the 11th of, 1944, the then president of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt of America gave a very significant speech to the congress as his state of union address. The speech was given by the president amid the Second World War, when the nation was in a state of dilemma. The speech covered the progress of the war, diplomatic progresses that were made, and most importantly certain economic rights citizens are entitled to, referred to as the economic bill of rights. He also emphasized on implementing the four freedoms, which are the freedom to speech, worship, and freedom from want and from fear. In the speech the American president at the time said “Necessitous men are not free” (Roosevelt Institute).

As opposed to socialists state that thought otherwise. It was therefore outstanding that the president of the United States of America would address the need for urgent reactions to social and economic rights. “We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not freemen” (Roosevelt). People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made” (Roosevelt). The above as quoted from his speech emphasizes on the importance of economic rights, as he simply puts it, “freedom cannot exist without economic security”. Some renowned scholars have argued otherwise, while others argue that state intervention only hinders the right of free market; therefore the state should not interfere with these rights (ÇAMUR). It is no surprise however that in developing countries, economic and social rights are regarded more important, and consider political and civil rights as an obstruct to achieve economic development (ÇAMUR). This argument has been countered however, some scholars have pointed out that dictators in developing countries argue that these rights aren’t important because of their interests (Tharoor). Regardless, the needy will always prefer their social and economic rights to be protected by the government before political civil rights (ÇAMUR).

According to article 1 of the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights “All peoples have the rights of self determination. By virtue of that they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development” (Human rights history). Therefore people should be allowed the freedom to economic, social and cultural developments. Initially the UDHR of 1948 had not distinctions to rights and most importantly did not assign higher importance to certain rights (Human rights history). There was however distinction in the later years, “By the early 1950s, Cold War politics and doctrinal differences led UN deliberative bodies to distinguish between civil and political rights, on one hand, and economic, social, and cultural rights on the other” (Human rights history). Many western countries argue that political and civil rights are more urgent than social economic and cultural