Whenever a new movement is founded in search of privileges what actually happens is the creation of duties, which configures tax raises in society. According to the progressive prysm, the thin line between right and privilege depends only if the agent is corporate or governmental. If the government by the use of coercion creates a law to privilege, for example, a more vulnerable part of society, that becomes a right. On the other hand, if a company launches a project which seeks to train young people for future job opportunities, that becomes a privilege for those who participate. Logically this eloquent way of thinking tricks a lot of people by not attributing the “less fun part of the conversation”. Who will pay for the created rights? Each new right implies a new duty, because the State cannot create wealth, it actually hinders people’s accumulation of wealth.
“In fact, nature has bestowed human beings with some rights. Such rights are called “natural rights” - that is, rights who are inherent to our human nature; rights that we as human beings enjoy by the simple virtue of being humans. Those rights cannot be denied, because, if they are, the person who denies them is contradicting themself.”
This extract from the Mises Institute clarifies that the existence of rights does not rely on the existence of a State, even less so in the existence of legislation, because they are natural rights of the human being in essence.
“If we want to evaluate if a determined right, a supposed right, is in fact a genuine valid right, it is then necessary that we make a critical and logically irrefutable test, that being: we should all be able to enjoy of this right, in the same time and in the same manner.”
“Only then can this right be considered natural. The obviousness of this affirmation comes from the fact that, for a right to be natural, his enjoyment can’t lead into a conflict or a logical contradiction.”
The dynamic of the SM utilizes the search for privileges as a “struggle” or social democratization, part of those restricted goals being the leadership of action with the intent of placing someone from the movement ahead in politics.
“The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 consolidates in rights, most part of the claims had been given birth in the womb of the incipient brazilian civil society, historically demarcated by the limitations imposed by the conservative forces.” Célia Costal Itamar Nunes.
The possibility of communist parties, auto declared socialists, softened by the SM, syndicates and ONGs in the pre-constitutional conjecture, has allowed the creation of countless duties, a reason why Brazil became the NGO paradise and “set the stage” for the biggest corruption scandal the world has ever seen.
In this sense, it is evident that Social Movements can be taken as being different kinds of political leadership organizations with the aim of introducing significant changes in the perspective of transforming society, alleging to defend the rights of minorities. Their genesis are the urgent demands, wishes and necessities for leadership. These movements introduce themselves alleging to fight against gender, race, class, sexual orientation, religious discrimination and enviromental hazard, lack of leadership, among so many others, charecterizing themselves as the expression of militant postures and social mediation practices.
The affirmative action system for scholarship in public universities: is one of the duties created on the basis of an idea of an impossibility of blacks and public school students competing for a spot with white students or private school students. Two important things that this system exposes are the disbelief in the quality of public schools in face of private schools and the correlation between poverty and access to education. As has already been said, the very creation of privileges to minorities creates a closed circle of poverty in the form of tax raises. In fact, poor people find more difficulties paying so many taxes and up “nailing their own coffin” by creating these new rights. Another important argument is that the competition incited by the restriction of spots allows frauds and a greater hardship for black students in public schools who shall dispute a smaller amount of spots.