The Freedom and Security of Minorities
AUTHOR: Peter Dunne
The great English liberal historian Lord Acton once wrote that "The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities."
It would be almost impossible to disagree with that principle – but what is the true measure of freedom and security in modern society? Many will cite the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights and argue that its provisions meet Lord Acton’s tests, as the benchmark against which nations should be ranked. Others will adopt a lesser standard based on the reduction of wants and the improvement over time of individual conditions.
Be all that as it may, the most obvious manifestation of freedom is surely more straightforward – that people are able to achieve, within safe and secure boundaries, their individual potential to the greatest extent possible, without compromise to their basic liberties of assembly, speech and belief. Implicit in this is recognition of the dignity of each person, founded on respect for individual worth, although not necessarily their particular views or situation. Against such yardsticks we can begin to assess the level of freedom and security we accord to our own society: the young, the old, the disabled, the sick, the generally under privileged, racial and sexual minorities, as well as the generally conformist majority.
But meeting these tests will often be a matter of national attitude, as much as it is a matter of legislative protection. Too often in this country we seem to have fallen back on legislative protection, without recognising that it needs to be accompanied by a positive individual attitude. It is all very well to be rigorous in upholding those laws which give protection to the rights of minorities, but this is of limited value if not accompanied by real individual and societal commitment to the principles and intent of the law in question.
Through the various pieces of civil and human rights legislation passed by the New Zealand Parliament in the last 150 years, we have built up a proud tradition and strong legal framework dedicated to the provision of freedom and security for all our people. But we have been far less positive in working to ensure that the spirit behind all these provisions has been widely embraced by our people. A quick listen to talkback radio, or visit to the blogosphere, will quickly show how embittered many of our people are, and how many existing rights they actually want to curtail.
So maybe it is time to take on afresh the mantle of promoting freedom and security – not in the neo-anarchistic way the libertarians and the far right do, or the soft hold no-one accountable of the left – but in Lord Acton’s principled context of individual respect for human dignity and worth? Maybe it is time to stop trying to promote New Zealand as a bi-cultural monolith, but to recognise the increasing diversity of cultures and backgrounds that we are today, and to encourage all to play their part in shaping the New Zealand of the future? Maybe it is time to set the national goal of excluding nothing as impossible, and seeking to empower all New Zealanders to achieve accordingly?
As it happens, these sentiments already find clear expression in UnitedFuture’s mission statement to promote strong families and vibrant communities: to seek a fair, and open society, free from poverty, ignorance and prejudice, and based on innovation, self-reliance, justice and integrity in business and personal dealings, where all New Zealanders, whatever their background, race or creed, have the chance to enjoy everything that is good in our country. We are surely today’s equivalent of Lord Acton’s powerful dictum.