[GW150914]

You’re not wrong, but for most of human history I could declare that you offended me and challenge you to fight to the death. “Most of human history” is a bad standard and is essentially hypocritical to raise selectively. People don’t compare their lives to those of ancient barbarians, they look around themselves today and they look to the future. Few people will be convinced by the argument that they have it better than a serf who died at 30, or s hunter-gatherer.

[stronglikedan]

> I could declare that you offended me and challenge you to fight to the death.

You still can, but not death in the sense of your target ceasing to breathe, rather the death of everything they've worked for in life being violently ripped out from under them, such as their careers, by the court of public opinion. Still sad when it happens though.

[ekianjo]

> “Most of human history” is a bad standard and is essentially hypocritical to raise selectively.

I made that point because someone referred to "human rights" when it comes to working hours. There is just no such thing and there has never been.

[watwut]

Article 24: Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

[lovich]

There's no such thing as "human rights" in general by that standard. You can't point to a physical object or some quantum of energy and say, that's a human right that you can measure. Human rights are something we decide on as a society, and if society decides that there is a human right to a set amount of working hours, then it becomes a human right.

The argument that there never has been such a thing is basically arguing that we should stop all progress. That nothing that doesn't already exist should ever be created