Symmetry of rights
Symmetry of rights means that a claim to a right must be consistent with recognizing the same right in other people who meet the same relevant conditions. If someone claims authority over others that they could not exercise over that person, the difference needs a justification. Merely changing the name or position of the person exercising power does not supply one.
The argument
The principle is an application of consistency to Natural Law. A person who claims ownership of their own body needs a reason for denying the same standing to another person. Jan Krepelka develops this argument against theories that claim special powers over other people: a proposed difference must exist, matter to the right in question, and support the particular authority claimed.Jan Krepelka, The impossibility of a non-libertarian philosophy of Law, 18 January 2015; translated by the author and François-René Rideau.
Theodore Dwight Weld used a closely related argument against slavery. A slaveholder assumes a right to himself while denying that right to another human being. Weld argued that the reason supporting the first claim also supports the second.Theodore Dwight Weld, The Bible Against Slavery, third revised edition, 1838, section “The Moral Law Against Slavery”.
Freedom in both directions
The following examples illustrate the reciprocal test:
- A speaker's freedom to express an opinion does not oblige other people to agree, provide a platform, or buy the speaker's products. They retain their own freedom of expression and association.
- Workers may seek better terms, organize, or decline an offer. An employer may offer different terms or seek other workers. Neither side thereby acquires a right to break an existing agreement; the terms and duration of any contract still matter.
- A person who chooses whom to trade or associate with cannot consistently claim that everyone else must trade or associate with that person regardless of their own choices.
Symmetry concerns the rule applied to each person. It does not mean that everyone owns the same things or has made the same agreements. Two people can hold different contractual claims because they consented to different obligations; the same requirement to respect valid agreements applies to both.
Rights and consequences
The normative argument must be distinguished from a prediction. Someone who attacks others may later become a victim of violence, but that outcome does not establish whether the later act was justified. Nor does a failure to respect a right show that the right does not exist.
Questions about self-defence, responsibility and remedies require arguments about the acts and people involved. The symmetry principle tests those arguments for special exemptions; it does not turn revenge, collective punishment or every reversal of fortune into justice.
