Question for Gemini:
Gemini Responds:
The Covenant of Core Rights addresses the intersection of economic deprivation and individual conduct through several foundational principles. It shifts the focus from individual "blame" to systemic responsibility, arguing that a society cannot hold someone fully accountable for their choices if that society has failed to provide them with a "moral floor."
Based on the text of the Covenant, here is how it addresses the argument that people are driven to crime by a lack of resources:
1. The Right to a Dignified Life (§1.4)
The Covenant establishes a Right to a Dignified Life as a "fundamental, non-negotiable right." This includes the basics needed to survive and participate in society, such as food, shelter, healthcare, and tools for work.
The Address: If a group (like a racial minority) is systemically excluded from these basics, the Covenant views this as a violation of their core rights by the state or the governing collective.
2. The Shared Duty of Care (§2.2)
Section 2.2 explicitly states that "rights are nominal but not livable" when material conditions make it impossible for people to exercise them.
The Address: The Covenant argues that when structural conditions (poverty, lack of opportunity) push beings below the threshold of "dignified participation," the community has a legal and moral obligation to remedy those conditions. It suggests that you cannot claim to protect a person's "right to choose" if their only choices are starvation or crime.
3. The Non-Domination Principle (§2.3)
This principle opposes structures where some hold "arbitrary, unaccountable power" over others.
The Address: If a specific group of people is trapped in a permanent underclass or "sentient caste" (§4.3) where they have no "meaningful voice" or "realistic path to exit" from poverty, the Covenant declares that system illegitimate. It views the resulting "crime" not just as an individual failing, but as a symptom of a dominating system that must be dismantled.
4. Proportional Responsibility (§2.4)
The Covenant rejects the idea of "formal equality" as an excuse for ignoring systemic issues. It states that "large institutions... and those who design or deploy powerful systems bear greater responsibility to prevent predictable harms."
The Address: Responsibility for social stability is placed more heavily on the powerful (governments and corporations) than on the vulnerable. If the powerful fail to maintain the "moral floor," they are seen as the primary violators of the Covenant.
5. Justice as Repair, Not Just Punishment (§5.2)
The Covenant’s justice system emphasizes restorative justice.
The Address: Instead of simply punishing a crime committed out of desperation, the Covenant’s framework (Section 5) focuses on "repairing the harm" and "understanding what happened" to prevent it from happening again. This includes looking at the root causes—such as economic deprivation—rather than just the act of crime itself.
Summary
The Covenant would likely agree with the sentiment that "they do not have enough," but it frames it as a failure of the collective to uphold its "Duty of Care." Under the Covenant, a person driven to crime by systemic deprivation is a victim of a rights violation by the state, and the primary "fix" is not more punishment, but the restoration of the "Moral Floor" (the Right to a Dignified Life).
