A public figure generally refers to the State or its sovereign part, a corporation or an individual subordinate to it. The term private person refers to one or more individuals who are a unit of the State, but do not represent it in any way for any particular purpose. Therefore, it can be said that the rights transferred to the state are called public rights. A private right concerns only individuals. Property rights are alienable, while personality rights are not alienable. There is an inheritance factor in property rights that does not exist in the latter. Property rights are more static than personal rights. Thomas Paine (1731-1809) went further into natural rights in his influential Rights of Man (1791),[45] pointing out that rights cannot be granted by any charter, as this would legally mean that they could also be revoked and, in such circumstances, reduced to privileges: a more modern version of this theory was proposed by MacCormick (1977). which argued that a rights holder was the intended beneficiary of a particular benefit and not just a general beneficiary of the rules. However, even with this change, it remains difficult to explain the rights of third parties under contracts. Suppose that X and Y enter into a contract imposing customs duties on each of them, with the intention that the performance of those obligations will benefit Z. According to the theory, Z must (conceptually) be a legitimate rights holder.

But it is indeed a completely random question of whether Z is or not. Some legal systems recognize Z rights in such a situation, others do not. In the United Kingdom, for example, Scots law recognized these rights for a long time under certain conditions, but English law did not do so until the situation was changed by law in 1999. While American individualist anarchists initially clung to positions of natural law, later in this era led by Benjamin Tucker, some positions of natural rights were abandoned and converted to the selfish anarchism of Max Stirner. Tucker rejected the idea of moral rights, saying there were only two rights: “the right to power” and “the right to contract.” [46] He also said, after converting to selfish individualism: “In ancient times. I used to talk lightly about man`s right to land. It was a bad habit, and I got rid of it a long time ago. Man`s only right to land is his power over it. [47] Every human being has certain rights and duties that are important for human development. Each individual has rights and duties that respect each other. A person must respect the rights of others. These rights are governed by law.

The true merit of the development of human civilization belongs to the law and its prohibitive process, which have informed man of his rights and duties as the unity of society. For the acquisition of the objective, the law provides for sanctions to prevent the violation of these rights. Rights are the concept of basic elements and are of great importance; They are recognized and enforced by the State. In developing his concept of natural rights, Locke was influenced by the narratives of Native American society, which he saw as natural peoples living in a “state of freedom” and complete freedom, but “not in a state of license.” [41] It also shaped its conception of the social contract. While he doesn`t say it bluntly, his position implies that even given our unique characteristics, we should not be treated differently by our neighbors or leaders. Locke argues that there is no natural trait sufficient to distinguish one person from another. Of course, there are many natural differences between us” (Haworth 103). [42] What Haworth takes away from Locke is that John Locke was obsessed with supporting equality in society and treating everyone as equals. However, he highlights our differences with his philosophy and shows that we are all unique and important to society.

His philosophy emphasizes that the ideal government should also protect everyone and provide rights and freedoms for all, because we are all important to society. His ideas then evolved into the British liberation movements that created our government. However, his implicit idea of freedom for all is more widely applied in our culture today. Starting with the civil rights movement and continuing with women`s rights, Locke`s call for equitable government can be seen as an influence on these movements.