I prefer instead the terms "collective rights" and "individual rights." The individual rights are those enshrined in our Bill of Rights, as well as those found here and there in the body of the Constitution itself. "Collective rights," however, are supposedly rights to things like food, housing, employment, education and health care. Most Americans on the left like to point to the South African Constitution as a "model" of granting collective rights, since those rights are all found there. What the left doesn't want people to know is that the real source of those "rights" is the Soviet constitution, from which the South African constitution was cut and pasted. Of course, it makes sense, since the ANC leadership were all Soviet communists.
I consider collective rights to be inherently in conflict with individual rights. You cannot have an enforcement of collective rights without an encroachment on the individual ones. And what is not pointed out is that collective rights are not really rights at all. To go down the list of these rights, do I have the "right" to a college degree, a job that pays $1 million per year, to live in a huge home and to eat steak and lobster for dinner every night? I may think I do, but realistically, we all know that isn't possible.
So what happens is that the State determines how much of your "rights" you get through process of rationing. That ration is determined on a political, not economic basis. You get what the State says you get, and if you are a "kulak," the State takes what it says it will take. "Collective Rights" come right out of Stalin's playbook, with his forced collectivization, five-year plans, and gigantic state planning agency, Gosplan. Don't forget all the repression that comes with it to make it work.
But it doesn't work; it's a bad business plan. That's why the USSR went out of business. The academics and power hungry activists on the left don't care about that. They care about advancing their totalitarian agenda, and collective rights are a very useful tool.
The HUD decree is a perfect example of "collective rights" in action.
The rights usurped by government are in direct defiance of Article 10, yet we continue to tolerate it. These days, it's a rare individual who even asks if the government has the authority to do what it proposes. They simply accept that whatever the government wants, it should get.
That is exactly the opposite of what our country was founded on. Increasing collectivization REQUIRES a corresponding lack of freedom for the citizenry. It is implicit in the notion of Social Contract.