If I may be so bold that would say something outlandish, it is that in principle I hate the idea of the existence of human rights claims and Bills of Right. This because the existence of human rights claims always (as far as I can tell) is the direct result of people needing to make such claims because of other people's (singular and plural) lack of love and/or hatred of other humans; which is a lack of love which has been weaponised.
Human rights claims in almost every circumstance that I can think of, are in response to needing to put limits upon people's power and the effects of that power being exercised. If you will cast your minds back to a high school science class, power is the ability to do work; it's just that nasty people who want to do nasty things, will also do nasty work with that power.
If you remove all of the overlay about whether or not the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen or not (because quite frankly, exactly zero credible evidence was presented to prove that assertion was true), then the display at the Capitol Building in Washington DC is reduced to nothing more than a display and exercise of power.
The only reason why swords are polished and sharpened, are to do the work of slaughter. The only reason why a gun exists, is to do the work of slaughter. Why then do we have both powerful people and parts of the commentariat who support said powerful people, wanting to either make mirth of what has happened, or want to play the game of whataboutism? Again, this comes down to nothing more than a display and exercise of power.
Most of the context of human rights claims in the past, have to do with limiting the power of government to act in nasty ways. Arguably the four most famous human rights claims happened in the wake of nastiness.
The Bill Of Rights Act 1689 happened after the relatively bloodless Glorious Revolution; which itself is kind of a restoration of the English Government back to what it was before the English Civil War and the period of the Commonwealth. The Bill Of Rights of 1792 was tacked onto the back of the United States Constitution after the American Revolution which was a pretty bloody war. Both the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights 1948 and the International Covenant Of Political Rights 1951, happened in the wake of two world wars in which one hundred million people were needlessly ploughed back into the fields. In all of those cases and probably many more, the claims for rights only happen after a tremendous cost has been paid and even then, the people in charge of money and power, still manage to reorganise the world so that they are immune from paying the cost.
I think that we've definitely seen over the past forty years, what happens to people whose ancestors once claimed rights but who now live in the twilight of a reorganised world where the people who control money and power, reorganise the world. Whatever rights were formally claimed, end up becoming nothing more than tombstones to the dead.
When the right to free speech is weaponised by nasty people who want to do nasty things, then that power is translated into nasty work. When the right to bear arms is weaponised by nasty people who want to do nasty things, then that power is also translated into nasty work. When a right is weaponised and springs forth a work of death, then the point of one's ancestors claiming the right in the first place is mocked.
There’s a certain madness in our politics. Much of it comes from the rise of postmodern conservatism and right wing identity politics. Exactly what is being conserved here? I think that it is disingenuous to say that "All Lives Matter" when by the action of power, the work which is done proves otherwise. I think that it is disingenuous to say that "Blue Lives Matter" when you wrap said flag around a metal pole and are using it to beat security workers.
I simply do not understand how rights even make any sense at all if on one hand you love your friends but hate your enemy. If you exercise your right to free speech and carelessly call someone an "idiot" (insert whatever slur on the basis of race, gender, nationality, religion, ability etc. you like here) then you quite rightly deserve to get yourself hauled into court. Where does any of this end? Love your friends and hate your enemies? We've been watching this merry-go-round of stupidity play out across western democracies for the last decade.
If history has taught me anything it is that it is impossible for any society to learn any lesson beyond that of its current memory. Contrary to George Santayana's aphorism, history shows that both those who do not learn history and those who do learn history are doomed to repeat it. How then do we step off of the merry-go-round of repeated stupidity? It's that thing which people didn't do which caused human rights claims to be raised in the first place - civic love.
Everything worthwhile in the world has been built through the collective efforts of community. The people with money and power are loathe to admit it but the very instruments which caused them to have money and power in the first place were also built through the collective efforts of community - the ownership structure of factories and business is even called a 'corporation' and is a collective purchasing arrangement of goods and services, which is for returning interest, rents, and dividends to its shareholders.
It is only when people learn to cooperate instead of competing or fighting that anything big and important gets done. Western democracies have forgotten that and have enacted policies designed to work out a decreasing amount of civic love. We allow public housing, education, healthcare, and in some cases physical infrastructure to deteriorate because we actively keep on choosing to give power to nasty people who want to do nasty things; we should not be surprised when they will also do nasty work with that power.
If all you do is love the lovable, do you expect a bonus? Anybody can do that. If you simply say hello to those who greet you, do you expect a medal? Or do we want to just keep on riding on the merry-go-round of repeated stupidity, where a lack of love has been weaponised?
No comments:
Post a Comment