#436 – HUMAN RIGHTS: WHAT’S WRONG? – MALCOLM PEART

Human rights in some form or another have been around since humankind began.  Some people had more rights than others while others had less.  This depended on the power held and influence through either benevolence or fear.  As in Animal Farm, “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” with correspondingly more rights.

History bears out this ‘equality’ and, as Churchill purportedly said, “History is written by victors.”  Any wrongs committed are conveniently ignored, rights are glorified, and real facts can be few and far between.  History is said to repeat itself and, as Churchill also said, ‘those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”  This is why, despite some people’s best efforts, we still see wars, slavery, religious persecution, cultural alienation, and political subjugation despite knowing that these things are wrong, right?

In the 17th and 18th centuries we had the Age of Enlightenment, also known as the Age of Reason with its doctrines of individual liberty and religious tolerance as opposed to absolute monarchy and the authoritativeness of the Church.  This didn’t work, and oppression and intolerance continued even with an enlightened few and a growing stream of activism.

In 1948, following two world wars and the overturning of the class system in Europe and the realisation that bygone European colonial powers were not omnipotent, the world’s most influential powers signed the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Earlier, in 1945 the newly formed UN started its advocacy that nations should resolve conflicts without war.  However, in the last 75 years the world has witnessed more than 285 distinct armed conflicts and innumerable tales of human suffering through genocide, displacement, ethnic cleansing, needless famine and poverty, and human trafficking etc.

Rights

Human rights aren’t new.  Over the millennia societies have advocated and advanced the principles of justice, peace, ‘good conduct,’ benevolence and respect for other people as basic rights to all persons.  Religions too, no matter where their origins lay, have advocated similar rights including morality, tolerance, compassion, and forgiveness as well as freedom of belief.  After all, without freedom of belief what would missionaries do?

Various states including Ancient Rome and Babylon, our modern-day republics such as America and France, and even monarchical Britain have some formality in the rights of individuals.  These rights include equality in the eyes of the law, plus liberty, security and freedom from oppression or torture.  There are also rights for freedom from punishment without trial and (subject to censorship and social media niceties) free speech.  Inside America there is also a right to happiness although happiness requires freedom of opinion.  Freedom of thought is, at least in some people’s minds, also a freedom until perhaps an Orwellian ‘Thought Police’ comes into existence.

The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states primarily, that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and should behave in a spirit of brotherhood.  The declaration addresses the matters of equality regarding race, colour, gender, language, and religion.  It also covers life, liberty and security plus slavery and servitude and the use of torture or other degrading treatment or punishment.  Despite the identity of the signatories in 1948 it’s a matter of record that most, including western democracies, have breached their own beliefs and codes of conduct.  But they condone that such wrongs are justifiably right and argue a ‘proportional response’ rather than a breach of the very rights they advocated.

Wrongs

The denial of the rights of human beings by other human beings has also probably been around since the first humans walked the Earth.  Humankind has witnessed many wrongdoings over history but, as time heals all wounds, and humanity and societies have developed, mankind’s understanding of man has also moved on as well as the continued inhumanity.

We hear of wrongs that happened hundreds of years ago and that human rights were violated.  These wrongs are matters of perception.  At the time, an enlightened few and those with more morality were against such matters but society at large, or at least those in power, saw no wrong.  Nothing has really changed and wrongness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and wrongness should be considered in the context of the time and the situation.

A famous British Judge, Lord Denning, in a UK landmark medical negligence case judged that you cannot look at a 1947 wrongdoing with 1954 spectacles.  Perhaps such a pragmatic view could be taken about human wrongs, particularly if they occurred centuries ago and well outside of living memory.  Some religious texts also have a pragmatic view and advocate that children will not be punished for their parents’ sins if they do not perpetrate the sin.  There are calls for reparations from the descendants of those who were wronged centuries ago as well as removal of statues and paintings of the wrongdoers.  Apologies abound and statues are razed, but is it right (correct) to require economic compensation and deny those accused of the wrongs, now dead and buried, of a fair trial?  What is right in such a potential wrongdoing?

The same is true of those who allege crimes against humanity and provide evidence of wrongdoings in the peaceful but angered aftermath of violence and hatred.  In the heat of the moment the worst in human nature can be seen and human rights can very often take a back seat.  But to quote an early human rights activist when asked about punishing a sinner, “Let he or she who has not sinned cast the first stone.”

Privilege and Entitlements

The right to be able to live in peace and without the fear of persecution but with the dignity that equality brings should be a human entitlement.  However, and despite the UN’s Universal Declaration, these basic rights and fundamental entitlement are becoming more and more of a privilege.  The privilege is linked to those who, ultimately, have control over society.

Today’s governments frequently call on the UN for intervention.  The UN may be a forum for discussion and resolution, but the UN has no legitimate power.  The UN drove COVID which, in hindsight for some and foresight for a silenced few, saw an elimination of many rights.  It saw the indoctrination and inoculation of millions on the whims of non-accountable and possibly irresponsible individuals.  This great medical experiment demonstrated the power of pharmaceuticals and philanthropists on the UN and enabled politicians to wield autocratic and dictatorial powers as they locked down their people with impunity.  Do people know what their governments are doing as our societies are engineered to create subservience?

There are now moves towards cashless societies spurred on by bankers who control our purse strings and allowing governments the means to monitor and exert even more control on people through money.  Will our entitlement to choose how we purchase goods become a privilege rather than a right and another manipulative step towards total subjugation of the masses?

What will be left of our rights if we lose the right to choose because there are no choices left.  Some food for thought perhaps, at least for as long as we are entitled to think for ourselves.

Bio:

Malcolm Peart is an UK Chartered Engineer & Chartered Geologist with over thirty-five years’ international experience in multicultural environments on large multidisciplinary infrastructure projects including rail, metro, hydro, airports, tunnels, roads and bridges. Skills include project management, contract administration & procurement, and design & construction management skills as Client, Consultant, and Contractor.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *