By Raphael Machado, translated by J. Flores
Dispatch from New Resistance, Brazil
In the discussions between left and right there seems to be a strong disagreement on the issue of “human rights”. This is an apparently polarising discussion, which is surprising since the positions of right-wing and leftists are actually very close and on common ground.
Leftists believe that human rights are valid for all humans, except when they suspend them, for example, when dealing with the right-wing. The right, now they believe that human rights are valid only for themselves, a category that excludes ‘criminals’ and leftists.
Despite this superficial polarization the philosophical and ideological background is basically the same. This is nothing more than the old discussion about the extension of the concept of ” humanity “, which is supposed to involve a series of innate ”rights”, which at this point in human history must already count among the thousands.
We, on the other hand, vehemently reject the mere possibility of wanting to think something like ‘human right s’, indeed exist. We’re dealing with something that’s nothing more than a liberal-Enlightenment fantasy, without any kind of concreteness, based on a fairy tale, something that’s nothing but pink aspirations and that, worse; they have only served until today to legitimize all kinds of wars, genocides, bombings, interventions, and sanctions.
The problem there is not one that passes through the acceptance or rejection of the existence of a “human essence”. The problem first is the lack of understanding of the meaning of the word ‘right’ as a ‘legitimate claim’ to something. It is not possible to deduce from the mere fact of belonging to a particular species the possession of any kind of “claim” to any rights or prerogative.
Nor can it be done from the understanding of the ontological condition of man as being differentiated from all other species. Wanting to think “human rights” from the mere perception of something like a “human” is wanting to take a leap over an abyss.
The second element of the problem is belief in humanity as a political category. Humanity has never been, is not and can never be a political category, has never been, is not and can never be an agent, subject, of political and historical facts. History is always the history of peoples, civilizations, religions, races, ethnicities, nations, etc.
Speaking in “history of humanity” is as empty as speaking in “rabbit history” or “history of bats”. That’s why anyone who talks about “humanity” is trying to deceive or is being deceived. It is always a category that serves to delimit part of human beings as being out of humanity and therefore unworthy of rights. All political theories of modernity work with this kind of reflection.
That is why the most recent crimes committed in Libya, Syria and Yemen, were all genocides had as their conceptual background the notion of human rights.
Today, the fundamental role of the “human rights” ideology is to justify bellicose propaganda against Russia, Iran and North Korea, is to justify the acts of Western NGOs in the Islamic world to change their values, is to justify the imposition of customs on Christian countries, is to provide a humanitarian fund for capitalist interests involving immigration, the LGBT cause, the gender multipliers, etc.
There is no right without coercion that guarantees its effectiveness. But who is the supra-human body that will guarantee the effectiveness of these “human rights” and will protect the entire planet to ensure that Samoans are not being macho or that the Inuit are respecting sexual diversity?
Today, this is “Carte Blanche” for all kinds of international crime, but all done with the best intentions, no doubt.
There is no such thing as “human rights”. Any right we have is conquered and defended by the struggle, and not given, through the state and with the state, so that the state guarantees them for those who are their citizens and for posterity. They are therefore fundamentally linked to the civilization in which they are in force, and not universal.
The rest is a fantasy caused by excess soy consumption.