On “Human Rights” and “Laws”

Apr 03 2008

Posted by: 阿偉 in Culture

During the 10th Islamic Summit in October 2003, Mahathir Mohamad, then-Prime Minister of Malaysia declared that human rights was created as a concept to help keep the elite in power. When I heard this news, I certainly agreed with the this his statement, especially with regard to the concept of human rights. Even though the context in wich Dr. Mohamad said them is not considered to be politically correct, I think there is a reason why this statement on human rights is correct.

From a political standpoint, many “progressive” nations use the idea of “human rights” to demoralize and delegitimize nations which they see as their ideological or cultural enemies. Whenever a power in opposition exists to today’s powers that be, they are decried as being “undemocratic” or “abusers of human rights”. Moreover, there is no universal standard of human rights. Even Amnesty International, often considered to be an international human rights advocacy group, often wavers back and forth on its principles. For example, they may criticize “sexist” laws in Saudi Arabia, but remain mysteriously silent on the excesses of feminism in the West; they may criticize the lack of free speech in China, but then go on to promote the addition of “hate speech” to the list of offenses in a nation’s criminal code, and then turn yet again and defend the authors of anti-Islamic cartoons in Denmark. Based on such happenings in today’s world, it is easy to see what Dr. Mohamad meant when he said that human rights are a “created” concept.

According to Confucius, the appearance of laws is the sign of a declining stages of a civilization. In a superior society, a ruler is able to keep order merely by ”facing south,” and embodies the principle of ”acting without acting” (無為). Since he embodies the same essence of Regality and virtue as the cakra-vartin, his manner of instructing the people is only to lead by example, and allow all other things to fall into place. When rulers become decadent, what follows is the loss of virtue and the loss of the ruler’s Polar connection to the heavens. Being detached from this higher principle, it is only then that he must then enact laws that keep men in place and maintain any semblance of order. Along with the laws, he also must enact harsh punishments, making people obey out of fear. Confucius summarizes:

Govern the people by edicts, keep the people them in line with punishments,
and the common people will stay out of trouble, but will have no sense of shame.
Govern them with virtue, keep them in line with rites,
and they will have a sense of shame and reform themsleves as well.

In the superior society, people are only bound by virtue (德) and ritual (禮), and not by laws. In the ideal situation mentioned above, the Ruler can afford to be benevolent (仁), because people under his auspices do right without being forced to “on pain” of any punishment.

Therefore, to answer the question of whether “human rights” are constructed, the answer is both yesand no. On the one hand, when a ruler is benevolent, his people are free from tyranny and society orients itself in a harmonious fashion. I think that what we might call “human rights” do seemingly exist, but it is only because the people carry themselves with dignity. This way, a society is ordered, because people are motivated by loyalty to their King or Ruler and have a sense of shame. Human rights do not really exist by name in a superior society. But as soon as laws come into place, the ruler must impose punishments, and invariably some people who are obsessed with having “freedom at any cost” will regard punishments as being harsh. In the last era of society, people will only be concerned with the hedonistic notion “freedom,” and the idea of human rights will then surpass laws. So, the idea of human rights is indeed a created one, created during a degenerate time in which the ideas of “virtue” and “benevolence” are dead, and where even “laws” are on the decline.

No related posts.

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 3rd, 2008 at 8:17 pm and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to “On “Human Rights” and “Laws””

2
Harry Says:
April 5th, 2008 at 7:47 am
It’s true that they are a created concept. Universial Human Rights had not recognized at all at any point of world history prior to 1945.

Human Rights is being used as a glue to destroy nations such as Sudan, Belarus, Democratic Republic of North Korea, Myanmar, Iran. Human Rights Group focus their crosshairs on non-compliant nations, threaten to destroy their economy, threaten to have their US, UK and NATO thugs come in and bomb out their countries…proof the Universal Human Rights even kills. lol
Reply - Quote
1
Michael Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Everyone should have “human rights” to some degree. But these days it is being used to delegitimize East Asian cultures. Plus, all norms of human rights should be decided by the state and not by some “universal” declaration.
Reply - Quote