Activists have seized control of a vast empire of international law, NGOs, and human rights charities with a global network of staff who monitor respect for "Human rights." They wield their significant influence in the human rights industry to undermine human liberty by redefining the meaning of "Human rights" to denote the antidiscrimination principle.
The United Nations human rights program educates the public on the need to eradicate "Hate speech" and interprets "Equal protection" of the law, as a fundamental human right, to mean protection from hate speech.
In that context, Hitchens is referring not to the ancient liberties protected by Magna Carta, but to the Newspeakian rights now enshrined in human rights instruments, such as the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Murray Rothbard avoids the ambiguity surrounding the meaning of human rights by defining them as property rights.
For not only are there no human rights which are not also property rights, but the former rights lose their absoluteness and clarity and become fuzzy and vulnerable when property rights are not used as the standard.
In the first place, there are two senses in which property rights are identical with human rights: one, that property can only accrue to humans, so that their rights to property are rights that belong to human beings; and two, that the person's right to his own body, his personal liberty, is a property right in his own person as well as a "Human right." But more importantly for our discussion, human rights, when not put in terms of property rights, turn out to be vague and contradictory, causing liberals to weaken those rights on behalf of "Public policy" or the "Public good."
Thus, the Rothbardian interpretation of human rights denotes the universal right to self-ownership and private property that vests in all human beings.
https://mises.org/mises-wire/ruling-elites-create-orwellian-reinterpretation-human-rights
No comments:
Post a Comment