IMPLICITY

good times

Posted in human rights, ramblings by Gautam on October 8, 2008

I have seen the need to explain my recent endeavors in human rights to people;

I would first like to make it clear that I do not agree with the general understanding of the concept. The phrase is thrown around imputing samaritanism to every one who claims to be associated with it.  As colorful as it sounds however, I have to attempt making it slightly unsavoury.

Human Rights are not the same for everyone.

People do not have a right to decent standards of living if they do not wish to live better; they do have an obligation to fight against oppression of even the worst kind if it be against their wishes, failing which they give up their right to existence.  The right to existence is the only right that supersedes every other right. The only people who are worthy of claiming it are the people for themselves.  The right to exist does not under any circumstances, over ride the capability to exist;  people incapable of protecting themselves give up their right to life.  I would ordinarily force in examples to explain my point; right now however, I shall implore my readers to fathom the sanity of my arguments without them.

An attempt at working for so called ‘human rights’ is an attempt to help people help themselves and for them to assert this right of self-help.  I do not wish to help those who proposition their helplessness without wanting to do anything about it; also do not wish to perpetuate my help to them; help extended to the bare minimum; and help it is for those whom I care for, and none else.  I do not care for people who exist in a distant part of the world as of now; I do not care for their rights as of now.  

I did in defense of something, tell a very nice person that, for those of us who’re incapable of connecting with the sufferings of others, the only other way we can help them is by enjoying it.  I would like to end with this.

Advertisements
Tagged with:

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Ishita said, on October 16, 2008 at 5:22 pm

    I agree with your concept of human rights where individuals fight for their rights themselves.

    But, i do not understand how helping people you “care for” is connected with human rights. Isn’t it a more universal concern than personal interest?

  2. gautam said, on October 18, 2008 at 7:15 pm

    im sure it is for most people;

  3. Arushi Garg said, on October 21, 2008 at 1:32 am

    You can’t pass a judgement without having experienced what these people in distant lands (whom you claim to hav!e no sympathy for) have to undergo. In fact even that experience wouldn’t IMO lend complete legitimacy to what you say. And anyway who decides minimum standards of help? You should probably go ahead with those examples you were talking about…its hard to accept your theory as anything but opinionated otherwise.

  4. gautam said, on October 21, 2008 at 2:18 am

    quite correct as far as my inclinations to pass judgements are concerned; sometime back I was explaining to my friend how in 1948, post israeli independence the jews massacre a whole village of arabs, killing brutally first the women, then the mothers and then children; then the boys and finally the men; this they do to avenge the murder of a mother and her 2 children in the same village by arab dacoits – something that the arabs criticised as wrong.. this was the reason given by the jews on national radio.

    there apparently seemed no point in my telling this girl about such a thing. This statement went back to the dhabha a few weeks prior to it where i was accused of indifference towards what happened to the jews in germany. my point through all this was very simple. theres all sorts of stuff happening around everywhere and it takes surprisingly little to make you pity or sympathise with what is happening. point being that you cannot sympathise with people because it is very likely that similar surprisingly petty circumstances turn them into the oppressor. Human right violations are about the oppressed and the oppressor; the same girl asked me to promise her that i would read a lot more and love more before making up mind mind on the nazis- i have not made up my mind on the nazis yet. i have however, over the period of time since then, realised that there’re as many oppressors as oppressed. no dirth of people to feel sad for, or pity or hate; Whats worse was that i figured all were the same.

    thats what human right violations are about; i’m certainly indifferent to the suffering of a lot of people and i dont deny that. that is all i have tried to say.

  5. arushi said, on October 23, 2008 at 1:23 am

    kudos. generalisation number two.
    you know, compare this to what happened in gujarat. Apparently, the Muslims attacked the Hindus and what the Hindus did later was just a retaliation. But what Hindus and what Muslims?
    By your logic it doesnt matter because very broadly, the oppressir and oppressed, the attacker and the attack are broadly the same category of people.
    If you’ve become immune to suffering its an entirely different thing.
    It has nothing to do with humen rights and their definition, I’d say thats just a personal reaction to whats happening around you.

  6. gautam said, on October 23, 2008 at 2:24 am

    the part of hindus or muslims certainly doesnt matter; its a pity that my comment should guide you to consider otherwise even in the least.

    and you’ve got my viewpoint perfectly as regards the rest.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: