Military Review

About fake human rights, or where the real ones are issued

22
In recent years, many have the feeling that human rights are generally a phantom. Something like a big-budget film industry produced in a particular country for specific purposes. And not at all a universal principle.


For example, Saudi Arabia is the main ally of the United States in its Middle Eastern region. More importantly even Israel. Since the United States is the main champion of human rights, their ally with human rights should be fine.

“Every adult resident of the kingdom must have a guardian - a close male relative. Without the consent of the guardians, women in Saudi Arabia are deprived of the opportunity to travel, obtain licenses to conduct business, work, study at a college or university. Without the permission of a husband or guardian, women are not provided with medical assistance. ”

It is well known that Saudi Arabia has no complaints about this from the American rights advocacy media. Apparently, the Saudi Arabian women, according to the American government, have enough rights. In addition, every year they are also added: from 2011, women can even participate in municipal elections, and from this year they can even ride a bicycle. However, so far only in a special cycling suit, which coincides, however, with the only allowable for women.

Well, and so on. If there is an absolute monarchy in the country (as in Saudi Arabia), then it is still sufficiently democratic so that there are no complaints about it. In contrast to those countries where there is a republic, but with an inappropriate president for the United States.

If in a country religion by law dictates to the whole society how to act in all cases of life, then the existence of allied relations with the USA excuses this country. If the country is not an American ally, even the protest of a particular group of believers against something they don’t like automatically becomes an accusation for the whole country. And the existence of a state religion can not even be discussed - it is immediately allowed to bomb and occupy such.

If there were arrested people in the country who caused riots or even started military actions, then it should be checked whether the country is an ally of the United States. If not, then these people are freedom fighters, totalitarian repressed by totalitarian power. If it is, it's quite the opposite. Suddenly they become terrorists, and they can be completely destroyed without trial. Well, if this country is the United States themselves, then it can even send its troops to foreign territory, catch anyone there, take it out of the country, put it in prison and torture it, simply because it didn’t like it. All this, no, no, is not a violation of rights.

Or, in Russia, people of non-traditional sexual orientation have exactly the same rights as all citizens. However, the United States, pro-American countries and the pro-American press accuse Russia of “discriminating against gays” on the grounds that this minority is not allowed to reshape the same rights for all of them for their personal interests. In Saudi Arabia, gay is simply obliged to be executed for being gay. Equal rights are not even discussed: they proved homosexuality - ax-noggin, that's all. However, this does not cause any objections to the holders of a controlling package of human rights. It does not cause objections to Saudi and similar attitude towards women, atheists, and simply to non-Muslims.

Feel the difference: the refusal to alter the laws common to all polls for the interests of a small part of the population is portrayed as a greater sin than the actual segregation plus the death penalty for this very “small part of the population” for its belonging to this part.

This kind of hypocrisy has been characteristic of the West for many centuries. It is part of the policy.

Equal rights of men and women in our country were formalized in 1918, although in fact they existed almost immediately after the October revolution. At the same time, the equality of all races and nationalities was consolidated. In the United States, only voting rights were issued to women in 1920, which was not even about full equality. France gave voting rights to women in 1944. Switzerland - in 1971. It became possible to speak about 70 – 80-s only about the progress towards full equality in most European countries. At the same time, racial segregation existed in the USA.

Did this prevent pro-American propaganda from considering the USSR as the main violator of human rights all over the world? Not at all. Facts to the side are cold war. Which continues to this day, despite the fact that the USSR is no more.

No matter how well human rights are respected in the country - especially against the background of the United States and its allies - this still does not save the country from the charges, because the goal is to accuse, not to achieve the observance of any rights. The ruling circles of the United States, generally speaking, are not at all concerned about the rights of everyone there. They are only interested in their personal economic condition and ways to multiply it, including using the political levers available to them. Exactly that’s why human rights do not interest the press subordinate to the aforesaid circles. She enjoys “rights” simply as a lever to shovel objectionable countries or those who are at the moment the turn to be robbed, and nothing more.

And now, attention, the main question.

Does all of the above mean that human rights do not exist? And we ourselves must forgive our power for all violations of rights only on the grounds that the concept of “rights” is used by Western propaganda hostile to us?

Not. We just do not have to use someone else’s term package and make excuses to its authors. Firstly, it is impossible - they will still be blamed. Secondly, doublethink cannot be encouraged. And thirdly, it is important, why should they dictate to us what to do?

We only have to send any pro-Western propagandist broadcasting human rights with reference to the so-called civilized world to Saudi Arabia as a forest. Let Israel achieve the abolition of national discrimination. Let him take over US citizens in the US, demand the closure of Guantanamo and the ban on humanitarian bombings. These are all objectively greater human rights violations than the little things sucked from the finger to which they cling to us, from China, from Syria (before the war, of course, there is no war without crime) and from a number of other countries.

And we, yes, also have problems in the area of ​​the observance of rights, but obviously not in the areas that they are trying to tutor us.

Why do these "fighters for human rights" never insist on the speedy protection of workers' rights? Where, where, but it is here that we have, that many others have the main chaos. Surely they do not fight against him just because the second side is just those very global groups whose interests the overwhelming majority of fighters for rights are serving?

In fact, they can only fight for the “safe” rights for their employers - not suggesting to their own population that, in order to protect their rights, it would be necessary for them to press this whole layer. These bankers, big business and so on.

But - and this is very convenient - their forces created the opinion that experts personally are experts on all human rights issues. And therefore only they have the right to determine where rights are violated, and where they are observed. The above examples already show the real value of their expert opinion, but even without these examples, judgments about the rights of people can hardly be considered a monopoly of near-government circles of several Western countries.

Even if they had not stained themselves by such a provocative, cynical double-mindedness, then even human rights would remain a concept equally belonging to all the people of the planet. That is, we too. And in our understanding, the priority of each of the rights is somewhat different from what they are trying to impose on us.

A person has the right to life, which he cannot be deprived of in any economic interest.

A person has the right to health. Everyone, not just someone who for some reason is able to pay for insurance.

A person has the right to active participation in the life and development of society, which is impossible without education - which means that it must be provided to everyone, not just a narrow group of children from wealthy families and a slightly wider group of valuable employees of large corporations.

A person has the right to freedom. And by the way, the right to disagree with someone is also a part of freedom. The so-called “political correctness” violates this right.

A person has the right to honor and dignity. Even if, within the framework of the current political situation, it is advantageous to deprive him of this right by, for example, pouring stories his country scum.

These rights are basic. To achieve compliance with them should be in the first place. And if this is exactly what most human rights defenders will do, then after a while they may be believed that they are protecting human rights, and not any particular elite of a particular country.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/
22 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lech from ZATULINKI
    Lech from ZATULINKI 10 September 2013 07: 26 New
    13
    Human rights in the modern world have been replaced by the rights of gays and pederasts with lesbians.
    If, for example, in RUSSIA, the minority represented by these abnormal people has more rights than WE ordinary people (majority)
    then in the eyes of the WEST we are violating human rights - a complete Nonsense for a normal person.
    1. Canep
      Canep 10 September 2013 07: 41 New
      +5
      I didn't read until the end, and so everything is clear, double standards are the standard line of behavior of the USA, if you are a Kent of the USA then you can even eat babies for breakfast, no one will say a word to you, and if you are not a friend of the USA, then you have when everything is not right with human rights. Like: "Why don't you have serial killers and maniacs getting enough vitamins and can't order pizza for breakfast."
      1. Very old
        Very old 10 September 2013 08: 22 New
        0
        I didn’t even drop in. Why upset yourself? Another yesseyskoy byaka. Only if someone annoy
      2. seller trucks
        seller trucks 10 September 2013 10: 36 New
        0
        Quote: Canep
        I didn’t read until the end


        the same garbage, I would also remember about "human rights" well, for example, in India, for some reason, no one remembers that this is a country of "racial fascism", and why, because friends and partners, albeit with ambitions.
    2. IRBIS
      IRBIS 10 September 2013 09: 01 New
      +8
      Quote: Lech s ZATULINKI
      Human rights in the modern world have been replaced by the rights of gays and pederasts with lesbians.

      Then I am personally happy to live in "powerless" and "totalitarian" Russia. And it is quite possible that soon refugees from pederasty will start coming to us from the West, with their families.
      1. Docent1984
        Docent1984 10 September 2013 15: 26 New
        +2
        What a blessing that we have a country of traditional values. In fact, an unshaven man in a vest with a fume is better than a shaved homosexual everywhere.
    3. OTTO
      OTTO 10 September 2013 10: 25 New
      +3
      Quote: Lech s ZATULINKI
      Human rights in the modern world have been replaced by the rights of gays and pederasts with lesbians.

      Alas. I just don’t understand: if democracy is the power of the majority, then how can the minority dictate their conditions?
      1. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 10 September 2013 14: 44 New
        +6
        Quote: OTTO
        Alas. I just don’t understand: if democracy is the power of the majority, then how can the minority dictate their conditions?

        In your question lies the answer - for this purpose the "notorious rights" are invented, so that the "black sheep" is not only not expelled from the herd, but also given "special powers."
        V. Vysotsky sang about such a goat ...
        1. OTTO
          OTTO 11 September 2013 10: 53 New
          0
          Quote: stalkerwalker
          endow with "special powers".

          I completely agree with you ... GAY with special powers, this is strongly said.
      2. kargrom
        kargrom 10 September 2013 19: 09 New
        0
        Maybe they have such a progressive, prolific, multiplying minority ...
    4. Docent1984
      Docent1984 10 September 2013 15: 24 New
      +6
      Why, if a man thinks that he is Napoleon, he is put in a "durka", and if he thinks that he is a woman, he needs some separate rights?)))))
      1. Canep
        Canep 10 September 2013 17: 29 New
        0
        Previously, all this LGBT people were clients of a psychiatrist, but now:
        From the point of view of modern medicine, psychiatric pathology requiring treatment can only be recognized as a violation that interferes with the activities of a person as a member of society [4], causes disorders that impede work, normal social activity and relationships with others, causes suffering to the subject [5].

        This is from Wikipedia.
        That is, he can live in society okay, but no one asks if she wants the LGBT people to live in this society and seduce children with their defiant behavior. Tolerance.
    5. Ruslan_F38
      Ruslan_F38 10 September 2013 16: 34 New
      0
      "Lately, many people have the feeling that human rights are just a phantom." - absolutely right. This is an illusion, self-deception.
      1. Dimy4
        Dimy4 10 September 2013 20: 10 New
        0
        Rights are generally fiction. Each person has exactly as many rights as he can back up with force, money, connections. The same can be said about the state.
    6. Corsair
      Corsair 10 September 2013 23: 59 New
      0
      Quote: Lech s ZATULINKI
      Human rights in the modern world have been replaced by the rights of gays and pederasts with lesbians.
      If, for example, in RUSSIA, the minority represented by these abnormal people has more rights than WE ordinary people (majority)
      then in the eyes of the WEST we are violating human rights - a complete Nonsense for a normal person.


      I will comment on the picture:
  2. Sadikoff
    Sadikoff 10 September 2013 07: 35 New
    0
    When Russia replayes the United States, it will be engaged in the establishment of democracy where the threats of terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics come from. Under the preliminary propaganda wave, we see and learn how to do this.
    1. washi
      washi 10 September 2013 08: 08 New
      +2
      Quote: Sadykoff
      When Russia replayes the United States, it will be engaged in the establishment of democracy where the threats of terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics come from. Under the preliminary propaganda wave, we see and learn how to do this.

      No need to wait. Yesterday it is necessary to explain to the population of the planet who is who. The greater the mass, the more inert the body.
  3. UV58
    UV58 10 September 2013 08: 16 New
    +5
    equal rights for all!

    http://russian.rt.com/article/15168
    In Iowa, blind citizens began to issue weapons licenses
    1. Very old
      Very old 10 September 2013 08: 24 New
      +1
      And what good? Pali kudy hit?
      1. Lech from ZATULINKI
        Lech from ZATULINKI 10 September 2013 09: 32 New
        +2
        But how cool you sit in a chair and at hand a 12-gauge howitzer.
        You respond to any rustle in one gulp from a large buckshot. smile
  4. Andrew 447
    Andrew 447 10 September 2013 09: 18 New
    +5
    "majority holders of human rights"well said, take note. Article +
  5. eplewke
    eplewke 10 September 2013 12: 11 New
    +1
    How did you get these mattresses! Climb everywhere! Let us live peacefully !!! Or we will fuck you destroy !!!!
  6. michajlo
    michajlo 10 September 2013 14: 49 New
    +1
    Good day to all!

    I liked the article, I directly and clearly give examples of the meaning of "human rights" adjusted to the needs of the Council of Deputies. good

    Also, plus a comment from a forum member below, I highlighted an interesting phrase
    Andrey 447 RU Today, 09:18 AM New
    "majority holders of human rights"well said, take note. Article +
    good
  7. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 10 September 2013 16: 44 New
    0
    Quote: eplewke
    How did you get these mattresses! Climb everywhere! Let us live peacefully !!!

    Unfortunately, they won’t give in vain if they surrounded by bases, barrier countries and set up world public opinion against Russia.
  8. mithridate
    mithridate 10 September 2013 18: 52 New
    0
    America and Europe will soon be choked by their democracy, which has already been reduced to absurdity
  9. luka095
    luka095 10 September 2013 23: 30 New
    +1
    The article is definitely a plus. And the "human rights activists" will never remember the rights of workers - they will not pay for it.