Burke and the Rights of Man
Where I would agree with Bentham in his critique of the rights of man revolutionary, a criticism that has been resumed, with different nuances, by many others. Mainly Burke, side Conservatives ( Reflections on the French Revolution , 1790), and later, Karl Marx (especially the Jewish Question ) showed there were specious terms of the Declaration of Rights of 1789.
But beware. You'd better proceed with caution. Do not forget that many of our contemporaries are engaged with all his being in the religion of human rights. Powerful partnerships with prestigious international institutions, the clergy of the Christian churches, a wide range of good intentions are delivered to the cult of human rights. Are allowed to observe, however (elementary observation) that these alleged rights, whatever the definition of its contents appear as unattainable.
revolutionary model. These are the observations of Burke on the rights of the French Revolution. While the Constituent Assembly so freely proclaimed man's right not to be convicted only after a process in good and due form, and the inviolability and sacredness of property, people walked past the windows of the Constituent heads of people in the Old Regime, raised on pikes, cut, without any form of process, and the Assembly put up the plunder of the emigrants. The rights of man are never for everyone.
The same observation can make the "substantial rights, called social, economic and cultural." Our new statements are one of the most reputable of the literature of our time, but before the lawyers will not pass without a problem. The right of peoples to dispose freely of themselves can be used to defend the Palestinian cause, and for others, the Israelis, but hardly of one and the other at a time.
All these rights are contradictory . Suppose that, for once, we take seriously the right of everyone to health and care through Social Security, we recognize the right of a transplanted heart to heart sick, should we reduce the rights of each to a living wage, to strike, and culture and to begin with, freedom.
not come easy to reconcile these rights that our age segregation everywhere: the right to modesty and sexual freedom, rights to life and abortion, rights to marriage and divorce rights to the written and televised, and the silence and creativity, rights "to the city", a sheltered housing and quality of life ... We Americans excel even more intensive production and daily human rights. This excess serves mainly to feed a multitude of claims impossible to do: when people return to real life, is disappointed and bitter.
misleading language. Immensely ambitious, but undefined, human rights have an illusory nature . It has been said to constitute 'unsustainable promises', 'false claims', as has happened to our money after inflation. Is deformation of Romans? When you grant us a hope that that right we truly belong, that we really because , and it may be, in the true sense of the word, claimed any chance of success. Which does not happen with the "rights of man." Given the inflation of the rights of man, one is surprised that so few lawyers, instead of applauding, are made to protest against this abuse of language. Source
VILLEY
MICHEL, Compendium of Philosophy of Law. Volume I. Definitions and purposes of law [Part. Treaty of the law for art. Section Two. Other conceptions of the purpose of the law. Chapter II. The service of men. Article IV. Criticism of human rights] , paragraph 88 (pages 172-174).
☩ ☩ ☩
Where I would agree with Bentham in his critique of the rights of man revolutionary, a criticism that has been resumed, with different nuances, by many others. Mainly Burke, side Conservatives ( Reflections on the French Revolution , 1790), and later, Karl Marx (especially the Jewish Question ) showed there were specious terms of the Declaration of Rights of 1789.
But beware. You'd better proceed with caution. Do not forget that many of our contemporaries are engaged with all his being in the religion of human rights. Powerful partnerships with prestigious international institutions, the clergy of the Christian churches, a wide range of good intentions are delivered to the cult of human rights. Are allowed to observe, however (elementary observation) that these alleged rights, whatever the definition of its contents appear as unattainable.
revolutionary model. These are the observations of Burke on the rights of the French Revolution. While the Constituent Assembly so freely proclaimed man's right not to be convicted only after a process in good and due form, and the inviolability and sacredness of property, people walked past the windows of the Constituent heads of people in the Old Regime, raised on pikes, cut, without any form of process, and the Assembly put up the plunder of the emigrants. The rights of man are never for everyone.
The same observation can make the "substantial rights, called social, economic and cultural." Our new statements are one of the most reputable of the literature of our time, but before the lawyers will not pass without a problem. The right of peoples to dispose freely of themselves can be used to defend the Palestinian cause, and for others, the Israelis, but hardly of one and the other at a time.
All these rights are contradictory . Suppose that, for once, we take seriously the right of everyone to health and care through Social Security, we recognize the right of a transplanted heart to heart sick, should we reduce the rights of each to a living wage, to strike, and culture and to begin with, freedom.
not come easy to reconcile these rights that our age segregation everywhere: the right to modesty and sexual freedom, rights to life and abortion, rights to marriage and divorce rights to the written and televised, and the silence and creativity, rights "to the city", a sheltered housing and quality of life ... We Americans excel even more intensive production and daily human rights. This excess serves mainly to feed a multitude of claims impossible to do: when people return to real life, is disappointed and bitter.
misleading language. Immensely ambitious, but undefined, human rights have an illusory nature . It has been said to constitute 'unsustainable promises', 'false claims', as has happened to our money after inflation. Is deformation of Romans? When you grant us a hope that that right we truly belong, that we really because , and it may be, in the true sense of the word, claimed any chance of success. Which does not happen with the "rights of man." Given the inflation of the rights of man, one is surprised that so few lawyers, instead of applauding, are made to protest against this abuse of language. Source
VILLEY
MICHEL, Compendium of Philosophy of Law. Volume I. Definitions and purposes of law [Part. Treaty of the law for art. Section Two. Other conceptions of the purpose of the law. Chapter II. The service of men. Article IV. Criticism of human rights] , paragraph 88 (pages 172-174).
☩ ☩ ☩
Click here to read the rest 
0 comments:
Post a Comment