54 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 34 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 5/15/11

Of Humans and Rights

By       (Page 2 of 5 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   2 comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message David Swanson
Become a Fan
  (139 fans)
Are future generations whose world we are damaging as human as we are?  Does the rest of the natural world get as much consideration as the humans?  While we laugh at nations like Ecuador giving rights to the environment, we give rights, human rights, free speech rights (including the right to bribe electoral candidates) to corporations.  Corporations have no flesh or blood at all, and we treat them better than we treat a lot of human beings, and other living things.

We have to drop racism and resist demonization.  A horrible crime by a person or a small group of persons tells us nothing about a race or a religion or a nationality.  We have to actively oppose fear and the manipulation it allows.  We have to speak up for Muslims, for immigrants, for whistleblowers, for activists, for death row prisoners, for gays and lesbians, and for every human being who is treated as something less.  This means we have to speak up, as well, for criminals, for murderers, for those we believe guilty of the most horrible crimes.  They must have the right to a fair trial.  They must not be placed into the box of non-humans called "enemy combatants."  Murdering murderers -- not to mention using their crimes as an excuse for decades of war -- generates more hatred and more violence.  Exposing and documenting, and then punishing, the crimes of murderers generates understanding, credibility, and respect.

Once we decide it's OK to abuse foreigners we don't know, it's a short step to the lawless killing of Americans who live abroad like Anwar al-Awlaki.  Once we decide it's OK to strip Americans abroad of any rights, it's a short step to the lawless imprisonment and torture of an American whistleblower at home like Bradley Manning. 

We have to start stepping in the other direction.  Bradley Manning should be freed and honored.  Anwar al-Awlaki should be given a fair trial if charged with a crime.  And Dick Cheney should be given several fair trials as well.

Spanish prosecutor Baltasar Garzon is rightly honored for his efforts to enforce international laws.  The internet is bringing the international pursuit of justice closer to us, and in fact humanizing humans at a pace our government can't keep up with.  Our future comes out of a square in Cairo, not a drone command in Las Vegas.  Today an international effort called the Stay Human Convoy leaves Tahrir Square to bring aid to the people of Gaza.  Can we keep those people and ourselves part of the same humanity?

Eugene Debs showed his understanding of humanity when he said, "While there is a lower class I am in it; while there is a criminal element I am of it; while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

From here on out, let's have no more celebrations of anyone's death, but on that glorious day on which our government does not kill a single human being anywhere on earth, not with guns or drones or electric chairs, then let us sing and dance in the streets.

WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT?

We often think of rights in terms of negative freedoms.  We demand the right not to be interfered with.  We want to be left free to speak and to assemble, or free to choose what we can afford from among the merchandise that corporations offer up for sale, or even free to leave our guns where our kids can accidentally get at them. 

There's actually a lot to be said for the freedom to be left alone.  The right not to be locked up without a swift, fair, open trial by a jury of one's peers is a crucial foundation of a decent society.  Losing it, as we are losing it, is extremely frightening.

Marcus Tullius Cicero lived in a time when imperialism threatened rights, but he had a very different idea of freedom.  Freedom, he said, is participation in power. 

Here we are exercising our freedom of speech, but are we participating in power?  After eight years of bringing democracy to Iraq, Iraq has banned public protests.  We still have the right to protest, as long as we're not too close to the people we're protesting.  We've been left free to assemble here today, but are we free by Cicero's definition?  Unlike every other wealthy nation on earth, we Americans are left blissfully free of national health coverage.  We're free to get sick and die if we take a fancy to it, and nobody can stop us, damn it.  But does that make us free by Cicero's standard, or is it -- on the contrary -- evidence of our lack of freedom? 

What if freedom isn't something we're born with that might be taken away, but something we have to create together?  If we conceive of free speech as a right to meaningful participation in power, then the freedom to talk at a festival without police interference and to post our talks on Youtube is important, but it's just not sufficient.  The majority of the speech that reaches Americans' ears and eyes through a corporate media cartel that dominates television and other news ownership is representative of the voices of a very small minority, and is in fact contemptuous of majority opinion on most political issues. 

A majority of Americans wants our wars ended, wants corporations stripped of the power to buy our elections, wants the rich taxed, wants estates and investments and excessive profits taxed, wants war profiteering banned, wants Social Security and Medicare protected, wants major investment in green energy and education, wants the minimum wage raised, wants warrentless spying banned, wants voting rights restored to ex-felons, and indeed wants national health coverage for all.  Tell me when you last encountered those majority views being represented as mainstream or even as respectable in a television or newspaper news report.  These are views held despite, rather than because of, our communications system.  And this means that most of the people holding these majority views falsely believe themselves to be in a minority.  That's disempowering, not empowering, not free.

Meaningful free speech means the ability to communicate to others in significant numbers through a communications system where the popularity of an idea, rather than its acceptance by major multinational media corporations, dictates its prominence, and where a variety of views is encouraged rather than shut out.  As important as the right to meaningful free speech is the right to meaningful free hearing.  We're not dealing here with the right to vent or to stand on a stage and mouth off as I'm doing now.  We're talking about the right to know what is happening in the world, what others are thinking, and -- in particular -- what our government is doing in our name.  A right to government transparency is a necessary component of a right to free speech.  So, when the ACLU defends the right of corporations to buy our elections, in the name of free speech, it is not actually defending free speech. 

Our privatized military and privatized illegal spying apparatus, and all of our other privatized government services are terrific for channeling public dollars into election campaigns, but are terrible for transparency.  And the current administration, just like the last one, is the most secretive we've yet seen.  We have very little idea what our government does, and when a whistleblower passes some information about what our government does to Wikileaks, our televisions tell us to vehemently defend our right to be left in the dark.  We may be free to shout or curse, we may have 35 choices of prepackaged breakfast cereal at the store, we may have 113 channels of sh*t on the TV to choose from, but if our military is in action in 75 countries and we can't even find out which ones, we're not free.  If a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission can push through a merger between NBC and Comcast and four months later be hired as a super-well-paid lobbyist for NBC-Comcast, she may be free but the rest of us are not. 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Supported 2   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

David Swanson Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

David Swanson is the author of "When the World Outlawed War," "War Is A Lie" and "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union." He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for the online (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Obama's Open Forum Opens Possibilities

Public Forum Planned on Vermont Proposal to Arrest Bush and Cheney

Feith Dares Obama to Enforce the Law

Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?

Can You Hold These 12 Guns? Don't Shoot Any Palestinians. Wink. Wink.

Eleven Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend