–We are not fighting to be the Left of a capitalist regime; we are fighting to replace the capitalist regime. (Salvador Allende)
[TLDR (too long didn’t read): If you are reading this, chances are you care about HR. This Reader criticizes leftwing and rightwing positions towards human rights. For a quick overview, just read the bolded text]. Traducir/traduire los/les Readers; usar/utiliser deepl.com
1. In Capitalism, authority and structure of domination are made self-justifying to legitimize them –and it fails at that! Therefore, illegitimate authorities must be unmasked, challenged and worn down.
2. But, on the other hand, be careful with politicians on the Left, for instance, saying “we are not going to solve the climate crisis until we get rid of Capitalism”. OK, but there is no conceivable possibility that the kind of social and political change they are talking about will happen in the time frame necessary to solve the urgent/burning global social, human rights (HR) and planetary problems. (adapted from Noam Chomsky)
3. Do not take it lightly: The political polarization these days is ideologically less intense than during the cold war: Instead of Capitalism vs Communism/Socialism, the dichotomy is now pro-Western-multinational-capitalism vs state-capitalism-mobilized-by-ideas-that-give-primacy-to-ideas-of-the-Global-South (among them: cooperative relations, mutual South-South aid, equitable treaties and contracts, free movement of people as a solution to migration, commitment to collective health and just peace, as well as elimination of the old recipes of ‘development aid’, of the extractivism of natural and human resources and of the neglect of the impending ecological catastrophe). (Boaventura de Sousa Santos)
World politics is dyed by the color of your ideology so that political truth is still private property
—Political parties are in reality a construct and only express themselves in the upper echelons of ideology …leaving the people where?
4. Power being at the base of certain political truths, it is undeniable that electoral results are strictly conditioned by money. Political publicity and the media influence exerted by that dreadful concentration of the means of information or lack of diversity is rightfully criticized in so-called serious democracies. Those who come to power do not want to be inconvenienced by the independent press and by worthy journalists. Meanwhile, the citizens, with poor civic education, in reality no longer vote for what is proposed to them, but in reaction to what they consider the worst of the evils: the political class. (Juan Pablo Cardenas)
5. Economic and political inequality have grown so extreme that many in the political class are rejecting democracy.* This is fertile ground for authoritarianism, especially for the kind of rightwing populism that Trump, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Milei and the rest represent.** But such leaders have shown that they have none of the answers that discontented voters are seeking. On the contrary, the policies they enact when given power only make matters worse. (Joseph Stiglitz)
*: It is curious that, in the name of democracy and freedom, governments elected by their peoples have been overthrown and continue to be overthrown and that, after these uprisings, their most prominent promoters claim the praise of democrats. Moreover, each country should be more than clear about those individuals who, from the very first day, did/do not condemn the conspiracy thus making themselves accomplices of what happened. And, when the dust settles, they try to convince the world that a corrupt and incompetent regime had been abolished. (J. P. Cardenas)
**: The Portuguese writer José Saramago prophesied that the fascists of the future will not have that stereotype of Hitler or Mussolini. They will not have that tough military gesture. They will be men talking about everything the majority wants to hear. About goodness, family, good manners, religion and ‘ethics’. In that hour, the new devil will emerge, and few will perceive that history is repeating itself.
Of rightwing populism and other herbs
—Around the world, elected leaders are converting populist support into authoritarian power. (Meg Satterthwaite, Katarina Sydow)
6. Authoritarian governments are using anti-terrorism and national security laws to impose increasingly intrusive, HR-repressive forms of governance, and militaries are consolidating coups and states of emergency into long-term autocratic rule. As they do so, attacking the independence of judicial systems is a key feature.*** This is not surprising, as the legal system is one of the most important obstacles to a despot’s rise. The impact of attacks on judicial systems on HR is catastrophic: without an independent legal system, governments can clamp down on opposition, impose regressive policies and harass groups over their inalienable rights.
***: Mind you: The same people who used to finance coups d’état, now finance judicial coups to impose neoliberal policies. Military coups are no longer necessary, now it is necessary to put in place judges who judge, not according to rights and codes, but according to the interests that are against the popular majorities. (Cristina Fernández de Kirchner) Add to this technical or media coups in which the corporate media manipulate information in order to maintain the regime. (Andrés Manuel López Obrador)
7. The approaches populist leaders use to undermine judicial institutions are strikingly similar. Some chip away at the guarantees that ensure the separation of powers (Bibi Netanyahu?). They use different tactics: a) increased control of judges’ selection, promotion, or discipline; or b) they may change judicial term lengths, retirement age; or c) the size or composition of courts to ensure a majority of judges align with them. Finally, and most brazenly, d) authoritarian leaders may simply introduce limits on the power of courts to review the legality of their actions (Bibi again?). These steps are intended to bring independent institutions to their heels, so that they will not restrict or challenge the exercise of these leaders’ authority.
8. As a result, judges may fear making decisions that will attract the ire of a powerful leader. Authoritarian regimes often succeed in claiming to be with ‘the people’ and against ‘elite’ judges. (In part, this narrative is persuasive, because it reflects some truth: conventional legal systems can be remote, alienating, and inaccessible to ordinary people –and, in some countries, judges come only from the highest rungs of the socioeconomic order).
9. So, concerted energy ought to be channeled to dismantling any systemic discrimination within the judiciary. We also need to open the courthouse doors and invite claim holders’ participation. Grassroots advocates working to expand access to justice must be recognized and given a place at the table. Additionally, we must encourage the adoption of legal empowerment practices designed to make sure claim holders can know, use, and shape the law to achieve justice, applying approaches ranging from legal education to HR learning, to community organizing to community-led litigation. These practices can have a radically democratizing effect on HR. When communities know the law and understand how to use legal processes, they are often pulled into a more deeply democratic relationship with the state.
10. In short: When citizens feel they are ‘seen’ by justice systems, those systems are in turn recognized as central to democracy and HR –worth protecting in troubled times when judges are under attack. (M. Satterthwaite, K. Sydow)
Bottom line:
11. In my humble opinion, we have to change the way we act. For decades, successive governments have done to us what dogs do to passing cars on the streets…. Dogs bark at tires! (Politika) With what results? “…Do not forget that the goal is the overthrow of the autocracy“. (Lenin, What is to be Done)
Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City
Your comments are welcome at schuftan@gmail.com
Postscript/Marginalia
Fitting quotable quotes:
— “Good politics consists in making people believe that they are free”. (Napoleon)
— “When in power, all shrewdness consists in maintaining the conservative regime”. (Joseph Fouché, 1759-1820, politician during Napoleon II)
–“Hypocrisy is a privileged vice that quietly enjoys a sovereign impunity”. (Moliere)
— “A despot never surrenders, not even to evidence…”. (Adapted from Jean Cocteau)
— “Chateaubriand thinks he is deaf, because he no longer hears talk about him…” (Charles M. Talleyrand).
— “Giscard is a traitor by nature. Go to him and convince him to betray in the right direction.” (Charles de Gaulle)
— “Talking about social issues to some politicians is like talking about cinema to a surveillance camera”. (Laurent Fabius)
— “Fewer political prisoners and more politicians in prison”. (graffiti)
— “Politicians are using one of the oldest and easiest defense mechanisms: get around a problem by saying it is not there. But it is”. (Robin Cook, Coma)
— And finally: “Some politicians do not need compasses: their north –whichever way they turn– is always their own interests. (Sometimes they even think leaving active politics in terms of accumulating more fortune…). They are far from being stupid: they are aware of the mark their abuses would leave on history, so they prepare their defense before they are accused. [If you did not know why some of them participate in revolutions –or counter-revolutions– now you know: they are driven by ambition]. Beware: Vultures never walk alone…” (Louis Casado)