Thursday, May 15, 2008
23:39 by FoxTwo 15 May 2008 is supposed to be "Unite For Human Rights" day, as Blogcatalog puts it. Before we go into anything too "deep" or serious, I request that you view the video below:
Funny? Perhaps. To me it is. In this part of the world, parents beat their kids. The western concept of "sending the kid to the room" has yet to catch on. The way that comedian Russell Peters put it across is hilarious, but it does ring true.
So what does this have to do with "human rights"?
As I see it, "human rights" is a set of rules (or "guidelines" may be the more appropriate term) by a group of people stating what should and should not be done to other human beings. Their "guidelines" stem from their own beliefs. They see that in other parts of the world, people do not behave like they do, hence they declare that the people there have little or no "human rights".
Just like parents beating their kids.
Sending a child to his/her room might work in the US, and it might work in Canada, but it won't work for other places in the world. For one thing, many children in other parts of the world don't have rooms (as Russell Peters put it across so hilariously).
When the pro-democracy movement in 1989 at Tianamen Square in Beijing was crushed brutally by the Chinese government, a huge outcry against "human rights" was heard from the western quarter of the world. Yes it's brutal. Yes it was devastating.
But, if you look at it, it was exactly the traditional way how a Chinese "parent" might approach a rebellious child - whack the guy till he gets some sense into him. The Chinese government was thus, "beating their children" to put them back in line, by sending in the army (the much-feared "cane").
Having the US government (and other governments in the world) imposing sanctions against the Chinese government is akin to your next-door neighbour coming over and telling you that you shouldn't beat your kids. How would you react?
Typically, one would say "Don't teach me how to discipline my child!".
China has won the privilege to host the 2008 Olympics. Here comes the "human rights" organisations of the world trying to tell China how to treat its "children". You think it'd do any good? What will happen is that China will tighten security measures and be even more brutal, since an "outsider" is coming in to "interfere" with domestic affairs.
I'm not even going to touch on the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, which partly happened under the banner of "human rights".
Human Rights, the concept, cannot be forcefully driven across to everyone. There are social norms and traditional barriers to overcome first, before this can be achieved. Education, while a slow process, will eventually change the mindset. However, a large forceful demonstration against a ruling government will almost always result in failure.
Case in point - just try holding a protest in Singapore. Within minutes, you will see a heapload of "ang chia" (Singapore's version of SWAT trucks and riot police) appearing to "maintain order". Human rights? You can talk about it in the lockup.
Last point to note - I am not for or against Human Rights. My point is just that the concept needs to be taught slowly, not driven across forcefully.
23:39 by FoxTwo 15 May 2008 is supposed to be "Unite For Human Rights" day, as Blogcatalog puts it. Before we go into anything too "deep" or serious, I request that you view the video below:
Funny? Perhaps. To me it is. In this part of the world, parents beat their kids. The western concept of "sending the kid to the room" has yet to catch on. The way that comedian Russell Peters put it across is hilarious, but it does ring true.
So what does this have to do with "human rights"?
As I see it, "human rights" is a set of rules (or "guidelines" may be the more appropriate term) by a group of people stating what should and should not be done to other human beings. Their "guidelines" stem from their own beliefs. They see that in other parts of the world, people do not behave like they do, hence they declare that the people there have little or no "human rights".
Just like parents beating their kids.
Sending a child to his/her room might work in the US, and it might work in Canada, but it won't work for other places in the world. For one thing, many children in other parts of the world don't have rooms (as Russell Peters put it across so hilariously).
When the pro-democracy movement in 1989 at Tianamen Square in Beijing was crushed brutally by the Chinese government, a huge outcry against "human rights" was heard from the western quarter of the world. Yes it's brutal. Yes it was devastating.
But, if you look at it, it was exactly the traditional way how a Chinese "parent" might approach a rebellious child - whack the guy till he gets some sense into him. The Chinese government was thus, "beating their children" to put them back in line, by sending in the army (the much-feared "cane").
Having the US government (and other governments in the world) imposing sanctions against the Chinese government is akin to your next-door neighbour coming over and telling you that you shouldn't beat your kids. How would you react?
Typically, one would say "Don't teach me how to discipline my child!".
China has won the privilege to host the 2008 Olympics. Here comes the "human rights" organisations of the world trying to tell China how to treat its "children". You think it'd do any good? What will happen is that China will tighten security measures and be even more brutal, since an "outsider" is coming in to "interfere" with domestic affairs.
I'm not even going to touch on the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, which partly happened under the banner of "human rights".
Human Rights, the concept, cannot be forcefully driven across to everyone. There are social norms and traditional barriers to overcome first, before this can be achieved. Education, while a slow process, will eventually change the mindset. However, a large forceful demonstration against a ruling government will almost always result in failure.
Case in point - just try holding a protest in Singapore. Within minutes, you will see a heapload of "ang chia" (Singapore's version of SWAT trucks and riot police) appearing to "maintain order". Human rights? You can talk about it in the lockup.
Last point to note - I am not for or against Human Rights. My point is just that the concept needs to be taught slowly, not driven across forcefully.
Labels: Human rights, random
