Whose Human Rights?

The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution
Whose Human Rights?

The concept of human rights has, over the past years, drawn the attention of both foreign and domestic political circles. Currently, it is recognized as one of the basic demands of Western, Asian, and Eastern societies. This concept is among the fundamental pillars of contemporary civil society.

 

The Origin of Human Rights

 

The notion of human rights can be traced back to the French Revolution, as this event marked the turning point in this field. Using slogans and mottos, such as liberty, equality, and fraternity, the French Revolution took a step towards reviving the rights of revolutionaries who had been marginalized during and after the revolution and who had caused widespread catastrophes because of their interaction with the bourgeois or capitalists.

 

During its early existence, liberalism introduced itself as a revolutionary and justice-seeking approach, as it led to the collapse of feudalism in Britain, France, and most other European countries with the slogans of fraternity and equality.

 

This intellectual trend, which had highlighted the principle of equality, enriched the movement and motivated the revolutionaries. It also narrowed its sphere of meaning to include only legal equality, i.e., all are equal before the law. This was because the crucial point in economic liberalism was the separation of free economy and equality.

 

Shaped in the free market system, liberalism turned into a setting for the promotion of capitalism, in which the capitalists, factory owners and producers made huge profits by exploiting the workforce and raw materials of a world that had been kept backward at the price of poverty and misery for white Europeans. Western plutocrats and tyrants, trained in the school of liberalism, spared no effort to preserve this dominance. The occurrence of two World Wars clearly shows the atrocities such governments committed. For them, the basic rights of humans seemed to be the most forgotten concept.

 

However, from an Eastern, Islamic, and Iranian perspective, the idea of human rights has been one of the most fundamental concepts throughout history, especially in Islamic law and Iranian tradition. In this regard, some have misused and distorted the Cyrus cylinder that addresses human rights in order to target Islam. This historical heritage reveals the deep-rooted attention of Iranians to the issue of human rights. Furthermore, Islamic teachings, as well as the practices and sayings of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the Infallible Imams (as), emphasize observing human rights, even during war. Therefore, it should be said that the observance of human rights has always been a priority throughout history, both before and after Islam arrived in Iran and the Arab world. However, over the past sixty years, new players have engaged in this field and sought to attract public opinion solely through propaganda.

 

Why Human Rights?

 

What is known as Western human rights differs significantly from our culture and religion. For example, the concept of individual privacy contradicts some aspects of many cultures, and the issue of fighting against gender discrimination known as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women is, for the most part, compatible with Western culture. For years, Western liberalism has accused Iran of disregarding human rights, and its advocators and supporters in the country make the same claim which is accepted and welcomed by some people who lack a proper understanding of its implications.

 

Despite the various efforts that have been made in recent years in this field, but as a consequence of them not being accurate and informative enough, they were unable to raise the awareness among people. This made these efforts turn into a weak point and provided an opportunity for Islamic law to be challenged.

 

Accordingly, religious scholars must strive to further clarify and expound the Islamic perspective on human rights. For instance, hijab, which is one of the fundamental principles in Islamic law, is categorized as an example of the violation of human rights in Iran.

 

However, regardless of the cases of Western human rights, it should be noted that it is not the West that should advocate for human rights; rather, it is Islam and the Islamic Iranian culture that call for the accountability and subsequent punishment of human rights violators. From the liberal, economic and sociological perspective, permissiveness is a basic principle which constitutes a typical way of life, allowing economic growth in some areas, particularly with respect to consumerism and luxuriousness, especially given the fact that the markets of Islamic countries are among the most lucrative in the world. The large number of cosmetic surgeries, the importing of cosmetics, and the prevalence of women's hair salons show the Western pressure to promote its own lifestyle, the consequences of which can be clearly seen within Iranian society.

 

In this way, the concept of human rights has been exploited by those who distort its real nature in line with the capitalist desires to impose a Western lifestyle on the people of Islamic countries. The reason lies in the fact that if the issue of political prisoners is so significant, why did the United States not allow even a small group of communist politicians to form during the Cold War and, by using McCarthyism, expelled, imprisoned or violently treated those who were merely suspected of somehow having socialist inclinations? The unfortunate track record of the Western human rights advocates includes expelling university students and school teachers who had spoken of the communist society, imprisonments and mysterious executions. The question is, were they not human beings? Or do the laws only cover capitalist liberals? If wearing the hijab is a violation of human rights, then why is the buying and selling of women as sexual slaves not considered an act of violating human rights?

 

If imprisoning the embezzlers and agitators, and executing the perpetrators of the massacre in Shiraz and the murderers who confessed to terrorism offences (e.g., the Munafiqeen Organization, the Monarchy Association, the Jundallah Group that was affiliated with Abdolmalek Rigi) would be the violation of human rights, then why do Western human rights advocates oppress the innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Chechnya, etc., under the excuse of fighting against terrorism and execute them in prisons by means of electric shocks, poisons, and gas chambers?

 

Clearly, this view is essentially incorrect and defending human rights, as one of the three sides of the triangle of transgression that includes concepts such as democracy and fighting against terrorism, is only a claim made by those who commit serious human rights abuses to excuse themselves of their crimes.

 

Reference: Omid-e Enghelab Monthly. Fall 2010.

Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution

Comments

leave your comments