The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizens: the Basic Principle of Human Beings - Research Paper Example

1.0. INTRODUCTION The story of humanity is filled with the search for principles and paradigms that will allow people to better understand and grasp their humanity, a humanity that is not made more humane by a transcendental reality, but a humanity that may achieved its fullness in the recognition of a commonality, of the common human experience. It is in this widely held condition of the commonality of human experience that although the contemporary period is marked and continuously challenged by the dynamism of pluralism, the strong belief in the one world of humanity is firm and undying in the hearts and minds of all peoples. This conviction has fired humanity’s desire in laying down principles that affirm the common humanity. And if there is one declaration that has inspired humanity for generation, it is the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. In the light of this ethos, this paper will look into the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizens and will attempt to address the following two questions. These are: first, what is the importance of the Declaration of the rights of man and of the Citizen? And second, in what way is the Declaration still significant in our times and in the contemporary appreciation of human rights? These questions will be addressed with the intention of finding and establishing the continued relevance of the principles of the Declaration centuries after its promulgation. Moreover, to be able to answer the questions the electronic databases ERIC, Academic Search Premier, Jstor, and Google Scholar had been searched using the combination of the following key terms: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, human rights, globalization, and development. Articles that provided analysis regarding the topic had been included in the search. Moreover, books expounding the topic had been included in the selection. Excluded in the selection were monographs, codes of conduct, pamphlets and position papers. This paper will have the following structure. The first part will be the presentation of the introduction, questions of the paper, its aim and the structure of the paper. The second part will be a look into the importance of the Declaration. The third part will be the presentation of the Declaration’s continued significance in the contemporary period and in the understanding of human rights. Finally, the fourth part will be the conclusion. In the end, this paper hopes to contribute a little more to the discourse of what it takes to be a human person. 1.1. THE DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND OF THE CITIZENS The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, is a revolutionary manifesto which has been adopted on Aug. 26, 1789, by the National Assembly of France and attached as the preamble to the new constitution of 1791. It was written principally by Abbé (later Count) Emmanuel Sieyès. However, more than it has influenced the French people in their perspective regarding national identify and international relations (Maslan, 2004; Siegfried, 1939), the Declaration has become one of the leading bastion for freedom, equality and dignity for humanity and as such, its importance and significance cannot be undermined. The declaration’s importance lies on the following reasons: First, the Declaration is the first that recognizes equality among ‘all men’ as stated in its first article “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights.” This idea has far reaching repercussion as it is the first that upholds the notion that human beings regardless of their color, and race are equal (Maslan, 2004). It is the first that maintains that as long as a human person is born as a human person, that person is to be treated with dignity befitting a human person (Siegfried, 1939; Maslan, 2004). This concept is of primary importance since it considers all men as persons and human beings. It attempts to remove the conception that some persons are less of a person because they do not belong to the same cultural or political group. Being such, it has made the class of men inclusive in such a way that the only attribute that one has to possess to become part of it is that one be born as a man (Siegfried, 1939). Although, it should be noted, that there is a strong critique on it in terms of the connotation of gender. Since, if the qualification in becoming human is that one be born as a man, then how are those human beings who are born as a woman? The silence of this article regarding gender difference is deafening. However, despite this humongous ‘problem’, it is still undeniable that the Declaration has been very straight forward in its attempt in elucidating the idea of humanity – all men are equal. Moreover, by claiming that ‘all men are equal’, it affirms that there exist an inherent attribute that defines a human being’s humanity. These attribute is not something external to the person. Rather it is something intrinsic in the person, possess by him on the premise that he is a human being; and these attributes are rationality and sentiment (Maslan, 2004). Though this may not be explicitly stated in the Declaration, however, it is something that can be deduced from the Declaration itself (Maslan, 2004). Second, the Declaration is important because it has provided certain “inalienable rights” which cannot be taken away from man. These inalienable rights include participation, through chosen representatives, in the making of laws; equality of all persons before the law; equitable taxation; protection against loss of property through arbitrary action by the state; freedom of religion, speech, and the press; and protection against arbitrary arrest and punishment. These inalienable rights are entailed in the concept of citizen (Maslan, 2004). What does this mean? Rationality and sentiments are natural and inherent in man as a man. No other further qualifications are necessary for one to possess rationality and sentiments; being born a man is enough qualification. However, when discussion pertains to inalienable rights, there is a necessary factor that has to be satisfied and that is “membership in a political association” which is stipulated in article 2. This brings the distinction between man and citizen. A man being a human person who possesses rationality and sentiments is to be accorded with human dignity and as such respected as a human person. A citizen, on the other hand, is a man who since he is a member of a political association possess not only the intrinsic trait of being a man but also possess inalienable rights which are defined by law, given by law for the good of everybody.(Siegfried, 1939). As such, rights of the citizen, though artificial, improve and empower humanity as these rights open the arena for equality among peers (Arendt, 1959). The third importance of the Declaration it sets the underlying principle with which institutions are to be founded – libertarianism. By recognizing the rights the of individual to liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression, it has provided the fundamental framework with which society and its institutions will structure its human relations. As such, since the inception of the Declaration, and “From that time forward, whenever and wherever the human being is threatened in his self-respect, his freedom, his title to existence, the first impulse is to look toward” (Siegfried, 1939: 653), it has become humanity’s inspiration. And the fourth reason for the Declaration’s importance is that it has influenced the bill of rights, the constitution of many countries not only in Europe but in Asia as well. This upholds the belief of the framers and author of the Declaration that what they are doing is not only for France during that time but it is something that all men of the world can access and use as they try to define and redefine their own humanity (Siegfried, 1939). The importance of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen is not only during its milieu. Its significance and magnitude is still applicable in the contemporary period. 1.2. THE DECLARATION’S CONTEMPORARY SIGNIFICANCE The contemporary global society has rapidly undergone progress in science and technology. This, in turn, has paved the way for tremendous developments in almost all facets of human existence. Moreover, the contemporary world is characterised by two important factors. These are: first, is globalization. Globalization entails the permissive separation between the national and the international spheres at the economic, technological, political, social and cultural levels (Durand 2005). The second important factor is the more prominent and active role of civil society. These two factors combine with rapid growth and development in science and technology has shaped and created a better world. However, in the midst of this progress lies the contradiction: the world is starkly confronted and marked with the divide between the rich countries and the poor countries, by countries which have nuclear weapons and those which don’t have, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, environmental degradation, climate change, infectious diseases of which the world might not be ready, HIV/AIDS, by transnational crimes and intrastate wars. In light of these contradictions, is the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen still significant? The answer is YES. However, how is it still significant? Globalization has created a global society that thrives through pluralism (Soros, 2002). The contemporary world, through globalization, has created a borderless and boundaryless world. In this regard, the pluralism that is experienced is anchored on the basic supposition that in the midst of the differences there exist equality among all human beings regardless of color, age, race, gender and culture. This supposition, in turn, is grounded on the basic tenet of the Declaration, “all men are equal”. Others may claims that this ideal is too abstract. That the moment a look into the actual lived lives of people one will see that, the equality envisioned by the Declaration is an illusion. Nonetheless, the nature of the human person which is characterized by felt sentiments and rationality as upheld by the Declaration becomes the common assumption with which the differences that exist in the pluralist global society becomes not a source of discord or hostility but a basis for good relations and amity. In other words, humanity has learned to establish bridges across differences instead of erecting walls and its foundation is the exact same principle that supports the Declaration, “all men are equal”. Furthermore, the development of a civil society that actively takes part in social discourses and helps in finding solutions to society’s problems is perceptible in the contemporary period. It can be appreciated as a way of putting flesh to the ideal of the Declaration that “All citizens, being equal in the eyes of the law, are equally eligible to all dignities and to all public positions and occupations, according to their abilities, and without distinction except that of their virtues and talents.”(Article 6). This presents the conception that the rhetoric of being a citizen finds its reality in the public sphere that allows for individual being to attain human flourishing and growth (Arendt, 19). Being such, it can be impugned that the material success that the contemporary world has gained does not necessarily lead to individualism and exclusivist ideals. But, that it too can be utilized in creating the condition with which people realizes that human flourishing and growth is not solely attained in the realm of personal success but that it becomes full and holistic in the arena of the public, in the civil society. Moreover, the idea that human beings as human beings possess inalienable rights is still until now being upheld. And in fact, it is one of the basic foundation of the contemporary understanding of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is guided by the general principles of dignity, liberty, equality and fraternity (Glendon, 1998). These general principles are the very same principles that steered the Declaration. Thus, though the words, the framers and the condition of these two declarations are different, but the essence and the spirit with which it is framed is the same – the recognition of the human person as a person with human dignity and with inalienable rights (Glendon, 1998). In the same manner, it can be claimed that the Declaration of the Rights of man and of the Citizen continues to be the source of inspiration as the world is confronted by realities that demean a person’s dignity, a person’s humanity. As there are parts of the world that are enjoying vestiges of the good life there are More than a billion people who lack access to clean water, more than two billion have no access to adequate sanitation and more than three million die every year from water-related diseases. Fourteen million people, including six million children, die every year from hunger. There were 842 million undernourished people in 2000; 95 per cent lived in poor countries. Almost 30 million people in Africa now have HIV/AIDS. In the worst-affected States, middle-aged urban elites are heavily afflicted, eroding State capacity and decimating the economic activity of what should be a State’s most productive group. The increasing number of infected women and girls is threatening food and agricultural production. If trends are not reversed, some of these States face collapse under the combined weight of poverty and HIV/AIDS. Source: A more secured world: “Our shared responsibility. Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes”. United Nations, 2004 And in this reality where human dignity and self-respect is threatened by disease and poverty, the Declaration can again provide the inspiration and ethos to find the solution that may ease the burden of these billions of people who are vulnerated by their conditions. Again, some may say that this too ideal, but the step towards change begins in the minds and hearts of people (Glendon, 1998). This is what the Declaration touches the most. In addition, the crime of our generation – genocide - can be lessened if we go back to the basic principle that supports the Declaration – all men/(women) are born and remain free and equal in rights.(Article 1). This point is being raised because the horrific atrocities against humanity in the form of genocide which has been committed in the last one hundred years have no comparison in the story of humanity and this prove to be our shame. The Declaration has inspired our forefathers in endeavoring to establish a humane world, a world where dignity, liberty, fraternity and equality are the guiding principles in living the human life, let it also inspire all of us as the call to fight genocide becomes a global plea. Finally, the Declaration can serve as a challenge for the contemporary men and women to continue to redefine our humanity in such a way that human flourishing becomes attainable, that a humane world becomes a reality and that the good life becomes the life of most peoples in the world and not just a dream. However, it should be noted that the Declaration is not without critique in the contemporary period. Hannah Arendt (1968) has raised a very strong argument against it. She claims that the concept of a citizen patterned after the Declaration has stripped refugees their own humanity. This is because the contemporary period has already failed in making a distinction between the humanness of the person and that which makes him/her a citizen. Thus, leading to the idea that what makes the person a human person is the fact that he/she is a citizen with certain inalienable rights (Arendt, 1968). This scenario has left millions of refugees bereft of their humanity because they are citizens of no country. Thus, leaving them vulnerated and treated less of a human. In this regard, this condition posits a challenge not to the Declaration to defend itself but for the peoples of the world to again redefine humanity and citizenship in such a way that it leads to a more inclusive, a more humane, holistic and integrative understanding of what it means, what it takes to be a human person. 1.3. CONCLUSION The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizens is important because it has provided and laid down the basic principle with which all peoples of the world may be deemed to be human beings. Thus, removing the conception that some are more human and some are less. It also paved the way for the inclusion of the idea that human beings possess inalienable rights in lieu of the fact that they are human being and citizens. Furthermore, the Declaration also laid down the general principle with which society and its institutions will structure its human relations –libertarianism. And finally, the Declaration has served as the inspiration of countries not only in Europe but also in Asia in framing their own Bill of Rights. In the same manner, the Declaration is perceived to be still significant in the contemporary period since, first, it basic principle all men/(women) are equal acts as the basic assumption with which pluralism which defines the global society becomes a source of good relations. Second, it offers the framework with which civil society is anchored and apprehended. Third, it becomes guide in the understanding and appreciation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as both are founded on the general principles of liberty, equality, fraternity and dignity. Fourth, it acts as a challenge to counter social imbalance that is widening in out period. Fifth, it challenges humanity to say NEVER AGAIN TO GENOCIDE. Sixth, it continues to inspire and challenge humanity to redefine our being human. In the end, the Declaration is an epitome of humanity’s deep desire in establishing a humane world. REFERENCE: “A more secured world: Our shared responsibility. Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes”. United Nations 2004. Arendt, H. (1968). The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. ________. (1959). The Human Condition. New York: Double Day & Company, Inc. ISBN 66-22273. De Feyter, K. (2005). Human Rights: Social Justice in the Age of the Market. London: Zed Books. ISBN 1 84277 486 7 hb Durand, D. (2005). “The United Nations at the Heart of ‘Another World”, Development, 48(1), p 61-64. Glendon, U. (1998). “Knowing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, Notre Dame Law Review, 73,1153. Harff, B. (2003). No lessons learned from the Holocaust? Assessing risk of genocide and mass Murder since 1955, American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No 1,pp 57 – 74. Maslan, S. (2004). “The anti-human: Man and citizen before the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen”, The South Atlantic Quarterly, 103: 2/3, 357 – 375. Siegfried, A. (1939). “The French democratic tradition”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 17, No 4, 649 – 663. APPENDIX 1 Genocides and Politicides from 1955 to 2001 Country and Dates Nature of Episode Estimated Number of Victims Sudan, 10/56–3/72 Politicide with communal victims 400,000–600,000 South Vietnam, 1/65–4/75 Politicide 400,000–500,000 China, 3/59–12/59 Genocide and politicide 65,000 Iraq, 6/63–3/75 Politicide with communal victims 30,000–60,000 Algeria, 7/62–12/62 Politicide 9,000–30,000 Rwanda, 12/63–6/64 Politicide with communal victims 12,000–20,000 Congo-K, 2/64–1/65 Politicide 1,000–10,000 Burundi, 10/65–12/73 Politicide with communal victims 140,000 Indonesia, 11/65–7/66 Genocide and politicide 500,000–1,000,000 China, 5/66–3/75 Politicide 400,000–850,000 Guatemala, 7/78–12/96 Politicide and genocide 60,000–200,000 Pakistan, 3/71–12/71 Politicide with communal victims 1,000,000–3,000,000 Uganda, 2/72–4/79 Politicide and genocide 50,000–400,000 Philippines, 9/72–6/76 Politicide with communal victims 60,000 Pakistan, 2/73–7/77 Politicide with communal victims 5,000–10,000 Chile, 9/73–12/76 Politicide 5,000–10,000 Angola, 11/75–2001 Politicide by UNITA and government forces 500,000 Cambodia, 4/75–1/79 Politicide and genocide 1,900,000–3,500,000 Indonesia, 12/75–7/92 Politicide with communal victims 100,000–200,000 Argentina, 3/76–12/80 Politicide 9,000–20,000 Ethiopia, 7/76–12/79 Politicide 10,000 Congo-K, 3/77–12/79 Politicide with communal victims 3,000–4,000 Afghanistan, 4/78–4/92 Politicide 1,800,000 Burma, 1/78–12/78 Genocide 5,000 El. Salvador, 1/80–12/89 Politicide 40,000–60,000 Uganda, 12/80–1/86 Politicide and genocide 200,000–500,000 Syria, 4/81–2/82 Politicide 5,000–30,000 Iran, 6/81–12/92 Politicide and genocide 10,000–20,000 Sudan, 9/83–present Politicide with communal victims 2,000,000 Iraq, 3/88–6/91 Politicide with communal victims 180,000 Somalia, 5/88–1/91 Politicide with communal victims 15,000–50,000 Burundi, 1988 Genocide 5,000–20,000 Sri Lanka, 9/89–1/90 Politicide 13,000–30,000 Bosnia, 5/92–11/95 Genocide 225,000 Burundi, 10/93–5/94 Genocide 50,000 Rwanda, 4/94–7/94 Genocide 500,000–1,000,000 Serbia, 12/98–7/99 Politicide with communal victims 10,000 SOURCE: Harff, 2003 Read More