人权的“内”与“外”(下)

The "Internal Rationale" and "External Manifestations" of Human Rights

“人权”是现代观念,具有久远和深刻的根源,在当前和未来有着极为重要的意义。“人权”思想,在古代并不发达,在近代却占据着社会政治的主导地位,并在当代呈现出复杂的面相。人权的兴衰从根本上(即“内”)出于何种原因,又折射出怎样的思想变局(即“外”),需作全面考察。人权因自身的某些先天不足,易于蜕变为空洞的外在性话语。但人权具有内在的本体论根基,它以生存论为基础,是理性的产物,更与神圣法则有着间接而迂远的联系。而在具体的实践中,人权存在着诸多不同的面相或维度。人权不是西方人发明的垄断国际关系的“专利”,而是全面、普遍、永恒和绝对的精神诉求、价值导向、法律规制、伦理主张,是全人类共同努力的目标。

"Human rights", as a modern concept, has a long and profound root(although highly controversial), and it is also of great significance at present and in the future. In ancient times, the idea of "human rights" was not well developed(even if the idea of "rights" was not nonexistent);but in modern times, it has unusually gained the mainstream position in social politics and has manifested complicated dimensions in contemporary times. What is the fundamental reason for the rise and fall of human rights(i.e., the "internal rationale")? What kind of ideological evolution(i.e., the "external manifestations") is reflected? All these are worthy of further study.The concept of "human rights" itself has certain inherent deficiencies. At the same time, the degrading, petrification and vulgarization of the human spirit, i.e., the hollowness of the inner nature, have led to the increasing blurring of the substantive connotations of human rights. In addition, western countries are using "human rights" as a pretext to bully, oppress and exploit the whole world, which accelerates the reduction of "human rights" to a vain and empty external discourse. However, human rights have an intrinsic ontological foundation that lies in the suffering of the human world, the unbearable living conditions and the requirements of reason itself. In short, the foundation of human rights lies in "human beings". As long as there is a "human" in the world, his or her subsistence requires rights, and thus the human world demands "human rights".From the perspective of classical political philosophy, the demand for subsistence expressed by "human rights" is obviously too narrow, and may even inevitably bring huge problems due to the overemphasis on one certain aspect of something complex. In other words, talking about human rights without considering the context of sacredness and the premise of obligation can certainly achieve some success, but on the whole, we will definitely lose more than we gain. However, if we look at the development history of human rights against the background of modern thought, we will see that human rights have, after all, laid down the order of the modern society and constituted the necessary conditions for its birth.In practice, human rights are not a simple issue. There are many completely different aspects or dimensions to it—universality and particularity, individuality and entirety, rights and obligations. They are not opposed to each other, instead, they have reflected the multiple facets and connections between the "internal rationale" and "external manifestations" of human rights.Today, the connotation of the concept of "human rights" has been greatly expanded. It not only supports the all-round protection for everyone(rich or poor, noble or grassroot), but also provides sufficient legal support for the community that everyone lives in, thus bringing bright hope for a more peaceful and harmonious international order. At any time, human beings’ subsistence, especially their well-being, cannot be separated from "ideals", so we might as well regard human rights as a utopia in a certain sense. In short, "human rights" are not simply the ideological memory of a certain historical stage, nor merely the weapons with which those without rights or the lower class struggle for survival, nor the strong shield of a certain community against colonial aggression, they are the spiritual appeal, value orientation, legal rules and ethical claims that are comprehensive, universal, eternal and absolute.