278-tir59
Bronze medal from the Paris Mint (Horn hallmark from 1880).Medal struck around 1980.
In Florentine bronze (golden patina).
Some shocks on the edge and races of manipulation.
Engraver : Bush .
Dimension : 68mm.
Weight : 228 g.
Metal : bronze.
Hallmark on the edge (mark on the edge): Cornucopia + br flo .
Quick and neat delivery.
The support is not has sell .
The stand is not for sale.
Dimension : 68mm.
Weight : 228 g.
Metal : bronze.
Hallmark on the edge (mark on the edge): Cornucopia + br flo .
Quick and neat delivery.
The support is not has sell .
The stand is not for sale.
Human rights (sometimes written “droits de l’Homme”N 1), also called human rights or human rights (for example in a Canadian government communications context)N 2, are a concept that is both philosophical, legal and political, according to which every human being has universal, inalienable rights, regardless of positive law (law in force) or other local factors such as ethnicity, nationality or religion.
According to this concept, every human being – as such and independently of their social condition – has rights “inherent in their person, inalienable and sacred”, and therefore enforceable in all circumstances against society and power. Thus, the concept of human rights is by definition universalist and egalitarian, incompatible with systems and regimes based on the superiority in dignity of a caste, a race, a people, a class or of any social group or individual in relation to another; equally incompatible with the idea that the construction of a better society justifies the elimination or oppression of those who are supposed to obstruct this construction.
Human rights, prerogatives enjoyed by individuals, are generally recognized in democratic countries by law, by standards of constitutional value or by international conventions, so that their respect is ensured by all, including the 'State. The existence, validity and content of human rights are an ongoing subject of debate in philosophy and political science.
Terminology
Since 1948 and the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the term “human rights” has been in common use in most of the languages into which it has been translated. Nevertheless, in French, particularly in France, the expression "human rights" is consecrated by usage5, notably in the founding text of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789, which does not distinguish men of women, but men of citizens.
The French name is sometimes perceived as sexist6 or unrepresentative7,8,9. Indeed, the expression "human rights", inherited from the 18th century, is the only one among the Romance languages to convey the ambiguity of man "male" and Man "human being", although the word Latin homo from which it etymologically derives designates the human being (the male man being designated by the word vir). In 1998, the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights recommended maintaining traditional expression10. However, in 2018, the High Council for Equality between Women and Men called for an end to the use of the term “human rights”, which it considers to discriminate against women, and to prefer the expression “ human rights”11. However, “human rights” is also criticized because of the connotations linked to the adjective (rights applied with humanity)12 and the very fact of using a qualifier (rights which are of a human nature) by erasing the reference to the subject while it is about expressing that these rights belong to an individual13. In other words, “It is not rights that are human, it is Humanity that has rights”14.
The expression "women's rights" which is used when talking specifically about women15 (as we talk about "children's rights" and "foreigners' rights") can give the impression that women would have different rights from those men in general. To overcome these ambiguities, some, such as the French Movement for Family Planning (MFPF), propose to speak of “human rights”, as is done in Canada. Amnesty International in France has explicitly chosen to speak of “human rights” as the Swiss section of this organization does in its publications in French. It should be noted that the Swiss authorities regularly use, at the highest level, the expression “human rights” rather than “human rights”16.
Finally, the use of “human rights” with a capital “H” for “Man”, which gives the word the meaning of collective person, is hardly attested in French-language dictionaries. On the other hand, it is often used among lawyers and in French normative texts, such as official journals17.
History
Cyrus Cylinder
The Cyrus Cylinder, kept in the British Museum.
Main article: Cyrus Cylinder.
“It is difficult to precisely identify the origins of the philosophy of human rights. The observer's gaze is in fact quite mechanically obscured by a form of historical pareidolia which pushes him to see retrospectively in ancient texts expressions of this philosophy”18. Thus, the Cyrus Cylinder is often referred to anachronistically as the "first charter of human rights". Engraved in clay at the request of Cyrus the Great after his conquest
According to this concept, every human being – as such and independently of their social condition – has rights “inherent in their person, inalienable and sacred”, and therefore enforceable in all circumstances against society and power. Thus, the concept of human rights is by definition universalist and egalitarian, incompatible with systems and regimes based on the superiority in dignity of a caste, a race, a people, a class or of any social group or individual in relation to another; equally incompatible with the idea that the construction of a better society justifies the elimination or oppression of those who are supposed to obstruct this construction.
Human rights, prerogatives enjoyed by individuals, are generally recognized in democratic countries by law, by standards of constitutional value or by international conventions, so that their respect is ensured by all, including the 'State. The existence, validity and content of human rights are an ongoing subject of debate in philosophy and political science.
Terminology
Since 1948 and the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the term “human rights” has been in common use in most of the languages into which it has been translated. Nevertheless, in French, particularly in France, the expression "human rights" is consecrated by usage5, notably in the founding text of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789, which does not distinguish men of women, but men of citizens.
The French name is sometimes perceived as sexist6 or unrepresentative7,8,9. Indeed, the expression "human rights", inherited from the 18th century, is the only one among the Romance languages to convey the ambiguity of man "male" and Man "human being", although the word Latin homo from which it etymologically derives designates the human being (the male man being designated by the word vir). In 1998, the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights recommended maintaining traditional expression10. However, in 2018, the High Council for Equality between Women and Men called for an end to the use of the term “human rights”, which it considers to discriminate against women, and to prefer the expression “ human rights”11. However, “human rights” is also criticized because of the connotations linked to the adjective (rights applied with humanity)12 and the very fact of using a qualifier (rights which are of a human nature) by erasing the reference to the subject while it is about expressing that these rights belong to an individual13. In other words, “It is not rights that are human, it is Humanity that has rights”14.
The expression "women's rights" which is used when talking specifically about women15 (as we talk about "children's rights" and "foreigners' rights") can give the impression that women would have different rights from those men in general. To overcome these ambiguities, some, such as the French Movement for Family Planning (MFPF), propose to speak of “human rights”, as is done in Canada. Amnesty International in France has explicitly chosen to speak of “human rights” as the Swiss section of this organization does in its publications in French. It should be noted that the Swiss authorities regularly use, at the highest level, the expression “human rights” rather than “human rights”16.
Finally, the use of “human rights” with a capital “H” for “Man”, which gives the word the meaning of collective person, is hardly attested in French-language dictionaries. On the other hand, it is often used among lawyers and in French normative texts, such as official journals17.
History
Cyrus Cylinder
The Cyrus Cylinder, kept in the British Museum.
Main article: Cyrus Cylinder.
“It is difficult to precisely identify the origins of the philosophy of human rights. The observer's gaze is in fact quite mechanically obscured by a form of historical pareidolia which pushes him to see retrospectively in ancient texts expressions of this philosophy”18. Thus, the Cyrus Cylinder is often referred to anachronistically as the "first charter of human rights". Engraved in clay at the request of Cyrus the Great after his conquest
— Karl Marx, The Jewish Question, 1843
Subsequently, many Marxists, including Paul Lafargue, Marx's son-in-law, denounced "consumptive" and "pompous" human rights as a bourgeois concept representing little more than the "rights of capitalist exploitation" (Paul Lafargue, The Right to Laziness).
According to Alain de Benoist, far-right essayist, the discourse of human rights ideology seeks to pass off its ideas as dogmas that cannot be criticized or questioned without placing oneself outside of humanity. This effect would be achieved by presenting human rights as “universal” rights. The proponents of the credo of human rights consider themselves invested with the mission of imposing its principles on the entire world, the ideology of human rights thus reveals itself as a bearer of intolerance and total rejection while theoretically it is based on a principle of tolerance53.
For legal historian Jean-Louis Harouel, European democracies, by making human rights their policy, have condemned themselves to collective impotence. Establishing a “virtuously suicidal” state morality, the religion of human rights would prohibit Western leaders from considering the problems linked to immigration and the presence of mass Islam, and from responding to them in a meaningful way. a political point of view. The religion of human rights would thus be the negation of the collective rights of European nations27.
Relativist criticism
Related article: Cultural relativism.
Human rights are sometimes presented as a modern Western invention, although similar proclamations, just more poorly known, such as the Manden Charter proclaimed in the 13th century by Sundiata Keïta, Emperor of Mali, in fact exist in other countries. places and at other times. In addition, they are sometimes used as a means of pressure by so-called “Western” countries on other countries in the world. Some even see it as an ideological weapon of cultural and religious destruction, and economic enslavement of other nations.
Thus, the principle of universality of human rights is sometimes contested by certain countries. Western countries are accused of wanting to indirectly relaunch a colonialist policy, reshaping the world in the image they wish to give of themselves (we then speak of “human rights”). This crisis was particularly acute with regard to the principle of humanitarian interference, described by Bernard Kouchner as the right to intervene, taking up a concept created by the philosopher Jean-François Revel in 1979, or even the duty to interfere (obligation made to any State to provide assistance, at the request of the supranational authority).
This observation led the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to declare the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights in 1981. This charter takes up the principle of the Universal Declaration of 1948, adding a certain number of rights which have been neglected: the right to self-determination of peoples or the obligation imposed on States "to eliminate all forms of foreign economic exploitation” for example. But beyond this addition a certain implicit relativization of human rights appears[ref. necessary], which are placed on an equal footing with duties towards the family and the State.
According to Robert Badinter, the loss of credibility comes from those who proclaim human rights without respecting them54.
The universalism - or universality - of human rights, as defined in the West, is often put in opposition to cultural relativism which promotes a notion of equality of cultures - even if they are the most brutal from the point of view of the Western world - and which can also go so far as to reject any possibility of evolution of ethnic values by virtue of the principle of the fight against acculturation.
The Western vision of fundamental rights, based on civil freedoms
Subsequently, many Marxists, including Paul Lafargue, Marx's son-in-law, denounced "consumptive" and "pompous" human rights as a bourgeois concept representing little more than the "rights of capitalist exploitation" (Paul Lafargue, The Right to Laziness).
According to Alain de Benoist, far-right essayist, the discourse of human rights ideology seeks to pass off its ideas as dogmas that cannot be criticized or questioned without placing oneself outside of humanity. This effect would be achieved by presenting human rights as “universal” rights. The proponents of the credo of human rights consider themselves invested with the mission of imposing its principles on the entire world, the ideology of human rights thus reveals itself as a bearer of intolerance and total rejection while theoretically it is based on a principle of tolerance53.
For legal historian Jean-Louis Harouel, European democracies, by making human rights their policy, have condemned themselves to collective impotence. Establishing a “virtuously suicidal” state morality, the religion of human rights would prohibit Western leaders from considering the problems linked to immigration and the presence of mass Islam, and from responding to them in a meaningful way. a political point of view. The religion of human rights would thus be the negation of the collective rights of European nations27.
Relativist criticism
Related article: Cultural relativism.
Human rights are sometimes presented as a modern Western invention, although similar proclamations, just more poorly known, such as the Manden Charter proclaimed in the 13th century by Sundiata Keïta, Emperor of Mali, in fact exist in other countries. places and at other times. In addition, they are sometimes used as a means of pressure by so-called “Western” countries on other countries in the world. Some even see it as an ideological weapon of cultural and religious destruction, and economic enslavement of other nations.
Thus, the principle of universality of human rights is sometimes contested by certain countries. Western countries are accused of wanting to indirectly relaunch a colonialist policy, reshaping the world in the image they wish to give of themselves (we then speak of “human rights”). This crisis was particularly acute with regard to the principle of humanitarian interference, described by Bernard Kouchner as the right to intervene, taking up a concept created by the philosopher Jean-François Revel in 1979, or even the duty to interfere (obligation made to any State to provide assistance, at the request of the supranational authority).
This observation led the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to declare the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights in 1981. This charter takes up the principle of the Universal Declaration of 1948, adding a certain number of rights which have been neglected: the right to self-determination of peoples or the obligation imposed on States "to eliminate all forms of foreign economic exploitation” for example. But beyond this addition a certain implicit relativization of human rights appears[ref. necessary], which are placed on an equal footing with duties towards the family and the State.
According to Robert Badinter, the loss of credibility comes from those who proclaim human rights without respecting them54.
The universalism - or universality - of human rights, as defined in the West, is often put in opposition to cultural relativism which promotes a notion of equality of cultures - even if they are the most brutal from the point of view of the Western world - and which can also go so far as to reject any possibility of evolution of ethnic values by virtue of the principle of the fight against acculturation.
The Western vision of fundamental rights, based on civil freedoms