视点——天赋人权？人赋人权？
人权，是所有人与生俱来的权利。在新闻时政中，它是高频词；而日常生活中，却是生僻词。
人权究竟掌握在谁的手中，由谁来判别、衡量和落实？
——人权，真的存在吗？
Hints：
Oscar Wilde
Tripoli
Strasbourg
主持：fancyfrances
校对：sighsmile
翻译：baizhixian
注解：baizhixian
答疑：唔哈哈哈哈哈哈
口语点评：Lsy34
口语节目链接：http://bulo.hujiang.com/group/topic/685419/http://t1.g.hjfile.cn/listen/201210/201210300957148157589.mp3Oscar Wilde said that England was the native land of the hypocrite. But it often seems to me that hypocrisy may have been the British Empire's most successful export, one that in the post-imperial era has taken root and flourished all over the globe.
Certainly the existence of human rights generally attested to but almost as widely abused, smacks of hypocrisy. But perhaps we're being a little too harsh on our political leaders.
True, one man's extraordinary rendition is another man's licence to torture, which in turn is a flagrant denial of a third man's human rights. But might the cross-border tangles of semantic barbed wire that snake through almost all human rights cases, from Tripoli to London to Strasbourg and back again, give the lie to the very concept itself?
I only throw this proposition out in a spirit of humane enquiry. Could it be that human rights simply don't exist? After all, in my understanding it's difficult to conceive of a person's rights as obtaining at all unless an effective sanction is in place in the event of their violation.奥斯卡•王尔德(Oscar Wilde)说过，英国是盛产伪君子的国度。但是对我而言，虚伪可能已成为大英帝国最成功的出口商品，一个后帝国主义时代根植于全世界，并被发扬光大的产物。
人们普遍承认人权，却又同样普遍践踏人权，人权这一存在自然有一层伪善的意味。不过或许是我们对于我们的政治领袖有一点过于苛刻。
特别引渡制度无疑为他人打开了用刑许可之门，反言之，也是对第三人人权的公然否认。但这种在各类人权案例中蜿蜒曲折的争论，从的黎波里(Tripoli)到伦敦(London)，再到斯特拉斯堡(Strasbourg)再回去，是否可能是对这一概念一次又一次的误读？
我仅本着人文调查的精神提出此命题。难道说人权根本就不存在吗？毕竟，在我看来如果侵犯人权之举不能得到有效的制裁，那么个人能享有权利这件事本身就完全难以想象。
页:
[1]