Where Rights do not Exist


A saddening situation confronts proponents of human rights these days. In reply to rescue calls from those prosecuted by an authoritarian regime, an activist in a democratic state starts his work. Armed with statistics, episodes and logical arguments, he arrives in the foreign country and meets those in power there to discuss the situation and address the importance of acknowledging human rights. The regime orders him strictly not to interfere with internal matters and sends him back empty-handed. Both sides end up detesting each other.

It is true that this situation arises mostly because totalitarian governments refuse to understand the importance of basic human rights. But it should also be known that activists must shoulder at least part of the blame. Their problem is that they consider basic human rights as having universal virtue. I wish to discuss this problem in this article to help reduce unfortunate misunderstandings caused by those engaged in the crusade to promote them.

I'm afraid many activists do not realize the nature of the word 'right'. What is a 'right'?

Right is opposite of left. (Please do not be offended. This is the essential part of this discussion.) The right hand being the dexterous hand for most people, right is associated with ideas such as normal, priority, majority and important. Right is also the opposite of wrong. This can be seen in meanings such as correct, direct and straight. One can observe that these are terms of benevolent or virtuous nature. Rightist is a political term used to describe conservative people. Even conservative politicians endorse basic human rights, in some cases more so than liberals do.

Mention must be made here about how the human brain processes language. Whenever the brain registers a word with plural meanings, it simultaneously considers all possible cases. Using context such as other words in the conversation or knowledge of the person speaking, it filters out a single meaning. But the feelings that the other meanings arouse remain. Thus when the brain hears the word 'right' the brain feels that something good is being discussed, whatever the word is being employed for. People are likely to get into the illusion that they are doing something right whenever they mention the word 'right'.

Whenever one comes up with a sentence in which two meanings of a word remain at the end of the brain's selection process, it is called a joke. So we have the riddle: "Why does one put the right shoe on first? It would be silly to put the wrong one on."

Proponents of basic human rights must keep in mind that the word for 'right' is usually not connected to meanings of benevolent nature in other languages. Take Japanese for an example. The Japanese use 'kenri' to express political rights. Kenri is a composite word written in two Chinese characters: 'ken' and 'ri'. Ken means political power and ri means profit. Let us examine these two words in detail.

Ken was originally the name of a tree. Because the tree's name sounded like the word for weight (used on a scale), the character became used to mean weight. Then it acquired the meaning of scale. Confucius uses the character to describe balance. Eventually it became used to designate political power, and the original meanings are now completely lost, at least in Japanese. Ken is used in composite words such as 'seiken' (regime), 'ken'i' (authority) and 'kenboujussu' (Machiavellian scheming). No good nature can be seen here. Political might is 'kenryoku'. Kenryoku is good only in the Leviathan sense.

Ri is a character written by placing the characters for fruited tree and sword side by side. It symbolizes 'splitting of the harvest' or 'profit'. Invented before capitalism, ri is also a not-so-good sounding word. As an adjective ri means 'sharp'. Ri usually has dual nature as can be seen in composite words such as 'rieki' (dividend or benefit) 'rikou' (well-behaved or smart aleck), 'riyou' (to use). Riyou is employed as 'use' is in English: It is proper to 'use a tool', but to 'use a friend' is not.

Kenri covers only two meanings of the word 'right', 'political right' and 'economic privilege' thus, 'the right to vote in an election' and 'the right to fish in a lake'. Translated back into English, 'concession' would be the proper word. 'Riken', a word that inverts the characters used for kenri, also means concession. Riken is used solely to discuss economic matters, and describes profitable social positions maintained through graft more often than not.

Concessions, unlike rights, are not natural. They are given to people through law. Kenri must be obtained through pleading and begging. Often it is bought through bribes. In other cases pressure groups seize them by threatening lawmakers that they would lose their seats if their wishes be not heard. Thus those in power can reject the requests of one asking for kenri on the grounds that should such benefits be granted to a person or a minority, it must come at the cost of the welfare of others. Japanese bureaucracies and courts frequently employ this logic.

The same situation arises in Chinese. The author has heard that the same characters are used for the Chinese equivalent of kenri and jinken, only the pronunciation being different. Thus kenri should be 'quanli' and jinken 'renquan'. Unfortunately, the author's Chinese-Japanese dictionary doesn't list these words. In any case, when transmitted to the other side of the interpreter, the word 'right' is unlikely to be retaining its virtuous nature.

This problem has escaped the attention of those working on human right issues because most of them come from countries speaking European languages. Between the Latin and Germanic tongues, words of the same origin often cover roughly similar ideas. Thus, 'droit', 'derecho' and 'Recht' are equivalents of 'right' in any situation.

Interpreters encounter a problem when somebody says a joke. Jokes can't be translated. With nothing else to do, he has to say: "The gentleman just said a joke in his language. Please laugh to be polite." Those working on human rights must keep reminding themselves that there are languages that the word 'right' cannot be translated into.

I'm not interested in promoting, much less discussing 'basic human rights'. Relieving basic human wrongs such as hatred, intolerance and contempt comes first. Mutual understanding is an important step toward that goal. Never hesitate to ask me for advice.

Send mail toProphet of the way afu@wta.att.ne.jp

Copywrong