Your analysis of 'human rights' meshes with my definition of 'civil rights':
"The concept of civil rights has meaning only in the context of an over-arching system of legal power against which the civil rights are supposed to protect. Ending the system of power would also end the need for civil rights. But it is precisely here that one sees the impossibility of ending the oppression by means of civil rights law."
Due to the problematic nature of the use of domination language - so eloquently and simply revealed by Steve in this article -
From the Newsletters I read from so many (majority Indigenous) Nations, Orgs and Movements, the lawsuits and language speaks in terms of "Rights", be those Indigenous, Mother Earth, Nature, human, civil etc and remembering that someone mentioned ( I can't remember who or when) that the Hopi "could not get environmental justice nor recognition" [of Original Free Existence in US nor International courts or forums] "until they moved the court case out of US govt (domination) jurisdiction (domination) to Traditional Hopi Council" -
In revealing that the terms of "Rights" are a distraction to liberation from "unlimited right of domination"...
what is the language/words to replace this? or do people have to continue to speak their definition of the english word "rights" ? Has that been as successful as all life needs it to be?
How can the perceived "unlimited right of domination" be removed from our lives, and am sure Mother Earth will have the final say about this lethal non-sense.
You discuss something related to "human rights." I write the ECONO Postings, a segment (Section) on my Subst newletter, (jacob's Newsletter.) Economics without human rights is bound to fail. Here is my piece: https://silverman.substack.com/p/does-economics-involve-human-rights
It seems to me that the fires in Los Angeles and the fragile state of California altogether are an example/result of the technocratic project to transform and dominate the natural world.
This essay describes the origins and now dramatic consequences of this one hundred year long project
" the technocratic project to transform and dominate the natural world " is nothing but psychosis. After thousands of years, domination becomes psychopathology. They are completely out of they little minds. Isn't it great to know these psychos are right there on the job? ~protecting our "rights"? What are they even talking about?
Steve, sharp dissecting of the serious verbal shenanigans and horrid side-effects. The duplicity is exhibited with: "‘promote’ [human rights] but not to ‘protect’” human rights"; plus a needed warning about "absolutism [totalitarianism]."
My congratulations for getting the interpretation machine going. I think you would benefit from David Graeber and David Wengrow’s “The Dawn of Everything”. Mattias Desmet has spoken briefly of this but seems to have dropped the subject. Hopefully, you can restart the conversation.
The book review says that anthropologists, etc. "willfully ignore what is staring them in the face." Not to detract from the newsletter I am on (Steve's) or try to be a dominator or anything, but I just want to mention that that also applies to economics. It is not really that easy for my knowledge to be transmitted by the short pieces I do, but I try. (perhaps one might "check it out." ~ by reading my short 'ECONO Posts')
Thank you Peter. I appreciate it. Your insights are profound.
All the Best,
Steve
Excellent work!
Your analysis of 'human rights' meshes with my definition of 'civil rights':
"The concept of civil rights has meaning only in the context of an over-arching system of legal power against which the civil rights are supposed to protect. Ending the system of power would also end the need for civil rights. But it is precisely here that one sees the impossibility of ending the oppression by means of civil rights law."
https://peterderrico.substack.com/p/the-law-is-terror-put-into-words
Due to the problematic nature of the use of domination language - so eloquently and simply revealed by Steve in this article -
From the Newsletters I read from so many (majority Indigenous) Nations, Orgs and Movements, the lawsuits and language speaks in terms of "Rights", be those Indigenous, Mother Earth, Nature, human, civil etc and remembering that someone mentioned ( I can't remember who or when) that the Hopi "could not get environmental justice nor recognition" [of Original Free Existence in US nor International courts or forums] "until they moved the court case out of US govt (domination) jurisdiction (domination) to Traditional Hopi Council" -
In revealing that the terms of "Rights" are a distraction to liberation from "unlimited right of domination"...
what is the language/words to replace this? or do people have to continue to speak their definition of the english word "rights" ? Has that been as successful as all life needs it to be?
How can the perceived "unlimited right of domination" be removed from our lives, and am sure Mother Earth will have the final say about this lethal non-sense.
You discuss something related to "human rights." I write the ECONO Postings, a segment (Section) on my Subst newletter, (jacob's Newsletter.) Economics without human rights is bound to fail. Here is my piece: https://silverman.substack.com/p/does-economics-involve-human-rights
It seems to me that the fires in Los Angeles and the fragile state of California altogether are an example/result of the technocratic project to transform and dominate the natural world.
This essay describes the origins and now dramatic consequences of this one hundred year long project
http://www.truthdig.com/articles/killing-california-for-a-snack
" the technocratic project to transform and dominate the natural world " is nothing but psychosis. After thousands of years, domination becomes psychopathology. They are completely out of they little minds. Isn't it great to know these psychos are right there on the job? ~protecting our "rights"? What are they even talking about?
Steve, sharp dissecting of the serious verbal shenanigans and horrid side-effects. The duplicity is exhibited with: "‘promote’ [human rights] but not to ‘protect’” human rights"; plus a needed warning about "absolutism [totalitarianism]."
My congratulations for getting the interpretation machine going. I think you would benefit from David Graeber and David Wengrow’s “The Dawn of Everything”. Mattias Desmet has spoken briefly of this but seems to have dropped the subject. Hopefully, you can restart the conversation.
Here’s a good start. A fair review that links to more detail at end. https://inquisitivebiologist.com/2022/07/13/book-review-the-dawn-of-everything-a-new-history-of-humanity/
The book review says that anthropologists, etc. "willfully ignore what is staring them in the face." Not to detract from the newsletter I am on (Steve's) or try to be a dominator or anything, but I just want to mention that that also applies to economics. It is not really that easy for my knowledge to be transmitted by the short pieces I do, but I try. (perhaps one might "check it out." ~ by reading my short 'ECONO Posts')