Rights are ideals to uphold, nothing more, nothing less. They are immaterial which is exactly why they are so precious and must be realized practically.
If you mean the liberal conception of human rights, then I agree.
Nah it’s just not a useful framework at all and leads inherently to Liberal modes of thought. The “right” to property is the underlying problem after all.
We should care about workers having control over their own lives and their own conditions, not because it’s a right but because it’s an end in and of itself. We should mercilessly destroy the bourgeois parasitic class so there remains only 1 class with shared common interests. The rest will handle itself as long as there are adequate protections against persecution and unfair treatment of minority groups, and a mass line to ensure that public sentiment is reflected in the transitional state’s policies
Adding to this: Rather than rights, Marxists tend to express things in terms of 'humanity'. Acts which harm are alienating/dehumanizing, like imprisonment, wage theft, discrimination, and being a middle class fuckwad all dehumanize and alienate both perpetrator and victim. Marxist philosophers generally recognize that the path to humanizing the oppressor is to fight the oppressors to liberate the oppressed. But civil rights being nebulous removes this dialectical relationship from the equation, putting everything into legal terms where we make possible events like the repeal of Roe v. Wade and gosh it's just nobody's fault isn't it EXCEPT YOU, LEFTIST WHO DIDN'T VOTE.
Rights are ideals to uphold, nothing more, nothing less. They are immaterial which is exactly why they are so precious and must be realized practically.
If you mean the liberal conception of human rights, then I agree.
Nah it’s just not a useful framework at all and leads inherently to Liberal modes of thought. The “right” to property is the underlying problem after all.
We should care about workers having control over their own lives and their own conditions, not because it’s a right but because it’s an end in and of itself. We should mercilessly destroy the bourgeois parasitic class so there remains only 1 class with shared common interests. The rest will handle itself as long as there are adequate protections against persecution and unfair treatment of minority groups, and a mass line to ensure that public sentiment is reflected in the transitional state’s policies
Adding to this: Rather than rights, Marxists tend to express things in terms of 'humanity'. Acts which harm are alienating/dehumanizing, like imprisonment, wage theft, discrimination, and being a middle class fuckwad all dehumanize and alienate both perpetrator and victim. Marxist philosophers generally recognize that the path to humanizing the oppressor is to fight the oppressors to liberate the oppressed. But civil rights being nebulous removes this dialectical relationship from the equation, putting everything into legal terms where we make possible events like the repeal of Roe v. Wade and gosh it's just nobody's fault isn't it EXCEPT YOU, LEFTIST WHO DIDN'T VOTE.
i see it being employed both ways by liberals and leftists. it seems like an easy way to confuse is with ought.