Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (650,000)
York (40,000)
POLS (1,000)
POLS 1000 (200)

POLS 1000 Lecture Notes - French Revolution, Second Vatican Council, Soviet Union

Political Science
Course Code
POLS 1000
Martin Breaugh

This preview shows page 1. to view the full 5 pages of the document.
Human rights has become the ultimate principle of morality
They receive the unanimous support of all the global economies
Human rights are so imp. Today that those who would normal be
critical of human rights ex. Conservatives, adhere to the notion of human
rights and they actively support the extension of human rights
The humanity to surrounding human rights is rare
Behind a certain superficial diversity there is a moral sane-ness
We all actually believe in pretty much the same things and son the
example of human rights
This unanimous support for human rights is a recent phenomenon
The notion of human rights was actually developed in the 17 and 18
The ancient [Greeks] had no idea of human rights, the idea itself was
foreign to ancient political thought
Medieval Europe did not have any idea of human rights
The notion itself will be officially proclaimed after the both American
and French revolution, it will be politically developed after the French
Both the American and the French revolution would actually put rights
at the middle
As soon as they would be politically proclaimed they would become the
focus of a sustained if not relentless critique of both conservative and
socialist theorists
They will be attacked by both sides
And despite the fact that today everyone's in favour to human rights,
such human rights should not be taken for granted the battle was hard and
the ultimate victory might actually be fragile then it appears, as a matter a
fact, it is only in the 1970s and the 1980s that human rights will be able to
gather more support and even become and unchallenged and
unchallengeable idea
1970s and 1989s You will have political struggles against communist
rule both in the Ussr and in eastern soviet block countries
Ussr -is not just Russia
DISSISDENTS: Citizens who decided to resist the autocratic rule of
communism and they did so in the name of human rights
Dissidents will appeal to human rights and use human rights as a sort
of intellectualism to human rights and this is an interesting strategy because
traditionally you would oppose it by saying your in favour of another kind of
regime; well the dissidents did not follow that route because if u follow that
route you would easily fall into the enemies route
Instead of playing a game that would have played in the hands of the
Dissidents just systematically abused human rights
For them the systematic abuse of human rights actually testified to the
profound illegitimacy TO SUCH regimes
Argument, the communist regime is illegitimate because they cant
understand basic human rights; the reaction of such communist regimens is
to throw them in jail
By throwing the dissidents in jail they are confirming their point
In addition, communist regimes did not declare themselves against
human rights, that could have been one of the possible solutions,
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

But in 1975- the USSR notably signed the Helsinki that has clauses that
human rights should be protected
The dissidents were the locals
Point : the recent fortune of human rights is directly linked to all of
these courageous people who in the name of human rights opposed
communism [dissidents]
Before the struggle of the dissidents, [before 70s and 80s] there were
3 types of groups that were against human rights
The opponents of human rights were quite influential, formulated
religious, political and social critiques of human rights
Religious critique of human rights
The catholic church
It is only in 1965 that the church will reverse its position in human
rights and will come out in favour of human rights
1965.Vatican 2 [the second Vatican council] represents the modernization of
human rights
Human rights are a fundamental component of human existence
The notion of human rights is grounded in the gospels and this is
strong information, this is the church that had little times for human rights
and they argue that human rights are a Christian idea.
Before 1965 the church was opposed to human rights
It was based upon the religious idea that the Truth is greater then
It is more important to seek the truth then it is to express up freedom
'human freedom from the church is fulfilled by improved the question
of Truth'
It is our human rights, our less important than religious truth, we
should believe and have faith instead of wanting to be free and wanting to
exercise our human rights
And so the church will be very boring of the effects of human rights on
It will be worried that human rights will pull individuals away from
faith; away from the quest of truth
The church will actually oppose the rights of god to human rights
The church will tell us that we must naturally give priority to god and
therefore subordinate human needs and human rights to the truth
Despite the 2nd Vatican council the church will favour the truth over
the extension of rights
They will actually oppose the extension of certain rights [ex. Woman's
right to abortion]
In the name of an objection moral approve the person will object. It will
do on the grounds that were will be an objective moral rights
The churches opposition will be grounded in the truth
Conservative/ Political critiquw
Born immediately after the French revolution - 1789
We've looked at it before because its part of the development of
conservative ideology
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version