One of the sadnesses when it comes to 'rights' is the fact that whilst the subject might be interesting and even bring some great close-quarter combat (of the intellectual kind), the bottom-line is that when the biggest objective lens of our theological/philosophical microscope is selected, we are dealing with people. What for some is merely a challenging or interesting topic is for others their reality and this needs to be an ever-present consideration as we enjoy the cut and thrust of debate. What some speak of an issue is the person with the issue's life and whilst this shouldn't stop us discussing, it should mean that we practice kindness and generosity whilst we do it (and this cuts both ways!).
One of the challenges of 'rights' is the fact that having a 'right' means that there is also a responsibility! This consideration makes some of the 'rights' debates rather interesting. I'm going to touch on just a couple for now (another busy day beckons and tea almost gone):
Animal rights - Animals have the right to be treated humanely, that should go without having to be said but, as I understand it, they are a lower class to humans and so we find them being used to feed us and, at times, used to advance medical science. What they are not fair game for is the testing of cosmetics and esoteric medical research for the sake of it (which I am sure doesn't happen).
Rights of the 'ethnicity' kind - Now I, naively, thought this would be a fairly simple area. Over the course of history we have seen various people groups opposed by other group. When I mentioned this in North London I was told it was white vs black. Move down the road a little and I found it was all about Turk vs Greek, a bit further up the road and it was African vs Caribbean. Heading towards the City and I found that it was Jew vs Gentile that was the compelling source of injustice! I travelled across town and found it was oppression of the 'British' on Pakistan, Islam, was sikh versus Hindu, Indians vs Pakistanis and the list continued far past the point that I willing to continue travelling.
Prejudice, oppression and intolerance existed, and still exists, in many places fror many reasons (real and perceived).
I tried to understand who was 'black', Indian, British, Pakistani and any other identifier and found that some who I thought were one thing were thought of as being something else by themselves or others! There was the young lady whose ethnic identity was 'half-caste' which meant she was rejected by all sides of the community (excluding 'Praise God' the local church).
Some naively think that being born in a place makes them members of that nation group but I have met many young people who are third-generation British and yet consider themselves to be otherwise.
Some naively think that this area is concerned with lack of oppression and the affording of general human rights but whilst this may true there are others in this battle because it is also a potential source of power, additional benefits (and I don't mean of the state-funded kind) and excuses for bad (ie. anti-social) behaviour.
Visiting an African-American church in the US I was taken up by a 'charter' affixed to the wall of the foyer. It spoke of being treated fairly and justly, of acting for the good of the local community and the nation as fully-integrated and committed members of the nation. On a separate wall were some words along the lines of:
Those who deserve rights - live and work to see them given to others.
'nuff said I reckon!
1 comment:
I am interested in the question of ethnicity. My family (paternal line) has been established in London since at least 1592 (Family tree evidence) but my father claimed Irish Ancestry. My grandmother had an Irish surname, (not our family name) but she, her parents and grand parents were all born in London, traced back to about 1790. So where did the Irish but come from? Race memory?
My last Uncle who died recently, also propounded this theory to his children, my cousins. It was mentioned at his funeral. I had challenged him about it several years ago, and he couldn't explain it, apart from the fact that they had all been raised as Roman Catholics. The presumption being, that as they were Catholics, they must be Irish?
My mother was Scots, first generation English. I don't claim Scottish ancestry, although I'm proud of her family name, but I won't wear the tartan or a Kilt.
I'm English through and through, as is my spouse. She had been told that there was German Ancestry in her family. We eventually traced a great, great, great, great, Aunt, not in direct blood line, who came from Germany in about 1804. Family myths perpetuated down the generations.
I suspect ethnicity is linked to an insecurity of identity. Wanting to be linked to a society or culture which seems more exotic or better than the one you are in. It's a shame, as we know that waves of migrants who came to the UK were assimilated in the past. It's only recent generations that seem to feel the need to retain cultural roots to places of origin.
I can remember when I was serving in East London, when we were recruiting, I was constantly asked to produce people from ethnic minority backgrounds for recruiting campaigns etc. Most refused. The did not want to be singled out due to their ethnic origin, they wanted to be treated no differently, as part of the unit, not a token add on.
The mistake we seem to make time after time is to think that minorities want special treatment. I don't think that is quite true. What they want is equal treatment, no more and no less. This is why setting quota's is harmful. Positive discrimination is still discrimination, no matter how we dress it up.
Post a Comment