Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech Is Everythingpar Eric Heinze
Aucun Chargement...
Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. aucune critique | ajouter une critique
"Eric Heinze explains why global human rights systems have failed. International organizations constantly report on how governments manage human goods, such as fair trials, humane conditions of detention, healthcare, or housing. But to appease autocratic regimes, experts have ignored the primacy of free speech. Heinze argues that goods become rights only when citizens can claim them publicly and fearlessly: free speech is the fundamental right, without which the very concept of a 'right' makes no sense. Heinze argues that throughout history countless systems of justice have promised human goods. What, then, makes human rights different? What must human rights have that other systems have lacked? Heinze revisits the origins of the concept, exploring what it means for a nation to protect human rights, and what a citizen needs in order to pursue them. He explains how free speech distinguishes human rights from other ideas about justice, past and present"-- Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucun
Google Books — Chargement... GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)342.08Social sciences Law Constitutional and administrative law Jurisdiction over personsClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |
I seem to remember from an earlier piece from Heinze that the distinction was between free speech absolutism and viewpoint absolutism. To make the terminology more readily understandable I like his adoption of content-based and viewpoint-based as the distinguishing factors of the free speech public debate. The need for viewpoint-based absolutism or near-absolutism is shown, through theoretical concepts and practical examples, as necessary, though not sufficient, for other human goods (commonly called human rights) to even be possible.
The overall argument seems like it should be agreeable to most, though it is in the details where debate usually arises. No matter what human goods are "guaranteed" as rights within state apparatus, if every single citizen doesn't feel able to safely and effectively speak out and advocate then those human goods have not truly become human rights. It is the ability to speak freely, with certain limitations, mostly content-based, and having a voice in making decisions, not just offering opinions about decisions, that allow human goods to become human rights.
I would recommend this to anyone interested in thinking in a more nuanced manner about free speech and human rights. It is not a difficult read so much as it is a read that requires you to pay attention to what words are being used, by whom, and what they might mean in practice as well as theory. In other words, it is an accessible work for those who don't mind working to grasp new perspectives on commonly (mis)used concepts.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley. ( )