人权观的历史局限和他权的谈起-冯毅的财新博客-财新网

人权观的历史局限和他权的谈起

The Historical Limits on the Thought Human Right

And the Rise of Other’s Right

当非洲的儿童发出饥饿的哭啼声时，我们想我们为什么不能认真地援助他们，当我们看到中东逃难的儿童淹死在海滩旁时，我们想到的是我们为什么不能给他一个安稳的家园？当我们看到在灯红酒绿的摩天大厦里，看到那些在办公桌旁的和厂房林立的机器旁苦苦奋斗的白领和蓝领的工人们，我们想到的是，我们难道不能给他们一个自由的天地吗？这里谈的全是他们，他们的权力呼之欲出。可人权观谈的是个人的权力，看起来一切平等，每个人都有，可弱者在竞争中那能和强者比，最后自由平等全属于强者的自由平等。可弱者总是大多数，强者总是少数。所以自由平等总归是少数人的自由平等。这自由平等不过是为了资本的顺利运作，自由平等的雇佣工人。可人们为自由平等最终奋斗的目标是自由平等享受财富，正像人权所没有谈到的而他权总是主张关心他人那样。人类需要英雄壮举，但只有为了他人权力与利益，才能永存史册。总之人权观的消亡和他权观的兴起同样是不可避免的。

　　为了真正与合理地保护我们每一个人的权力与利益-权利，使我们能真正得到平等自由，我们应该强调保护的不是个人的人权，而恰恰相反要保护和尊重并不得侵犯他人的权利-他权，强调对他人的基本责任，制止各种侵犯他权的行为。这不是讲人权本身，而是讲人权思想的历史局限。我们认为人权思想应寿终正寝。

　　认真提倡人权的人希望我们每一个人（不分种族，不分男女，不分年龄，不分健康，不分语言，不分不危害他人的政治与宗教信仰）都得到社会的平等，自由，正义和尊重，但人们考虑问题的出发角度的不同，是从保护个人的权利出发还是从保护他人的权利出发，结果也完全不同。人类的历史已清楚地证明了这一点。

　　自从1776年，美国第一次在《独立宣言》中正式提出人权的概念，我们又有法国，联合国发出的人权宣言和补充。但就在这段历史中，人们却经历二次世界大战，现在中东还发生着大规模的践踏人权的行为。我们不能不说这段历史充滿了血腥暴力。人权观不夠作为人类和谐的思想武器。就在于它有一大部分内容强调了个人，也就是自我，自我的权力，造成人们为了自己过分的幸福权力而侵害他人的权利，直至对内对外发动战争和侵略他国。

　　许多学者曾指出过人权思想的这一严重的问题，但没提出新的可替代的方案。现在我们提出他权代替人权，请予参考。我们认为我们不需要继续修改和解释人权的旧思想，应该看一下他权的新思想。

　　在二千多年前，在世界东方的一块土地上也发生过人类之间大规模的相互争夺，相互战争, 和现在世界的情况差不多，--- 那就是中国的春秋战国时期。在其中后期，许多重量级的学者，如孔子老子孟子等，在面对人类的厮杀与压迫大声疾呼，提出要对他人的仁爱。爱就意味着责任。毛泽东继承并发扬了前人这一思想，提出了为人民服务。这也是为他人服务，尽对他人的责任，他权的思想，要尊重和不得侵犯他人的权力。这些思想是面对人类频繁的厮杀和残酷的压迫而发出的呼吁，它绝不因为年代久远，而有丝毫的减弱。它在现实中发挥着不以人的意识为转移的决定性作用。问题只是我们这代人是否足够聪明而意识到这点罢了。文化是历史的思想，而文明是历史的相对的或绝对的优秀文化思想。我们遵循的是人类由古代起到现代的优秀思想，因为它们是人类的文明，要看思想的本身而不能看它的年代。它应使我们再次考虑现在该提倡什么。別看这他权与人权只是一字差，意思是差之干里。

　　我们在注重人类自由平等的夙愿下，不能把为了自己的权利而侵犯他人权利的自私的思想不注意的引入。我们每一个人都是他人的他人，因此每一个人如都能尊重他人的权利，我们每一个人的权利也就自然会，并也才能得到合理的保护。因为他人会把我们自己看成他人也会加以保护。而如果我们强调个人的权利，就可能会因为了自己的权利而和他人发生各种争斗。在维护自己的权力与利益时，在追求个人的幸福时，如果不顾他人的或集体的公众的权利时，就会形成自私。而自私是万恶之源，它最终会不顾他人的权利而为自己过分的名誉地位与面子发生争斗，会引发各种不公正。因此提倡人权，就有可能是提倡自私，而解释和补充总是苍白无力的。这是人权观的一个历史局限。

　　保卫本身的权利，这是一般动物的本能，而尊重他人的权利，是人类的情操,因为只有人类才能够有，也应该做到。迄今为止现代的科学揭示，在宇宙中人类生活的星球是唯一的，地球庇护着我们生活在这唯一的家园下，过着集体生活。因此人与人之间必须懂得怎样与他人他国相处。尊重他权这是与人相处的前提也是结果。这里面都强调的是他人，而不是个人。这是有天壤的差别的。

　　过去几百年以来至今的人权观都是上升的起到推动生产力前行的资本运作的重要思想武器。资本不承认一切特权，因为他们大多数就没有世袭的特权，只承认金钱，因为他们只有金钱，生产用的金钱就是资本。发财的机会只能给少数人，不论什么人，有机会成为资本的拥有者，都获得承认。但其他大多数皆沦为被雇佣的人。因此资本必须给大多数人以自由平等的身份，给人以尽可能多的自由平等，各种自由平等的机会，好使资本能自由平等的雇佣工人。令人吃惊的是人权里没有讲人们是否同样能有自由平等地享用各种财富的权力，这说明这人权讲的自由平等对大多数人来讲充其量不过是平等自由地被雇佣，人们可以自由平等地寻找工作。

　　资本把人从封建桎梏的泥潭中解放出来。客观地讲，不管什么原因，由于人有了这比较大的自由平等，怎么说，这都是人类的一个巨大的进步，因而和它相适应的人权思想也有其巨大的进步意义。但它的主观目的是使资本有能力充分运作。再多的解释和补充也掩盖不了原先的本意，也无法洗去它带来的血雨腥风。

　　我们查遍了相关文件，看到人权主张给予人们一切自由平等，但却不谈支配，所得和享受财富的平等与自由。人类争取平等自由的最终目的是什么? 我们认为人要争取平等自由，不仅是为了工作和政治上的诉求的自由与平等，不仅是要大量的生产财富，而同样的是有权取得满足生活的一切合理需要的财富。人们工作的目的是取得财富，过着幸福无忧的生活，这也应是自由平等的目的。所以这自由平等的最后目的，也应是自由平等地享用各种财富。我们不能要求每一个人都成为英雄，都能够牺牲自己的利益，但我们主张的是每一个人在追求个人幸福时能尊重他人的权利。因为只有每个人在财富享受上也最终具有平等自由的权力，人类的社会才能最终得到彻底的和平与和谐。

　　我们认为人权观从其本质上讲绝不是为了整个人类，它也绝不是人类的终极思想武器。这种缺乏最终的目标，又反过来印证了我们的推论。当生产力发达到一定的程度时，社会就不能只给你工作的自由与平等权力，而不给你取得全部合理需要财富自由与平等的权力。在社会能够生产充分且足够的财富的情况下，社会满足每个成员的需要是社会的人性化的职责。但那是长远目标，现在还不能实现。然而这一目标同样象人权本身那样，尽管现在不可能完全实现一样，但仍有为之奋斗的巨大意义。有人可能会说这目标是不是农民意识？农民起义领袖们曾发出过“等贵贱，均贫富”的战斗口号。我们说农民这一美好的原始意识是朴素美好的，不过不可能建立在现实的生产力上，"朱门酒肉臭，路有冻死鬼",不过是诗人在文学中空发些感慨,但这不能说明这一目的不是美好的愿望。看下历史就清楚了。在100-200多年以前，很少有人会认真思考贫富差別，但近年来，人们开始认真采取行动減少贫富差別，我们因此可推想一下，随着人类生产力再近一步发展，人类终会把消灭贫富差別的口号写在自己的旗帜上。当然这不能现在一步达到这目的。但这是自由与平等最终真正要实现的目的。

　　令人感到意外的是人权可以主张给广大的人民各种自由平等却不提目标。但不提目标并不等于没有目标。这最后的目标就像权力的本身一样重要。看下资本的目标，它是十分明确的，那就是尽快的累积利润，好使少数拥有者能夠享用无尽的财富。资本的拥有者对它当然会抱有极大的兴趣和快乐。

　　人权观把这一私有制看作永恒的，所以普通的人们永远不能有权平分财富，不管生产力如何发达。但事实却是自然要发生的。试想一下，当我们每一个人，都有自由的权力取得我们所需要的财富时，财富的私有性质对大多数人已变得没有意义。那么少数巨额财富的拥有者，拥有这些巨额财富对他们的生活来说也没有任何意义，因为他们像大都数人一样可以自由获得他们所需要的一切生活品。但如拥有这些巨额财富，就最终要为社会负担起直接管理的责任，而不是通过信托管理。而且这一责任会随财富的增加而增加。要没有管理经验，或不想成为这笔 “额外”财富的管理者，也没必要把这财富记在自己的名下。由于巨大的企业对社会经济影响巨大，不可能社会会不加以管理。财富的私有性质就会消亡。一个沒有目的的纲领最终不会引起并保持人们为之奋斗的激情与愿望。因这一目的反映人类发展的前景，十分重要。现在有些人们可能会觉得这目的是海上蜃楼，可望而不可及。但我们确信，只要这一目的未实现，人类就一天不会停止争斗。

　　有些人一开始觉得人权主张自由平等，这确实给经济带来一定的发展，因为工人能夠自由平等地雇用而使资本能顺利地运做，因而觉得人权是有用的是好的，以及它是人类必须要走的路，但却是一条沒有目标的路。好在人们发现了问题，指出了目标，通向自由平等最后目标的路没有枉走。有了美好的目标，人们就会为之奋斗。

　　人权观可大致分成两类，一个是为个人，另一个是为了全人类。

　　第一是为个人，为了个人，局部来看并没说错，但得加以限定，这就是不得侵犯他人的权力。由于没有这样的限制，血淋淋的现实就是利用人权问题侵害他人或他国的事实比比皆是。加上了限定，这人权的概念就成他权的概念；

　　第二是为了人类，但这概念太空洞，我们可以将人类具体化为他人。世界就人来说，本来就分为两类，自己和他人。所以为更明确地说为了整个人类的权利要具体化为了他人的权利。因此人权的这部分思想就是他权的思想。所以说人权的合理部分就是他权。

　　经济和政治本是两个互相制约，互相依存的东西。从他权的观点来看，是不用分谁先谁后，都是要尊重他人在经济和政治上的选择。但，从人权观点来看，经济和政治就要分出谁先谁后，因为它常被人用来一个否定另一个。经济是基础，政治建筑在经济基础之上。先经济后政治。政治是否适合社会，要观察其经济是否得以发展。经济在一段时间里能得发展说明该社会的人与人和人与物的关系基本上得到满足和相适应。经济上和政治上都有人权问题，但经济上的生命与幸福的权利重过政治上的权力。只有在生命与幸福权得到基本的滿足，才能谈得上政治的权力和要求。

　　根据通行的科学研究，人的生存分5个层次，在最下面的也是最基本的是人的生命要求，生理方面的各种需求。往上，才是安全尊重到实现等政治因素。因此人类在争取生命与生活的权力是第一位的，这是人权工作者不能不考虑的。人权如不谈人的生命权和生活权，就不应叫人权，而叫政治权，以正视听。我们不能将此本末倒置，不谈经济上的生命权，而把政治上的权力看作第一位，要顾及集中力量发展经济的人们的诉求，顾及各国人民先争取经济上摆脱贫穷的愿望，顾及事实与真相。一般来讲，一个国家如其经济能得到发展，它在政治上的稳定比由外国力量根据一国的政治标准或对其的态度，而促使其进行政治结构的改革，对本国人民来说要重要的多。世界各国不论大小越集中力量发展经济，将会对政治上的不同越能理解和容忍，并且面对政治上和军事上的冲突越少。按照这个方向经过几代人的努力，全球的人们会发现自己的团结和趋向同一, 因为人类生存具有最大的相同处。

　　但现在劳动者还要在这自由平等下，为生计需用大量的时间去工作。在经济比较发达的地区，劳动者在生存的压力下，在挣扎与奋斗中生活着。为买房子，为孩子的教育，为每日的生计等而操劳着。自由平等实际对他们来说主要意味着找工作的自由，而不是享受生活的自由。各种工作把劳动者紧紧的锁在工作上，使他们很少有自由支配的时间，能够享受由人创造的和自然赋予的财富。在非洲许多人挣扎在赤贫线上，人们是否尽到力所能及的责任予以认真的帮助？我们应该想到这是他们最需要的最基本的生命权。在中东，人们在战乱中挣扎。人们反正是要冒生命危险，所以逃难的逃难,拿起炸药和枪的拿起炸药和枪，针对手无寸铁无辜的人们采取恐怖主义的方法，我们对此予以谴责。但他们需要的是安定，平等和起码的尊重。这些特别需要对他人的关心与爱护的思想。他们更需要的是他权。提供足够的救援和建设物资而不是军用物资去表达我们对他们的关爱，只有这样才能减少杀戮而解决这恶性循环，这是我们对他人的责任。

　　由于各种原因,有危害他人的情况或有可能影响他人利益的事情发生，那些英雄们出于对他人的责任，为了保护他人或维护他人的利益而牺牲自己的利益，践行了他权的想法，他们是我们的英雄。各国那些舍生忘死的英雄，包括中国的雷锋，焦玉禄等，美国911事件的抢险救灾的英雄们。他们想到的决不是个人的权利，我们又怎能用个人的权利来解释呢？他们想的唯一是为了他人的利益，为了集体的权利。这也是他们成为英雄的共同点。我们为之所深深感动。在任何情况下，为了自己的利益而侵害他人的利益，绝不能成为英雄。

　　当劳动条件的改善消灭了男女体力上在工作上的差别，当不同的机会成就不同的人因而创造不同量的财富已变得没有现在这样重要时，当全球由于全球一体化，地球上不同地区的人们生活没有什么差别时，就剩下老幼病残的差别无法消除。当我们能生产大量且足够的财富时，我们难道还不让这些人尽他们的需要，取得财富吗？

　　资本由于私有，将非常困难地主动地将这一平等与自由推进到人们不仅有自由与平等的工作机会，而且最终能自由与平等的享用人们创造的财富。有人会说，那样就没人为资本工作了，劳动者也挣不到钱养家。的确，按现在的生产力来说，必须要根据人们的劳动分配与享用财富，以激励人们在对人类来说现在还是相对艰苦的劳动条件下，完成财富的创造，但，这是在较低的生产力之下和资本为私有的要求。这也是现在的客观需要，我们暂时还不能说这有什么错。但将来的目标，要靠今天适当的努力。私人企业家从本性上来说，为了追求更好的利润，相对来说总是希望各种成本，其中包括人工的成本支付的越少越好。

　　要达到上述的最终目标，或解决上述这一切问题就要求我们要尊重他人的各种权利。他人的生活与生命的权力，必须首先要对此充分的尊重。不能持强欺弱, 以富欺穷，以大欺小。不尊重他人的意愿，而强行按照自己的意愿明里暗里加给他人自己的想法是不道德的。当然我们这里说归说，他那里做归做。但总归使一些人不能毫无顾忌的利用冠冕堂皇的人权理由去干些没有道德的事要好。我们现在有条件消灭赤贫，减少贫富差距。我们还要努力把人从精神奴役中解放出来和能自由支配自己的时间。总之，这只有他权的思想才能使之实现。但人权思想给人予太多的借口去侵犯他人的权利。

　　只有在尊重和保护他权，人们之间才会和平友好和谐的相处，互相尊重，自然的会有政治上的平等权利和每人才最终得以财富享受（而不仅仅是生产财富）的平等与自由的权力。人们才享有受教育受医疗受娱乐的平等机会，具有工作的平等机会，而且同工同酬的对待。如果人权思想脱离了为人民服务的思想，脱离了对他人的负责精神，这自由平等只会成为个别人的自由与平等，最后就会变成强者的自由平等，就没有广大相对弱者的自由与平等，社会就会充满了各种争斗或压迫。只有尊重和保护好他权，才会使有权的人-统治者尊重和保护好人民（被统治者，相对的弱者），才会使有钱的人对贫穷的人给予应有的生活的照顾和帮助，从而消灭贫穷，才会使弱者-老年，儿童，妇女，病人，残疾人得到最大的帮助。这些由于权力，体力和财力的差异才不会成为阻挡人人自由平等对待的理由。

　　我们绝大多数人来到这个世上，开始都受到他人无私的，尽最大的责任与义务的关心，爱护，保护，撫育和教育，直到成为能自食其力独立生活的人。反过来，从婴幼儿起，我们就自发地尽力所能及的对父母关爱，到对亲戚，对朋友的关爱,这说明对他人的关爱和尊重他权是天生的。人性本来是善良的，不过后来的现实影响了我们。不同的现实影响人们走向不同的方向。但，现在我们主张我们应该反过来回馈他人而且是最广大的他人，也尽自己的责任和义务帮助他人。这样形成良性循环。

　　我们每个人都是他人的他人，因此尊重了他人的各种合理的权力，就是保护了自己合理的权力。实现了人权的合理要求。如果说人权发现了人，这只是个人，那么 “他权”就发现了人的集体，人是共生的。因为我们是共生的，因此我们就有许多重要的共同点。这每个人的共同点就形成了集体的大多数人的公众的权力与利益，但这一形成过程要真正公正，真正代表大多数人；我们每一个人也都有差异，这些差异如果伤及了他人的权利，就必须要克制；这些差异如果没有伤及他人的权利，就必须得到尊重。

　　当他人的和集体的权利得到了尊重，得到了保护，不受侵犯时，人类才能和谐地共同生活在地球上，真正实现自由平等与博爱。这自由平等与博爱也才有意义。否则，只强调个人的权力，这自由变得不过是有钱有权人的最大自由。有钱有权的人总归是少数，这自由变得不过是资本自由运作的游戏，而绝大多数人只能享受有限的或名义上的自由，而不是最大的和真正的自由；平等也由于每人真正所享受到的财富的不平等而变得空洞，因为只有财富享受的权力-这大自然毫无偏心地给于它每个成员平等权力也最终得以实现，人类的社会才能最终和平与和谐。当然人们的状况从不平等的权利到平等的权力，然后到最后结果都享有平等的权力，这要有一个过渡阶段；博爱本身就是对他人的爱，不过字面上没有明确讲出对他人的爱，而缺乏明确的语言力量。

　　现代民主与法制是建立在维护和保护他人权利的思想基础上。因为正是为了尊重大多数人—他人的权利，使之不受侵害，才采用各种不同的民主方法，每一个人有机会表达自己的权力或利益所在，并形成一个共同的能代表多数人权利的方案付诸执行。在人们能自觉尊重他人的权利之前，在财富生产满足人们的需要之前，民主总是主要作为发展经济和维护社会公正为目的的一种手段。现在的手段是否可以，是否需要做彻底改变就主要看其目的即经济是否能得到发展，还要参看一下社会是否基本公正（这因标准不同而结论不同，因此只能作为参考）。目的能够到达，手段就不需要也不能做大规模的改变，否则社会受损，人民遭殃。而法治，正是防止因责任不清而相互间经意或不经意的侵害他人的权利，和为了防止个人在追求个人的权利时侵犯他人或公众的权利而建立的。

　　这一他权的原则，推广到国际事务，就是每个民族都有为自己民族的尊严与幸福而努力的权力。但，这一努力应以不侵害他国的权利为前提。而做到这点就应该得到尊重。一国内部是否有严重践踏他权的行为，如种族歧视，种族屠杀等，要经过联合国来决定，要以民主的方法讨论达成共识，并发出警示，警告，制裁，直到武力干预措施等。总之不能以一国或几个国家的利益或政治为标准。不采用民主的方法而对他国侵犯，封锁和制裁。这是老殖民者的做法，新瓶装旧酒。这与他权的要求格格不入。

　　最后，希望国内外那些为人权而努力的人们或机构能够认真思考一下他权或他责的思想，以便能将人类引向无限美好的未来。

[subtitle=英文版]

The Historical Limits on the Thought of Human Right

And The Rise of Other’s Right

(2015/12/20)

Preface and Summary

When children in Africa made hungry cries, we think why we can't seriously help them, when we saw the children from the Middle East as refugee drowned in the beach, we think why we can't just give them a stable homes? When we see white-and blue-collar workers are struggling next to the desks or the machine in the neon-lighted skyscrapers or in the plants standing like forest, we think why we can't give them a free world? Here is all talking about them, their rights-others’ rights seem ready to be shown on the call. But human rights are talking all about individual rights. It shows everything is equal, everyone has, but how can the weak win in the competition with the stronger? Finally the all freedoms and equalities belong to the stronger. However the weak is always majority and the stronger is always a minority. So freedom and equality is always freedom and equality of a minority. Freedom and equality is only for the smooth function of capital, which can freely and equally hire workers. But that people strive for the ultimate goal of freedom and equality is the rights of freedom and equality to enjoy the wealth. This is goal that the human right does not talk. But others’ rights always claim to care about others. Human needs the heroic action. However only if it is for others’ rights and interests, that can go down in history forever. Anyhow, the end of thought of human rights and the rise of others’ rights are same inevitable.

In order to truly and reasonably protect the right and interest of each of us，to have all people really be free and equal, what we should stress to protect is not the individual human rights, but instead, we should respect and must not infringe upon the rights of others – others’ right. And we should emphasize the basic responsibility of others and inhibit various violations of others’ rights. This is not concerned with human right itself, but historical limits of thought of human right. We think the thought of human right should end.

Those serious people hope each one of us (without distinction of race, man and woman, age, health, language, political and religious belief not against others) get social equality, freedom, justice and respect. But owing to different starting angles of the considerations such as protection of the personal right or protection of the others’ rights, the results are completely different. Human’s history has proved it clearly.

Since 1776, the United States for the first time officially put forward the concept of human right in its “Declaration of Independence”, we have French and UN declarations and supplements of human rights. But in this period of time, people miserably suffered two world wars. Now in the Middle East, the human rights are still violated in massive scale. We have to say this history is full of bloody violations. The thought of human right is far from enough as an ideological weapon for the peace and harmony of the human beings. This is because that the big parts of the human right stresses individual, one self right. This will definitely lead to violation of others’ rights for personal right for over happiness till the launch of the internal and external wars and aggressions to other countries.

Many scholars have pointed out this serious shortcoming but no new alternative idea has been raised. Now we put forward the others’ right instead of human right for reference. We think that we should not continue to revise or amend the old idea of human right and take look at the new idea of others’ right instead.

Over two thousand years ago, there is a piece of land in the East on which there were intensified wars and fights for hegemony to each other in large scale among the mankind, like the present situation over the world - that is China during the period of Spring and Autumn and Warring States. In the middle and later period, many heavy-weighted scholars such as Confucius, Lao Tzu and Mencius, etc., in the face of killings，oppressions and fights made voices loudly and puts forward the benevolence for others and the love of others. Love means responsibility. Mao Zedong inherited and developed this thought and put forward “ Serve the people”. This is to serve all the good others, to have a responsibility for others, thought of the others’ rights. We should respect and must not violate others' rights. This appeal was made in front of the cruel killings to human in large scales. It has never absolutely become a little weak because of years apart farther from the present. It has played its decisive roles in reality not changed in accordance with the people’s consciousness. They are only questions whether we the present generation are intelligent enough to realize this point or not. Culture is thought of history, and civilization is relative or absolute excellent culture. We follow the human‘s excellent thoughts from the ancient time to the present because they are the excellent civilization of the human beings. We only look at themselves and do not look at their ages. It should let us re-think what we should advocate? Though others’ rights and human rights are different only by one word, their meanings are different far away.

While we focus on the hopes of the equality and the freedom, we cannot carelessly introduce the thought of selfishness to violate the others’ rights for one’s own. Each one of us is other’s other, and therefore, if everyone can respect the rights of others, the rights of every one of us can be also naturally protected, because the others can protect us as others. It is the only way to protect our own rights. And if we emphasize the individual rights, it will definitely result in various battles among people and the endless harms. In safeguard of one’s own rights and interests in the pursuit of personal happiness, the one disregard the rights of others, publics or collectives, the one is selfish, which is the source of all evils. It will end up to lead to fight for one’s own unfair rights, fames, positions and faces at expenses of the others’ rights. It can cause various injustices. So if we advocate the human right, we may be advocating selfishness at the end. And explanation and supplement are always pale and powerless. This is a historical limit of human right.

To defend the rights of its own body is the instincts of normal animals, while the respect of the rights of others is the sentiment that the only human beings have and should be able to do. The modern science has revealed so far that the planet where we live in the universe is unique. The Earth shelters us to live under this unique home, living collectively. Therefore, among human beings, we must know how to get along with others. This is a prerequisite as well as the results for getting along with people. This stresses the other people rather than individuals. It is entirely different.

In the past hundreds of years through today, the human right during the same period is the most important ideological weapon of the capital which has been rising and function as to push the productive forces forward. The capital does not recognize any privilege, because most of them have no any hereditary privilege; only recognize money, because it is only thing they have which is called as capital when in production. The opportunity to get rich only is given minority. Anyone becomes the owner of the capital, and he gets recognized. But the rest of people fell as workers being hired. Therefore, the capital must claim free and equal status for majority as much as possible and various opportunities of freedom and equality. So the capital operations can hire workers freely and equally. What is astonish, the human right does not mention the same freedom and equality for people to enjoy wealth, this demonstrate the freedom and equality to the most people at best is the freedom and equality being hired, or workers find jobs freely and equally.

The capital has liberated people from the constraint of the feudal mire. Objectively speaking, because people have the bigger freedom and equality, speaking in any way, this is a great progress of mankind. The human right adapted to capital operation has a huge progressive meaning. However its subjective purpose is to give capitals the enough ability for its operation. No explanations and supplements can cover up its original meaning and to wipe out the bloody rains it has brought

We looked for many documents concerned and found that the human right can claim all freedoms and equalities, but surprisingly neither freedom nor equality for people to obtain, enjoy and be given the wealth for their needs. What is the final goal for freedom and equality of human beings? We think the human beings strive for freedom and equality not only for the purpose of the freedom and equality to work and political requirements, not only for production of wealth in large amount, but the same rights of freedom and equality to support their lives, to meet all their reasonable needs, to enjoy the wealth of all kinds. The great nature gives its every member the freedom and the equality to enjoy the wealth without any prejudice. This is also the main purpose for people to work for and to spend unworried lives. It should be also the purpose of freedom and equality. And therefore it should be the final goal of freedom and equality for workers and entire human beings. We can’t require every one like heroes or heroines who can sacrifice their own interests, but what we claim is everyone can respect others’ rights in pursuit of personal happiness. So only every one of us finally has the rights of freedom and equality to enjoy wealth, the society of human beings can get the thorough peace and harmony.

We think the thought of human right is neither for entire human by its nature, nor the human’s final ideological weapon absolutely. The part of meaning referring to selfish and this lack of the final goal have all confirmed our deduction reversely. In the time when the productivity develops to a certain extent, the society will not give you the rights of freedom and equality to work only, but the rights of freedom and equality for you to enjoy for all reasonable needs as well. When the society can produce sufficient and large amount of wealth, it is a humanized duty for the society to fully meet the needs for its every member. But that is a long-term goal. Now it is impossible. However it is same as the human rights itself, though it cannot be fully realized for the time being, it is still greatly significant to strive for. Some people may question: is this goal a farmer’s thought? The farmer’s uprising leaders ever announced the fighting slogan as “Equalize the noble and humble, same share between rich and poor”. We say that the farmer’s nice and primitive thought is plain and nice, however it is impossible to build it on the present productivity. Chinese ancient poet made his empty sadness in an old poem “Inside a color gate, meat and wine have gone bad, while outside along the road the frozen bodies like ghost lie”. But this cannot demonstrate this goal is not a beautiful hope. The history of human can make it clear: about 100-200 years ago, there were seldom people who seriously thought about the gap between the rich and the poor, but recently people have begun to take measures to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. And therefore we may logically forecast that with the further development of productivity, the human will write the slogan on the banner: “eliminate the gap between the rich and the poor”. Of course, this is not the goal to be realized at the moment by one step. This goal should be final for the freedom and equality to be realized at last.

Surprisingly, the thought of human right can claim all rights for the people but with no goal. But without mention of goal is not equal to there is no goal at all. The final goal is as important as right itself. We look at the capital, its goal is very clear, that is the accumulation of profits as soon and large as possible, so that a few owners can enjoy endless wealth. Capital owners will of course take great interest and pleasure about it.

Thought of human right thinks this private own system is forever, so labors will never have the right of freedom and equality to share the wealth, no matter how advanced productivity will be. However, the fact will take place naturally. Imagine that when each one of us has the right of the freedom to obtain wealth, private-own system of wealth for most people will become meaningless. Then to a few owner of great amount of wealth, huge wealth doesn't make any sense for their lives as well, because they are like most people and have the freedom to get all they need. But if they have huge wealth, eventually they have to undertake the direct management responsibility for the society, rather than through trust management. What is more, this responsibility will increase with the increase of the wealth. If you have no management experience, or don't want to be experienced to undertake the "extra" works, you will not have to write this wealth under your own name. What is more, as big enterprises have big influences to economy of a society, so it is impossible for the society to govern these enterprises. The private own nature of the wealth will die. A program without a goal eventually won't inspire people to strive and keep long for it with passion and desire. For this goal reflects the prospects of human development. It is every important. Now some people may think this goal is but a sea mirage. It is within sight but beyond reach. But we are convinced that as long as this goal is unrealized, humans will not stop fighting for one day.

At the beginning, some people feel that since human rights claim the freedom and equality, this does bring about economic developments, as the capital can hire workers freely and equally and so the capital operations can go smoothly. Therefore people think that thought of human rights are useful and good, and since it is the only way that human must follow. And they think the thought of human right should be justified. But this is the way without the final goal. Fortunately, some people found the problem and pointed out the final goal. Luckily, the human beings didn’t make the wrong way for the final goal of freedom and equality any way. When people have an excellent ultimate goal, they will fight for it.

The thought of human right can be divided by two parts. They are personal right and right of entire human beings.

The first is for the personal right. It is partially correct, however it must be restrained or limited. That is not to violate to other’s right. Because if no such the limit, the bloody facts that the human rights are used as executes to harm the others and other countries take place everywhere and every moment. So we must impose the restriction to the thought of the human right from theory. When human right adds the limit, its concept becomes the concept of the right of others.

The second is for entire human. But the concept of human is too empty, can be specified to the others. Human in the world can be originally divided by the two parts only: oneself and others. The meaning of human right for the entire people can be more clearly specified as others’ right. So, this reasonable part of human right is the other’s right.

The economic and political issues are two co-existent, inter-supportive , inter-restricted and inter-dependent. From the point of view of others’ right, they need not to tell who comes before whom. After of all, you have to respect the economical and political choices of others. But from the point of view of human right, they have to be distinguished who comes first as they are often used one denies another. Obviously economy is first and basic. Politics are second. So economical right comes before the political one. They are the comment sense. Whether political requirement is fit with a society and can meet international standard (not the standard of one country), we should observe its economical developments. If the economy can develop in a period, this illustrates the relationships between people versus people and people versus material basically got suitable and are fitted each other. There are the issues of human rights both in economy and politics. But human right in economy is more important than the same one in politics. Political right and requirement can only be wanted after the basic needs for the right of survival has been met and guaranteed.

According to the general scientific research, human’s existence can be divided by 5 layers. The needs of human’s life, the physiological requirements are on the most basement at lowest level. Only from this level up, there are political elements such as safety, esteem till actualization at the top. Therefore the right of survival and lives is first for human beings. The workers for human right have to pay attentions to this. If the human right does not talk about the rights of survival and lives, then it should not be called the human right but political right. It is worthy of the name. On the whole, we cannot put our carts before the horse, cannot shut our mouths about the basic right requirement of life, disregard the efforts of the people all over the world for the survival and give the priority to get rid of poverty economically, and disregard the truth and facts. If its economy can develop, the stability of one country is much more important to the people than the changes of political structure by foreign forces according to the political standard of or the attitude to one country. If counties big or small in the world focus more on the economical development, they will be more understanding and tolerant to political differences and less expose to conflict in political and military affairs globally. In this direction, after human’s efforts in several generations, people will find themselves united and identical，because human beings’ existence has the maximum common feature.

But now workers have to spend a lot of time to work. In developed countries, labors have to struggle for the survivals under the pressure of survival and are busy for purchase of rooms, educations for their children and daily necessities. This freedom and equality mainly means to be free to find jobs for the workers and not for their enjoyment of lives. Various works lock the Labors at works as the results that they have little abilities to control their time and enjoy the wealth given by the human and nature. In Africa, many people are struggling at horizon of poverty. Do we fulfill our duties possible to give them serious helps? These are their survival rights as their most basic and top needs we should think about. In the Middle East, the people are struggling at wars and disorders. On the whole, they have to take risks of death anyway, so they have to escape as refugees, or rise with explosives and guns. They launch terrorist attacks to the unarmed and innocence people. This should be denounced. But they particularly need cares and loves. So they need more and immediately the thought of others’ rights. Aid them the enough goods for rescue and relief and constructions rather than military goods to show our cares and loves to others and to unlock this vicious circle for less killings. That is our responsibility to others.

For various reasons, some events that may harm the others and negatively influence others’ interests take place, for the responsibility to others, heroes and heroines sacrifice their own interests for others on the events, practice the thought of others’ right, they are our heroes or heroines. For the heroes and heroines in all countries including China’s Lei Feng and Jiao Yulu etc. and America’s heroes and heroines in the rescue and relief for 911 Attack, such as Moira Smith, Welles Crowther and Tom Burnett etc. They do not care about their own lives. What they thought by no means was individual's rights. How can we use the thought of human right to interpret them. The only thing they care about is the rights of others and the public’s. This has become the common features for the heroes and heroines. We are deeply moved for it. In any circumstances, anyone who harms the interests of others for one own can never become heroes or heroines

When the improvements of working conditions eliminate the differences between men and women physically at their work, as the different opportunities given to different people who can create different amount of wealth will not be as important as it is now, as different people in different places of the world live at the about same level because of the large production increase and globalization, it is only the old and young, the sick and disables who are different physically and this cannot be eliminated. Couldn’t we let these people to take what they need for free at that time of big and enough increase of production? They can take any wealth they need.

Owing to the capital is private-owned, so it will be very difficult for the capital voluntarily to push the freedom and equality forward to the free and equal rights for people to obtain and enjoy the wealth. The people should say that then nobody would work, and workers would not be able to make money for their families. Indeed, the present working conditions require people to enjoy wealth differently according to their labors, so workers can be incentive to finish the creation of wealth under the present and comparatively harsh working conditions. This requirement is out of the lower productivity and private own capitals and objectively required as well. We cannot say they are wrong for the time been. But future goal realization depends on today’s proper efforts. By nature, the private owners make payments of costs of various kinds including manpower as less as possible for better profits.

To realize the above-mentioned final goals, or to solve above-mentioned problems, we must respect other’s rights. Other people's rights to survival must be first fully respected. No the big, the strong and the rich should coerce, humiliate or bully the small, the weak or the poor. It is immoral not to respect to others, i.e.to take overt and covert actions and force others to do something only in accordance with one’s own will but disregarding to others’ will. Of course, talking is talking, business is business. But it is always better to let some people cannot do some immoral things by using the high-sounding human rights as grounds without scruple. Now we have conditions to eradicate the poverty, reduce the gaps between the poor and the rich. We will liberate human from the spiritual slavery and be able to control everyone’s own time, etc. On the whole, only the right of others can realize these goals. But the thought of human right give people too many excuses to infringe others’ rights and interests.

Only on the basis to respect and safeguard others’ rights, people can get along with others friendly and peacefully in harmony, respect each other. It is natural to have all of equal political rights and finally to have the equal and free rights for each person to enjoy wealth (not only to produce wealth). Then we have equal opportunity to enjoy the educations, medical treatments and entertainments, equal opportunities to work and treat equal pay for equal work. If the thought of freedom and equality deviate from the thought of “to serve the people”, from the thought of other’s right or a responsibility to others, these freedom and equality will doom personal ones, and finally become that of the stronger only and the vast weaker will have no freedom and equality. The society will be full of various fights. Only everyone respects and protects others’ rights, then the persons in power – the rulers can respect and protect the rights of people (the governed, compared weaker)，then the rich people give their cares and helps to the poorer for their survivals, then the weak - elderly, children, women, patients, disables and sick can get the most of helps. The differences being made owing to the power, physical reasons and finance will not become causes to inhibit the equal rights.

Most of us who come to this world start our lives under others’ the selfless and their maximum responsibilities and obligations to care, love, protect, nurture and educate until we can rely on ourselves for independence. In turn, starting from infants, we do what we can spontaneously love and care our parents, to love and care for our relatives and for our friends. This demonstrates the love to others is born with. Human’s nature at birth is good, but later reality affects us. Different realities give different influences for people to develop. However, we claim that we should in turn give our feedback to others, and to the most others, do our responsibilities and obligations to help others. And therefore it can form a virtuous circle.

Each of us is the other of others, therefore we respect other people's right, that means we protect our own rights as well as reasonable part of human rights. If we say human rights found people, this is just an individual, and "right of other" founds a collective of people. People are symbiotic. Because we are symbiotic, so we have something important in common. That everyone has in common can form the rights and interests of the collective and publics. But this processes of the formation should be true and fair and can represent majority. Because each one of us has personal differences, if these differences harm others’ rights, they must be restrained. If these differences do not harm the others’ rights, they must get respected.

Only when the rights of others and collective are respected, then human beings can live together in harmony on Earth, then the freedom, equality and philanthropism can be really realized. These freedom, equality and philanthropism will make real sense. Or, if we stressed personal rights purely, this freedom became just the right of the rich and the people in power. And the rich and people in power always is minority. This circumstance makes the freedom but just a game for the capital operation and most of people can enjoy limited freedom or nominal freedom, and absolutely is not for the maximum and real freedom. The equality will also become empty due to the inequality for each person to obtain and enjoy the wealth. Only when human beings finally have the right of equality to enjoy wealth, the human can finally live in the peace and harmony. Certainly, from the unequal right to the equal right, then to the equal rights in the last results, there is a transit period. The philanthropism means to love others indeed. But this term does not literally say to love others. And so this lack of the specification is powerless in language.

Modern democracy and the rule of law are also built on the basis of the respect and the safeguard of the others’ rights.

It is just for safeguard and respect of the rights and interests of others, the different approaches of democracies are used to given people chances to express their preferences of their interests. Common solutions for the majority are reached for execution. Before people can consciously respect others’ rights and the production of a various kind of wealth much enough for people’s needs, the democracy is mainly used as means for a purpose to develop economy and safeguard the justice of a society. Whether the means can work basically for the society or will be necessary to change entirely, it will mainly depends on the purposes whether the economy can be developed and the basic justice of society can be realized (this can be used as reference only because different standards have different conclusions). If these purposes can be basically reached, the means cannot be totally changed, is not required to do so, especially not in large and sudden changes. Or, the society will have the disasters and the people will be suffered.

And the rule of law is established to prevent people from harms each other consciously or unconsciously due to unclear responsibilities and prevent individuals or minority from the violation of the rights and the interests of the others or the public in the pursuit of their own rights and happiness.

This principle of other’s right when extended to the international affairs is that each nation has the right to strive for the dignity and well-being for its own. But this effort should not infringe the rights of others as a precondition. And if it is fulfilled, the efforts must be respected. Whether there is a serious violation of others’ rights within a country, such as racial discrimination, genocide, this should be decided by the United Nations using democratic ways: countries concerned discuss it and reach agreement on it. And UN only UN can take measures and solutions on it such as advices, warnings, sanctions, until military intervention. Anyway one country or a few counties should not take any action such as military attack, aggressions, block and sanction to other countries in their own interests or by their own political standard and not using democratic methods in any international affairs. Because this is a way of old colonists, the same old stuff with a new label. This is totally incompatible with the principle of others’ right.

Finally, it is hoped that those people or organizations domestic or abroad who work for the “human rights” can seriously think about the thought of “rights of others” or “responsibilities to others”, so that entire human beings in the world can be lead towards the splendid future.

话题：