Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Michael E. Tigar: In every period of human history, this question is posed and the answer is socially, historically and culturally determined. When the Americans who wrote the Declaration of Independence proclaimed certain inalienable rights and then went on to write a Constitution that supposedly enshrine them, they carefully excluded slaves, native Americans and women, and by inference, those who did not own property. That was the first generation of rights. Then in the wake of the Second World War and the struggles for colonial liberation and the founding of the United Nations, certain rights to education, to employment, social rights of people began to be recognized. And now the third generation of rights, the rights that might be called those of the earth and the environment and the place where we live, these third generation rights, are beginning to be recognized in documents of international organizations and in constitutional drafting such as that in Namibia and South Africa. So the recognition of rights is an historical and cultural process that doesn't arise out of the sprung from the brows of so called wise people rather these rights are stated and defined and put into practice based on social struggle. They are then protected or not protected, depending upon the establishment and maintenance of institutions where people who are denied them can bring their claims and have them heard. That is the task that confronts us now. It confronts you. It confronts me. To make sure that every person with a claim for justice under any of these three generations of rights has someone to go to to talk about it and a tribunal or forum in which the deprival of that right can be presented and the denial of that addressed. And that the gap between our ability to imagine these rights and the power of institutions to protect them is our struggle.

by Michael E. Tigar

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Michael Laitman: We must respect only the aspirations and efforts of a person that are directed towards the good of humanity; not towards his own good, the good of his nation or his family—but only towards the good of humanity. If we will respect this, then we will see to what degree a person overcomes his egoistic nature for the sake of belonging and contributing to the whole world. I think that all people must overcome themselves, their egoistic desire. If each of them will contribute in this way, then in response they must merit gratitude and respect from society. Everyone—the children at home, the wife or husband, the relatives, the parents, the environment, the friends, and the whole world—must be grateful to the person and value him only to the degree of his contribution to society. A person is created in such a way that he needs society's recognition. This way, in essence he expresses his "I." If we will arrange things in such a way that society will protect a person and respond to his contribution to humanity, by this we will obligate every person to be an active part of humanity. We will see only good things from every person relative to the whole human society; we will see what contribution every person adds. This is why we must establish such laws in our society, where every person will be evaluated only according to his contribution to humanity, so that this will catch people's eye. If we will measure a person only by these criteria, if every person will know that others evaluate him and treat him precisely in this way—then he will not have a choice and he will have to become a healthy cell in the general body, that is, a person who is maximally useful to humanity.

by Michael Laitman

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Michael P. Totten: We live with biases and dogma that -- whether it’s fueled by our families, our communities, our religion, our nationality, and we are very bad at raising the issue of contemplating and reflecting our needs, our prejudices and biases, so that we end up valuing what we know, are most familiar with in growing up, than what is foreign to us and different from us, and we obviously take to heart those that we trust, their views on other cultures and peoples, and their religious views. It seems to me that that never was from my perspective an acceptable way to view life. We need to really promote a tolerance of view points, and in fact recognize that there is a seed in each individual that should be allowed to grow and flourish, and our curiosity in looking at what that is in each person, to open our minds to that awe and wonder of how that person came into being, the long lineage of that person, going back throughout time, and to the point where we all were connected at one point. For me there is such mystery in our daily lives and interactions that if we can look upon others as a walking embodiment of that mystery and again, the phrase I love is awakened from our dogmatic slumbers and put at bay those prejudices that constrain us from allowing ourselves to experience others, then we won’t differentiate the value of some as more worthy than others. We see this in our own country right now with the Bush administration causing such--[audio ends].

by Michael P. Totten

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Mohammed Arkoun: Yes the question of human dignity is a subject of studies and reflections and research and exchanges that is reserved unfortunately to humanitarian speeches and speeches about abstract human rights, completely abstract so much so that they don't necessarily take into account what is necessary understood under fundamental human dignity of the person. We only have to take a look at the confusions made everywhere between what we call the individual with his selfishness, especially in democratic countries, countries of rights that protect every citizen and reinforce selfishness in the individual, and the question of dignity must be precisely attached to a philosophy of the distinct person, of human and citizen rights. There is a human right that is the right of the respect of the dignity of every human person. There are philosophers who thought deeply about this question, unfortunately, the philosophical culture got out, almost got out of our preoccupations today which are pragmatic preoccupations. However the notion of human dignity, weather he or she is man or a woman, black or white, the question of the human dignity is fundamentally a matter of philosophical critique, of everything happening around the human, of everything that concerns the human. The term humanism for example which itself cares about human dignity, this term disappeared in the western language, the European language itself, apart from some surroundings that are still interested in philosophy and that still concerned with the fundamental dignity.

by Mohammed Arkoun

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Mohau Pheko: I think that in the world today, we have created a situation where somehow we have sanctioned the fact that it is okay for some people to have basic rights while others do not have those basic rights. I think that the sort of basic rights that all of us need and at least I need in the world to survive. At the communities that I work with and as I move across the African continent and I talk to different women and men, what they think is basic, for example, is the right to shelter, something which seems so common sense, but you look at people dwelling in the slums, you look at people who are living in dire circumstances and you wonder; the right to water, nobody can survive without water; the right to work because people have begun to recognize that work gives you dignity and I think that dignity has really become a response to many things about who we are, I think even beyond rights. I mean if I have dignity, it means that I work, I have water, I have shelter, if I get sick I have healthcare. So, I think that these things become fundamental. And I think the reason why and I am trying to grapple with this myself, the reason why I think so many people do not have these rights is that there is a need to keep certain people ignorant, there is need to keep certain people out of the system, so that those who want to keep them out of the system [and those] corporations can create profits. That's the only answer I can give to that.

by Mohau Pheko

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Monira Rahman: I think it's important that every individual has an identity and freedom; freedom for choice and freedom to live a life without the fear, and freedom of voice. Obviously respect for others, human being; the dignity that each human being deserves to have the equal opportunity and equal treatment. Well, we do not promote these basic dignities that each human being deserves because we don't believe in this universal human rights; therefore, the politics which is actually promoting in equality and controlling these laws and policies and systems which is [] these basic human rights. That the human being should deserve and therefore I feel like no if you're promoting the people participation and empowerment, solidarity…

by Monira Rahman

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Nadja Halilbegovich: I think every time a child is born anywhere in the world no matter what’s his gender, his race, anything, her language, we have immediately, inherently, a right to live, to think, to grow, to grow in a peaceful fair world, and to choose our own path in life. However, these rights, these basic human rights and dignities are so often abused and taken away from the people. And I myself was 12 years old when the war began in my country of Bosnia, and right away so many dignities and liberties as a human being were taken away from me. As a child to me it meant that I couldn’t go to school and I couldn’t grow and learn normally. All of a sudden there were bombs and sniper bullets and I myself was wounded during the war. So, my own dignities and liberties and freedoms of just growing up and having a cheerful carefree childhood of not fearing from my own life at the age of 12 of not fearing from my safety, all of that was taken away. And I remember learning about the UN Convention on the rights of the child and thinking to myself, “Why is there such a convention when everyone is just trampling it? Why is there a document that is worthless it seems in Bosnia when so many children are dying and their basic liberty of just living and breathing freely and walking freely are taken away?” And I don’t have the answer to that except to say that us as adults, me -- myself as an adult today living in a developed peaceful country, we have the responsibility to be constantly aware what is happening in the world because I think one of the main things that really hurt me during the war, apart from the bombs and bullets and just the horrific reality, was the fact that I felt alone. I felt like the rest of the world, the people, adults that were in peaceful countries did not care what was happening to children in my country and in other countries that have the war. So, I think that we just need to be more aware and really encourage and demand of our governments to get involved and create peace in the world.

by Nadja Halilbegovich

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Neela Marikkar: Well, there are many dignities, but I think if you look at the basics, the fundamentals, I think the freedom of the individual is key. I think security, sanitation, freedom of right to worship the religion of your choice, food, access to food, and water, and healthcare, and education, I mean, that’s quite a handful. But, these are the basic rights of every individual. And, every state, every government has an obligation to give these, to ensure that these basic rights are met. Why do we have so many people go without them? Because, I think that our policy makers, those in government, those who have the ability, who are in authority, you know, don’t see it that way. They look at it from their individual or their collective perspective. They don’t believe it is important enough. If it doesn’t fit with their agenda, of their policies, they will compromise these, because that’s -- for them not an issue. So, I think that it is through awareness; it is through education that we can change this, that we can put pressure for change, we can raise these issues.

by Neela Marikkar

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Oliviero Toscani: We need to create a dialogue; not a monologue. We need to create a culture, not a monoculture. We have to alter the messages. We have to rearrange their image. People shouldn’t be – we – you know, we shouldn’t be the survivors of our species, but we should prosper creatively and we should evolve dynamically. We must recognize the whole human race in a brand, in a human brand. We don’t need this diversity, ethnics, colors, these differences and sometime these limits and [vetoes]. A human brand based on respect; not on power, possibility; not uniformity, a human brand based on love, and not fear. So we should give those possibility to humanity, actually to our self.

by Oliviero Toscani

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Oscar Olivera: I think, that must be a question from George Bush or Tony Blair or any owner of a supranational corporation, because what human beings need to live with dignity, is to have the possibilities of the most basic rights as persons, which we have shown, which are the right of education, of health, of accommodation, of work, to live dignified in this way, where ones rights are respected, where one isn’t excluded of an economic and political system. And those, who let live without this dignity, well, are the first who permit, that something like the following happens, that the big economic and political interests of the superanational corporations, of governments support these politics of [], politics of plundering, of expropriation of our common goods, expropriation of our rights, the basic rights of the people. And after all I think, it’s not us, the peoples, who are permitting that this happens. Maybe what is missing, is a full consciousness of the of the peoples, of these imperial countries, this consumption orientated economies and societies, to start thinking about the fact, that what they are consuming is basically eliminating and taking away the possiblity from other people to live with dignity. The consumption of those peoples , in the powerful contries is based on the plundering of our common goods. And I believe that the consciousness that has to be found by these peoples, by the people of these peoples is fundamental to stop this.

by Oscar Olivera

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Paul Knight: I think the main thing we need to look at is self-respect, personally. Once again it’s back into human rights and saying well, we let people go without these things or don’t have opportunities for lives that will be constructive parts of society. However, I think that even in the environment that we live in I think a lot of that can come out of self-respect, understanding who you are, understanding where you fit in to society and therefore starting to understand the greater good, understanding where other people fit in. I don’t think enough of us analyze what we do as individuals. But at the same time it’s all about the self. So providing we’re happy we don’t question our rights. Therefore, when it comes to assisting other people we’re not really interested because it’s all about ourselves, the individual. So we need to start focusing on ourselves, start respecting our roles and respecting our roles as human beings and the options that we have for expanding our sphere of relevance if you like, beyond our own self to that of others. And once we start to understand that there’s a bigger world out there, that there’s more to it that we’ll start to address some of the indignities portrayed on people around the world.

by Paul Knight

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Pauline Tangiora: Every person on this planet of Mother Earth has the right, firstly, to shelter, to food and to water. But this is not happening to so many people around the world. It comes from the greed of others who wish to rape their land of their resources for those who wish to create wars. And so therefore when we had war, we had devastation of homes and the resources that go with basic living standards. So, it is not so much that we let so many people go without. It is a case of within each country we are not looking after those people who are less well off than others, or that we allow war. War is not healthy for children or any other living beings, and this accrues itself and manifests itself from the four corners of the earth.

by Pauline Tangiora

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Pico Iyer: Freedom of movement and speech and worship, freedom from hunger and poverty and warfare, and I don't think that any of us have tried to deny other people their fundamental rights. But, it’s often hard in a world of dictatorship and deprivation to ensure that each person in the world is cared for as she should be. The basic dignities that any human being is really entitled to are to live free of a system that would deny her those dignities.

by Pico Iyer

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Rachid ElDaif: I don't know how to answer this question but spontaneously I would say that the human dignity has something to do with liberty and a decent and sufficient salary. For me it is the possibility to speak my language freely and to say all that I want in my language and to have a salary and to be free in every move I make, my way of living and my decisions. I think that's my dignity. Well I don't know. So why is it that many men and women go without them? Yes, there are many men and women who go without them. It's true.

by Rachid ElDaif

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Raymond Federman: I suppose it is not a cliché to say freedom that what most human being must have is the freedom, freedom to act, freedom to be, freedom to move, freedom to believe in what they want to believe. But in many, many cases, that freedom is restricted either by political laws, restricted by religious laws, restricted by geographical laws and so on. Freedom, but beyond this notion of freedom, freedom applies not only in do to freedom to go and be what one may be. There is of course the freedom of speech, the freedom of belief, the freedom of acting. The freedom that does not interfere with the freedom of another human being, that is what must be human dignity and whatever human deserves. But very often when this human being would go to assert their freedom, they infringe into the freedom of others and this results very often into violence. How to be free without infringing into the freedom of others. What are other human rights that one has. The human right of, oh okay, we say, happiness”. Happiness is such an abstract term in family. Happiness is to be able to live with oneself in relation with other. We are not happy alone. We are happy with others. And that is another one of human rights that is often denied because of social, political, economic situations.

by Raymond Federman

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Robbie Conal: Each human being deserves everything. Each living being deserves everything, health, food, shelter, the right to party, ecstasy, freedom from psychological pain. This becomes abstract when you try to do anything about it, and there is nothing abstract about it. That abstraction doesn’t really help. For no good reason, people are abused by other people. Are we doing that already? We have a lot of helpers here. It’s the greatest thing like and there are methods for helpful people. And there might be a key to it, like why wouldn’t -- why won’t you give another person the benefit of the doubt and love them until they prove unlovable. As we say about our politicians in Los Angeles, you are going to love them until they betray you. And there is really no reason to betray each other. It works better the other way. Of course, dignity is overrated. [audio ends].

by Robbie Conal

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Rodrigo Baggio: There are a lot of fundamental dignities like the right to food, to habitation, to life. And it is very important that we can search for ways in the public politics, in the participation of the society and in the mobilization of society so that it may be garanteed that dignity exists for everybody in our society, for the more privileged and for the less privileged persons. And today we experience o very big abyss between those who have the right and who have access to a lot of questions and those who don’t have it. There really is an abyss in this process. We have to reduce these distancies. It is fundamental that people can have more productive, more efficient and more caring relations that permit a balance of this situation. Everybody should be equal in the eye of law, of God and even of ourselves. And it is very important that people can conquer this equalty in every sector of our society, in all social classes. It is necessary that people mobilize themselves and that they can fight stronger for a safeguard of these values, of these dignities in all sectors of our society.

by Rodrigo Baggio

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Roland Berger: Well, the German constitution says, the dignity of men is untouchable and I think it’s quite important that, on the one hand, the politicians show an example of complying with this basic law and to carry out their duties in accordance to it, on the other hand, every person who bears responsibility in this society should act following the law. And every citizen should see a fellow man in another citizen whose dignity is untouchable. What are human rights? What is human dignity? It means, to give freedom, to be tolerant, to give every person chances for his development, to respect each other, to let the other achieve something, that is, to give chance to learn, to educate himself, to make his own life, for instance, by working. And the societies, where it’s not the case, must be changed by going out on the streets to try to enforce these rights. The mass media have a particular responsibility in this question. This responsibility must be realised. Why do we let so many people live without dignity? The answer may be that so many people are just satisfied with their lives, with having their dignity themselves. But that’s an approach that is characterised by selfishness and it shouldn’t be tolerated.

by Roland Berger

Sep 9, 2006 11:30:00 AM cite

Sanar Yurdatapan: A Turkish proverb says, “If one is hungry, then he or she may first eat his or her own beliefs.” The new world order, which makes rich richer and the poor poorer, has only one dignity, money and power.

by Sanar Yurdatapan