[pp.int.general] Are there "good" and "wrong" Rigths?

[mattias.bjarnemalm at piratpartiet.se]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:26:26 +0200, Dario <i at dario.im> wrote:
> 
> I don't agree with creating the content by ourselves. Then you are not
> supporting HR, you are just making up your own version. HR are one
thing,
> opinions are another one.
> 
> You can have opinions about them, you can have objections about some
> article and you can extract your own visions from them, but you are not
> able to just create them and say "hey, these are the Real Human Rights,
> UN's one just sucks".
> 
Yes you can. And it has actually been done over and over again. The udhr
is not a legally binding document and grants no protection what so ever.
Within the UN framework the actual rights that the states has legally
agreed to upheld are contained in other documents. And those documents have
different signatories from one document to another, meaning that what is a
human right in one country might not be it in another.
For information about the jungle of UN documents on HR I recomend:
http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/spechr.htm

Now, in Europe it would be just as valid, or even more so, to claim that
the best, and also legally binding, treaty that defines what is and what is
not a human right is the European convention on human righs and fundamental
freedooms
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights). 

Or you could define the rights you claim to champion in any other way you
prefer.

Personally, being a transnationalist, I dislike the state centric approach
to human rights that has shaped the development of HR in the world. I
understand the necessity at the time, but I see no need for the pirate
movement to bind itself by any document that reduces HR to be an affair of
the state to grant it's subjects.