As soon as tyrannical leaders or oppressive political groups gain power, they tend to violate human rights in pursuit of their own interests and enrichment.

Student Commentary

By Vittoria Caroli | Edited by Mackenzie Konjoyan

Often those who justify the abuse of power claim that putting the interests of a select few above those of society is not a violation of human rights if the reasons conform to the implicit ordinance of their culture or religion. A clear example of the subjugation of the needs of society, in favor of the wants of the select few, is the behavior of people who practice Islam in the Palestine war: they assert that the consequences of their actions – murder of children, women, old people – are supported by the commands of the Qur’an, their religious book, yet it is their wrong interpretation of it which leads them to proclaim it. However, since ancient times, people have sought power for the mere purpose of exploiting it. As soon as tyrannical leaders or oppressive political groups gain power, they tend to violate human rights in pursuit of their own interests and enrichment. Whereas such personalities should use their status of power to lift their nations to ever-higher positions of strength and prosperity; dictators, corrupted presidents or dishonest political organizations are instead seduced by the amount of power afforded, which guides them towards the mobilization of ethnicity differences, race and religious disparities. The result is unjustified violence, the result is the trampling of human rights. This ill-fated behavior is demonstrated by the horrors of the Holocaust, the brutality of the Apartheid and the Israeli-Hamas war.  

In her article, “Sentimental Education,” the British historian Joanna Bourke asserts that “inhumanity is endemic to the human condition” (89). This claim suggests that the nature of each human being is characterized by violence and brutality. The Holocaust represents one of the greatest examples of how ethnicity was weaponized as an instrument of fear, violating human rights. It alludes to the genocide of six million Jewish people by the Nazis during World War II. Adolf Hitler, the initiator of these atrocities presented his whole plan in a book entitled Mein Kampf. The motivation behind Hitler’s ethnic cleansing of the Jews was to achieve the so-called perfect race. He identified certain groups as undesirable: children, women, people with illnesses, homosexuals, and more aggressively, the Jews.  

In chapter XII, Nation and Race, the dictator wrote “He who wants to live should fight, and he who does not want to battle in this world of eternal struggle does not deserve to be alive”, attesting that whoever was not able to measure up with his majestic realm would be annihilated. This belief clarifies that Hitler was totally blinded by the power he possessed. He lost sight of his duty as the leader of Germany and deprived civilians of their rights and dignity as human beings. This concept has been further explained by the writer Michael Polgar, who, in his book titled Holocaust and Human Rights Education, recognized the Holocaust “as a series of mass crimes that ultimately were addressed through criminal persecution.” This latest term can be parallelized with the concept of deprivation of rights for people considered a problem for society. Even so, should people be divested of their basic rights? The answer should be a resounding no, in fact no person should ever be denied the opportunity to exercise their rights since, according to the United Nations, human rights are “inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language or religion.” Therefore, the Holocaust should represent a “blueprint for a free and equal society.”   

An illustration of the manipulation of the not-accepted race differences that characterize the world is Apartheid. In 1948, it ruined the lives of three and a half million black South Africans. This inhumane policy was based on racial discrimination of all the Black South African citizens. The all-white government in charge, imposed policies of racial segregation. Black people were obliged to live in separate areas without having access to the same facilities used by the whites, their participation in local and national government was denied. Physical violence was the prime modus operandi: people would have been murdered, tortured, or illegally imprisoned if they showed the slightest sign of disagreement or resistance to Apartheid. However, the oppressed did not remain silent and, their determination for equality was confirmed by the Sharpeville massacre in 1960:  

5,000 Black Africans conducted a demonstration against the brutality of the Apartheid. The consequences were disastrous: 69 people died, 180 were seriously wounded. Black South Africans were left without any hope to survive, due to the terrible conditions they were forced to live in. Apartheid has been an instrument to reflect how being different from the authority represents a problem, which induces to the justification of rights’ violation.  

As if the human being has not suffered enough of these cruelties, another evidential example of human rights’ violation linked to the rejection of differences – religious ones in this case – and to the utter abuse of power by the authority, is the eleven decades long Israeli-Palestinian war that the Middle East is still facing. Not only is the number of people, mostly innocent civilians, killed exorbitant (at the end of October, the victims, both Israelis and Palestinians, were more than six thousand) but the way these deaths happen is even more shivering. Hamas is one of the most dangerous terroristic groups of all times and the Israeli military is one of the most equipped ones across the whole globe: both sides fuel the conflict and are considered a threat at a different scale. Nevertheless, the crimes committed during this war are not justifiable, neither is the religious agenda that drives this atrocity. Both population, Palestinian and Israeli, are living in horrible circumstances and their rights are being step on every day. Palestinian civilians who live in the Gaza strip are deprived of water, electricity, fuel and food. Besides the unavailability of basic resources, their lives are put in danger daily because of the continuous bombings and the attacks made by the enemies. On the other hand, Israeli citizens have been kidnapped and made hostage, before being inhumanely massacred, children have been killed in front of their siblings and parents, pregnant women have been deprived of the most beautiful gift in life: giving birth to their creature who they were keeping safe in their womb. The common denominator is the pain imposed on those people who found themselves involved in a religious conflict between two great powers. Newborns, kids, teenagers, pregnant women, old people. Entire families. All of them are fighting to survive.     

Despite all the viciousness and the pain inflicted on thousands of civilians, the Islamic fundamentalists – the same ones who daily shoot innocent people since the beginning of the conflict – revendicate and justify their actions, explaining that this behavior is legitimate if it follows the dogmas of the Qur’an. What is left unsaid though, is that this instrumentalization of the doctrine is explained by the Islamic fundamentalists’ interpretation of the term “Jihad”: its actual meaning is “never-ending commitment” from the believers to fight the passionate soul. This misinterpretation leads to the deformation of the spirit of the tradition and the inner commitment is translated into violence against whoever is considered different form them, whereas the Qur’an itself promotes the respect of any other religion and tradition. 

Summing up, politics and the transgression of human rights are not that unrelated when it comes to the pursuit of interests. Moreover, by studying history, society has been given the exceptional opportunity to analyze the mistakes that led to the misconduct of the world and consequently, to learn from those errors. Yet, it seems like we have not taken the chance, otherwise the Holocaust, the Apartheid, the war in Gaza, or other current events linked to the abuse of power of a corrupted authority – such as the Russian invasion in Ukraine –, should not have happened and human rights would finally be respected. Every day there is a testimony to the fact that instead of acknowledging the past and making a change, society has not made any significant strides in the direction of adjustment.