On Marx’s Thought Of Human Rights

As to the idea of human rights, especially the standpoint of human rights of Marx, what should be carefully discussed are: in what sense did Marx perceive the human rights? What kind of attitude did he hold toward the human rights he had perceived? What degree and sense did he establish this kind of attitude? What’s the reason and fundamental aim of generating this kind of attitude?Marx’s concern about human rights derived from the agitation of the spirit of enlightenment and the concern about Jew, the continuous development of Marx’s idea of human rights accompanied with his continuous deep discussion and analysis on the enlightenment of human rights theory. The enlightenment of human rights explicated by theory of freedom rights makes the conception of “human rights” obtain concrete form and determinate content, which sets up the classical paradigm of modern theory of human rights and realizes it into the legal system of bourgeois republic through modern bourgeois revolution. The enlightenment of human rights theory is not only a kind of abstract human-oriented concern idea, but also the specific theory taking fulfilling self-preservation as the orientation and breaking it into each basic right and safeguarding them which is represented as the actual system recorded in each “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” and the law of bourgeois republic. The two components of the specific form of enlightenment of human rights theory are the human beings ubiquitous as individuals and the right discourse expressing the basic need of individuals and carried out on private property right. Therefore, we should not mix up the core idea of human rights with its specific form, instead, we should prudently understand the human rights through the mutual relation of the two. This is just the basic premise of understanding Marx’s idea of human rights and the enlightenment of human rights theory. On one hand, Marx uncovered the secret of this kind of relationship between the idea of human rights and the alienation through analyzing the image of “human being” in the enlightenment of human rights theory and the essence of “rights” in the enlightenment of human rights, thus pointed out its inner contradiction, deep absurd and historical limit; on the other hand, he always insisted that the core idea of human rights was human-oriented concern, he also promoted the perfection through the idea of “human liberation”. In this sense, Marx’s attitude toward the enlightenment of human rights theory is neither entirely objecting nor unilaterally endorsing, we can rather say this is a kind of “transcendence”, the standpoint of which should be specifically understood in the following implication.Marx’s transcendence of the enlightenment of human rights theory is obviously represented as a kind of critical standpoint, and this kind of critical approach is carried out in civil society step by step and successively—political state theory, alienated labor theory and historical materialism. In On the Problem of Jew, the first work completely and systematically discussing and analyzing the issue of human rights, Marx took the civil society—political state theory as the basis of analyzing the enlightenment of human rights theory and the issue of human rights. Based on the separation of civil society and political state, Marx exposed the split human nature, distinguished human rights from civic rights; based on the substantive characteristics of the life in civil society and its decisive relationship with the political state, Marx revealed the nature of human rights in the enlightenment of human rights theory and the human rights system of bourgeois republic—the rights of the member in civil society, defined the main part of this kind of human rights—self-interested and self-reclusive individuals of atomic pattern, pointed out the core content of this kind of human rights—private property right. On this basis, the inner contradiction in the specific form and the system time of the enlightenment of human rights theory was revealed;(1) the contradiction between the individuality and sociality of human being;(2) the contradiction between the universality and particularity of human being;(3) the contradiction of the subjectivity and servility of human being. The alienation labor theory in Paris Manuscript contained Marx’s important attempt of deeply revealing the alienation of civil society and its source and his idea of human rights, and his discussion and analysis on the enlightenment of human rights theory were further promoted in it. Marx defined the nature of human being by the unification of “natural existence”, “species being” and “social existence” and established the alienation schematism of “nature of human being—alienation of the nature of human being—involution of the nature of human being” by taking it as the fundamental measurement. In this schematism, Marx unfolded deep criticism on the two components of the specific form of the enlightenment of human rights theory “individuals of atomic pattern” and “private property right” and confirmed that it was the products and manifestation of alienation and finally revealed the deep absurd of the enlightenment of human rights theory: it always took the alienated human being and the alienated rights as its own basis, thus deviating from the core idea taking manifesting the subjectivity of human being as the purpose in both theory and practice. The historical materialism formed in German Ideology signified that the thought of Marx was mature. Base on this brand new world view, Marx did not criticize the enlightenment of human rights theory and the realistic human rights system by the abstract theory any more, instead, he objectively explored the historical development law of human rights in historical deep horizon, verified the historical reason for the inner contradiction and deep absurd of the enlightenment of human rights theory, pointed out its historical limit and made scientific description on the aim and method of surpassing the enlightenment of human rights.However, the above mentioned criticism can be correctly understood only through being limited into the determined scope. Marx’s criticism was only aimed at the specific form and system manifestation of the enlightenment of human rights theory rather than its core idea, as a matter of fact, human-oriented concern is just the basic measurement of the above mentioned criticism of Marx. What’s more, the fundamental object of Marx’s criticism lies in the realistic basis leading to the inner contradiction, deep absurd and historic limitation of the enlightenment of human rights theory, this kind of criticism is not absolutely denying the promises of the enlightenment of human rights theory and the human rights system of bourgeois republic on safeguarding personal rights and civic rights, but lies in why it fails to fulfill these promises in the practice.Therefore, besides the “criticism”, Marx’s transcendence of the enlightenment of human rights theory also has two implications which should not be ignored—“reconstruction” and “confession”. Marx’s criticism of the enlightenment of human rights theory and realistic human rights system was to illuminate human liberation fundamentally, the theory of human liberation is the absolute sublation of alienation, as a matter of fact, it is the reconstruction and sublimation of the core idea of human rights theory. The final aim of human liberation is to restore the image of Prometheus of human being and radically set up human being’s dominant role in the world. Human liberation theory sets up a kind of high-order standard of human-oriented concern in the theory of human nature, subject value and aim and approach, which is the absolute promotion of the core idea of human rights. It not only points out the direction to solve the inner contradiction and deep absurd of the enlightenment of human rights theory, but also supplies solider basis and guiding theory for the future human rights practice. Although the realistic basis of sublating the enlightenment of human rights theory and its system is the necessary implication of human rights liberation, standing in the position of reality, Marx held the cautious attitude to express his recognition of the enlightenment of human rights theory and realistic human rights system to some extent. On one hand, the generation and extinction of the enlightenment of human rights theory and its system should be understood from the perspective of the development of productive force and its objectivity of realistic existence should be recognized. On the other hand, the historical advancement of the enlightenment of human rights theory and its system should be appreciated. Just out of the above mentioned confession of the enlightenment of human rights theory and realistic human rights system, Marx’s transcendence of the enlightenment of human rights theory not only aims to reveal the future trend of human rights, but also lies in promoting the perfection of the realistic human rights system. This kind of perfection is first manifested on the restructuring of economic rights, mainly including paying high attention to the leading position of economic rights, endowing the economic rights with the nature of positive rights, enlarging the subject and content of economic rights and emphasizing economic equality. Meanwhile, Marx also reconstructed the relationship between economic rights and political rights, he actually supplied two sets of human rights ranks: under the realistic condition, the economic rights really belong to the basis and aim of political rights; while under the new idea of human rights—human liberation, political rights should be the most essential human rights.Marx’s transcendence of the enlightenment of human rights theory reveals a kind of new idea of human rights through criticizing the specific form of this kind of theory, this kind of transcendence is just to basically finish fulfilling the “unfulfilled career” of the enlightenment of human rights theory–human-oriented concern. As to the “times of human rights” today, what Marx supplied is not a set of “destructive” theory, but a valuable heritage.