What’s Antihuman Rights Aggression?
“Antihuman Rights Aggression is a new label. It captures the real world effects of a decades-old project to roll-back the World War Two peace settlement.”
Every time a Covid variant arises, many voices cry “it’s milder.”
This “Milder” misdirecting misinfo looks at the human race from a provincial, local, sectoral standpoint.
The matter looks differently from the perspective of the universality of human rights.
From that standpoint, we might more profitably, however, be directed towards thinking about those whose “immunity” is weaker than others’.
That’s the core point about the universality of human rights.
We each have the same right to life and to health security.
It’s vaguely ironic that if selfish people thought in terms of what’s universally good, they’d themselves all benefit!
It’s faintly weird that even people with the same “vulnerabilities” to Covid can be persuaded by relentless “othering” disinfo that Covid won’t impact their lives.
Disinfo is targeted with cutting edge precision.
It’s repeated (literally) ad nauseam.
It can be so powerful that it convinces people that “owning the libs” is better than wearing N95/FFP2, etc masks – the only devices capable of protecting one from an airborne neurotropic virus!
The result of justifying Mass Infection-friendly policies is a virus that’s now itself universal.
It’s splintering into different strains suitable for different demographics.
That’s helping the virus in its quest to find ways of infecting every single cell in every human being on earth.
Repeatedly.
Well, while Covid can and does infect humans repeatedly, it rarely steps into the same cell twice.
This is because it eats cells for breakfast.
Covid is just executing a programme like a computer.
And antiscience aggression and antihuman rights aggression are helping Covid execute that programme to infect us all, again and again.
By naming antihuman rights aggression, I hope to make it easier to fight.
And combat it we must.
Coupled with its equally evil twin, antihuman rights aggression has infected every family in the land with a terrible virus.
US scientist Peter Hotez has coined the term Antiscience Aggression.
Antihuman Rights Aggression is antiscience aggression’s equally evil twin.
Antihuman Rights Aggression describes the real world effects of a decades-old project to roll-back the World War Two peace settlement.
After World War Two a new system of international law was established.
Much of what Germany’s Third Reich did in the 1930s (which led inexorably to the Holocaust) was done quite legally.
That’s to say, the violation of minorities' Right to Security was done in conformity with domestic German legislation.
After the war ended, almost every State in the world agreed:
Never Again.
These States set out in detail the matters affecting human rights.
No State or parliament or government or authoritarian leader would have sufficient sovereignty to violate these fundamental laws.
For the past forty years, a small set of powerful people have been running a campaign to break this architecture apart.
Many voices in the UK’s ruling party today promote the idea of withdrawing the UK from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights.
They propose again and again to weaken or overturn the Human Rights Act 1998.
The Human Rights Act 1998 enshrined the European Convention on Human Rights into United Kingdom law.
According to that Act of Parliament, any law that a judge finds incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights must be changed.
Schools are forcing children into unsafe environments.
Ordered to do so by that minister, they’re using strategies of coercive control.
The chutzpah of citing the human right of access to education as the rationale behind this compulsion!
The chutzpah of mandating that children sit in unsafe schools for the good of their “physical and mental well being” (as Zahawi’s below letter does) is almost laughable.
This is a November 2021 letter from the UK education minister to “school leaders.”
At the height of the pandemic the letter emphasised “attendance” so much, it used that word an aggressive eight times!
That is antihuman rights aggression, par excellence:
Why is this antihuman rights aggression?
Well, between May 2021 and when that letter was written, 1.4m English children were infected with Delta – a neurotropic virus.
The letter clearly emphasises “attendance.”
It doesn’t mandate masks for children.
There’s no provision for virus-free air.
Nor for any other mitigations in schools.
Yet the government has a duty in international human rights law to protect the health security of children.
That letter shows us exactly what the government thinks of human rights.
Enabling Delta to rip through schools stokes the pandemic.
From schools, Covid transmits to the rest of society.
These policies are a bonfire of human rights.
Delta eats human rights for breakfast lunch and dinner:
And the government is serving children up on a plate – to Covid.
A government that facilitates that kind of destruction is practising antihuman rights aggression.
The impact of this antihuman rights aggression will be felt for decades.
Any Covid infection is part of the exposome factor.
Our exposome factor determines how we will respond to every other virus we encounter until the end of our lives.
Even so-called “mild” Covid cases impact immediately on our brain and physiology:
The government is clearly breaching human rights by attempting to coerce children into environments where they’ll be infected by a neurotropic virus.
The government has a duty to protect human rights and to ensure them.
Allowing the virus to rip and using the State’s courts to compel dissenting parents to send their children into unsafe schools is a brilliant example of antihuman rights aggression.
That’s right, education authorities all over England are even prosecuting parents for keeping children out of unsafe schools!
These authorities are taking their lead from the Education Minister’s aggressive letter.
Aggression masked as a form of concern about children’s “mental health” really takes the biscuit!
Experts on “racist” rhetoric have long noted that racism is often masked and promoted using the language of rights.
See for example this explanation in a paper on Hate Speech for the Council of Europe (the international organisation that acts as guardian of the European Convention on Human Rights) by Dr Gavin Titley:
By analogy, we can see how those promoting aggressively antihuman rights policies are doing the same thing.
The government even promoted the idea of building up immunity to Covid by, wait for it, getting Covid!
First, it neglects its duty to prevent every infection, then it makes a virtue of this by telling us getting the virus once will stop us getting the virus a second time!
This antihuman rights aggression has led to 1.4m English children being avoidably infected by a neurotropic novel coronavirus.
In just six months between May and November 2021, 5m UK residents have been infected by Delta.
Justification?
Right of access to education.
Freedom from wearing a mask.
Concern about the mental well-being of students unable to access education.
These aggressive antihuman rights advocates' entire political project is to abandon the European Convention on Human Rights.
Yet, suddenly they begin to use human rights to justify policies that breach human rights.
Policies that lead to the annihilation of those children’s human rights.
Policies that infringe parents’ right to family life free from mandated Covid infection.
What a joke!
The troll or joke is on us!
It’s so arch, they must really think they’re having a laugh!
It’s well aggressive because the policies are themselves resulting in the infection of young minds by an actual neurotropic virus – that’s pretty aggressive in itself.
It’s also aggressive because it seeks to delegitimise the human rights order, by demonstrating (so they would wish) to the public that human rights are not a panacea.
Antihuman rights aggression humiliates parents, children and human rights advocates by illustrating how easy it is for morally corrupt regimes to subvert human rights.
However, for those who understand the power of the post-World War Two system of human rights enshrined in law, we see their value as being honoured in their breach.
We just need those of us who don’t have the time to delve into antihuman rights aggression’s practitioners' rhetorical tricks to understand how we’re being manipulated – thus this paper!
There’s a whole complex system dedicated to practising antihuman rights aggression.
It starts with those at the top (like that minister emphasising “attendance” in schools where children shall catch an airborne neurotropic virus).
It continues right down through the aggressive antihuman rights power structure.
School attendance officers are marching in step with antihuman rights aggression when they threaten parents unwilling to send their children into unsafe schools with law suits.
They can actually get a court to take a child away from a parent who’s trying to protect their child from catching a neurotropic virus.
Now that’s antihuman rights aggression.
This complex system of antihuman rights aggression is setting a tone in which children are denied the Right to Security on the same terms as everyone else in society.
Remember, the point of the international human rights architecture was to ensure everyone had human rights, not just special groups of people.
That’s the meaning of universality!
The impacts of Covid ripping through schools on children’s right to freedom from infection by a neurotropic virus is not being emphasised.
Just “attendance.”
Those leading the UK government, of which Zahawi is a part, have actually been trying to re-litigate the entire World War Two peace settlement by denying children’s rights, through multiple means, for at least two decades.
It’s part of a whole system of antihuman rights aggression adopted by senior government ministers and promoted by relentless aggressive antihuman rights propaganda campaigns sponsored by oligarchs and media barons.
It’s such a defining ideology of the current UK governing regime that the prime minister himself and his sidekick – Michael Gove- are professional journalists whose stock-in-trade– you guessed it- is promoting antihuman rights aggression through those same media barons’ media empires.
Michael Gove even opposed the peace in Ireland because he (or the oligarchs he serves) thought a culture of human rights would infect the rest of the United Kingdom:
The UK government funded tabloids like the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Spectator, Sun and Express have been running “anti-woke” campaigns for a few years.
“Anti-wokeness” replaced political correctness as the straw person against which the far-right define their aggressive antihuman rights campaigns.
They don’t want people fighting for their rights to be comfortable doing so.
They want “wokeness” or awareness about the universality of human rights to be ostracised.
Better to be a sheep who’s asleep to how we all benefit from equality and universality of human rights.
Wolves prey on sleepy sheep, not those woke to the risks and results of antihuman rights aggression!
At the beginning of the pandemic the government created another hole in the universality of human rights protection it’s lawfully obliged to provide.
The so-called Herd Immunity/Mass Infection policy was prémissed on an incorrect notion that a certain category of residents could be classified as “vulnerable.”
The vulnerable were then told not to leave their homes, supposedly to protect them from the virus the government was allowing to rip through the rest of society.
The idea that it was appropriate to allow the virus to rip through the rest of society, provided it didn’t ravage older people, is another example of antihuman rights agression.
First, it didn’t work in practice.
Shielding vulnerable people were twice as likely to die in the pandemic:
Second, the rest of society and the vulnerable have the same human rights to life, health security, freedom of movement, etc.
This is because human rights are universal.
In a time of a global public health emergency, it could be argued that certain human rights protections could be suspended.
The right to life though is not suspendible.
Unless you don’t believe in human rights.
Third, the policy didn’t work, even within its own terms.
The idea that by letting the virus rip, you could prevent a second wave in the Autumn of 2020 was flawed from the beginning.
It actually just led to the brewing of a further variant which ravaged the world.
Antihuman rights aggression is just as susceptible to euphemistic descriptions which conceal its true nature as its equally evil twin antiscience aggression.
Anytime you hear a talking head on the media saying memes like:
“Just gotta keep hospitalisations low!”
What you’re really hearing is the promotion of the idea that it’s acceptable not to protect us from being infected.
The system or government may well only care about hospitalisation rates.
But by the time that’s relevant to the human being, it’s already too late.
An aggressively antihuman rights policy has not protected us from infection.
They’re trying to move the conversation on to hospitalisation rates or ICU beds or n’importe quoi.
It’s their failure to protect us in accordance with their legal obligations we should be focussing on.
We have a human right not to be infected by a neurotropic virus.
This seems so obvious, it’s mad one even has to mention it.
Yet, constant news items and government and public health “expert” communications strategies don’t mainstream consideration of the impact of their words on awareness of the universality of human rights.
Many of those promoting aggressive antihuman rights tropes don’t even realise they’re doing it.
They need to mainstream considerations of the impact on the universality of human rights whenever they make and publicise policy decisions.
Every time they fail to do this, consciously or unconsciously, they’re just as bad as that aggressive UK education minister.
He clearly doesn’t care if English children catch a neurotropic virus.
Do you?
Of course you do!
That’s why it’s important to get what antihuman rights aggression is, so we can root it out together.
If that minister did care, he would ensure children wear FFP3 masks in school and breathe virus-free air.
To recap:
By promoting division between people who all have equal rights – say, by imposing restrictions on an invented category of “vulnerable” people- awareness of the universality of human rights is weakened.
In that case, those shielding died in higher numbers than other people.
It wasn’t even practically possible to Let The Virus rip without over 160,000 people being killed.
Twenty months ago the UK prime minister told the Italian prime minister he was was “going for herd immunity.”
There are still around 150 people-a-day dying preventable Covid deaths in the UK.
Even if going for Mass Infection has been compatibilité with the universality of human rights, it’s failed.
5m people have been infected since July 2021.
Yet, the government and their advisers promised us there’d be herd immunity by the summer of 2020; then by Christmas of 2020;…
In July 2021 they even briefed their favourite tabloids that by front-loading cases during the summer, there’d be herd immunity by the Autumn.
It’s Autumn now, and a consistent 80,000 ish cases a day, and Omicron has hardly gotten going yet:
Only relentless misinfo prevents widespread awareness that even within the mad logic of their Mass Infection policies, they’re not working.
Alpha was a product of going for Mass Infection in the Spring of 2020.
Many of the children forced into school where they catch Covid will have played a role in deadly chains of infection.
The UK government constantly attacks lawyers, human rights and the right to life and health security of its residents.
The right to health security and the right to life trumps the duty to access education.
If you’re forcing children into environments in which 1.4m children have been infected by Covid since May 2021, thats breaching their human rights.
Antihuman Rights Aggression, like its equally devilish twin antiscience aggression, is killing people in the tens-of-thousands.
As Peter Hotez has noted Texas has seen 20,000 Covid deaths of those who were convinced by antiscience aggression to avoid the vaccines that would have saved their lives.
Likewise, antihuman rights aggression led the UK regime to ignore the universality of human rights and let Covid rip.
The Alpha variant foreseeably resulted from this antiscience aggression coupled with antihuman rights aggression.
All that’s needed for new variants to be brewed are more and more Covid hosts’ cells for Covid to infect.
My meme here although tongue-in-cheek masks a very serious message:
Each of us benefits from the universality of human rights.
Let’s learn to recognise antihuman rights aggression whenever we encounter it.
Speak up when you encounter antiscience or antihuman rights aggression.
We never know when we ourselves may be “othered” and victimised by divisive rhetoric and laws.
Stephen Douglas studied European Human Rights law at the University of Cambridge
Here’s two papers that give further examples of antihuman rights aggression:
