?
Современная концепция прав человека: кризис забытой истории
Introduction: relativist narratives in human rights discourse have reached a point where they take on the form of ultimatums. Human rights have become caught in the crossfire between irreconcilable ideologies, such as political posthumanism and post-liberal solidarity, which seek to redefine human rights beyond recognition. Meanwhile, the very nature and legal foundations of post-WWII human rights are at risk of dissolution in precarious political whims. In particular, the increasing claim that there are no stable, multiculturally acceptable criteria for interpreting human rights challenges their universality directly (but controversially). A key problem with both posthumanism and post-liberal approaches is their disregard for specific aspects of legal history and anthropology, combined with an overreliance on biased concepts. Methodology: the article argues that human rights should be understood primarily as a historically and socially conditioned phenomenon. Employing an anthropological approach, the article traces the global evolutionary development of the concept (paradigm) of the status of the individual (individual vis-à-vis society) and human rights. It highlights the decisive role of World War II in shaping a universal understanding of human rights among nations who honor the legacy of the Great Victory. The conceptual integrity and practical potential of universal rights are assessed through synthesized doctrinal knowledge and extensive international and domestic practice, including sources understudied in Russian scholarship. Results: the analysis dispels several widespread misconceptions about the history of the International Bill of Human Rights and the contributions of non-Western civilizations to its creation. Without claiming it to be exclusive, the study proposes one possible basis for a universal and authentic interpretation of human rights instruments: the principle of anti-fascism. The article also proposes a methodological framework for the historical and teleological (problem-oriented and purposive) interpretation of human rights in controversial contexts. Conclusions: from the perspective of the proposed interpretive methodology and the modern paradigm of the status of the individual in international and constitutional law, the principles of the individual’s status and the catalogue of human rights enshrined in the 1993 Russian Constitution harmoniously align with both international law and national values. A problem-oriented and purposive interpretation can serve as a balanced response to contemporary challenges, while safeguarding the institution of human rights, a longstanding product of immense efforts and unprecedented intercultural dialogue. Phenomenologically, the issues addressed in this article reinforce the thesis “Back to human rights themselves!”.