'Are human rights moralistic?', Human Rights Review, 2017
Guy AitchisonHuman Rights Review
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
In this paper, I engage with the radical critique of human rights moralism. Radical critics argue that: i) human rights are myopic (they overlook important dimensions of power); ii) human rights are demobilising (they obscure political conflict); iii) human rights are paternalistic (they undermine political agency); iv) human rights are monopolistic (they displace more radical, collectivist ideologies). I argue that critics offer important insights into the limits of human rights as a language of social justice. However, critics err insofar as they imply that human rights are irredeemably corrupted and they under-estimate the subversive potential of the moral ideas that underpin the discourse. Building on the idea of human rights as claims, I set out the politicising features of human rights as they are deployed in a practical context of disagreement, conflict and imbalances of power. I illustrate this discussion with reference to the contemporary struggles of irregular migrants.
Related papers
THE MODERN HUMAN RIGHTS DISCOURSE: A construction that jeopardizes its own values and effectiveness
ANAIS SOCIOLOGY OF LAW 2017: Perspectivas das relações entre direito e sociedade em um sistema Social Global, 2017
In a world of political and economic instabilities, the role of human rights discourse should be seen as neutral, solid and coherent towards the preservation of the individuals' life and dignity. However, this article aims to promote a debate about the modern interpretation of what emerged as the man's natural law, and today is the foundation of a transnational and highly complex structure: the international humanitarian system. Through a critical literature review, this work combined arguments proposed by Habermas and Arendt, with the morphological structures of the state, rights of the man and sovereignty, and the Kantian view of cosmopolitanism. This article's main objective is to highlight discrepancies between the theory and practice of human rights discourse, demonstrating the dilemma of duality that abases this system's effectiveness. Yet, the present work found and sustains that human rights discourse may fail where it aims to universalise and promote civil rights as inherently human rights, which ultimately disregard sovereignty, people's self-determination and, in numerous cases, contributes to the destabilisation of institutions and international relations.
Human Rights: Moral or Political?
Oxford University Press, 2018
Human rights have a rich life in the world around us. Political rhetoric pays tribute to them, or scorns them. Citizens and activists strive for them. The law enshrines them. And they live inside us too. For many of us, human rights form part of how we understand the world and what must (or must not) be done within it. The ubiquity of human rights raises questions for the philosopher. If we want to understand these rights, where do we look? As a set of moral norms, it is tempting to think they can be grasped strictly from the armchair, say, by appeal to moral intuition. But what, if anything, can that kind of inquiry tell us about the human rights of contemporary politics, law, and civil society ― that is, human rights as we ordinarily know them? This volume brings together a distinguished, interdisciplinary group of scholars to address philosophical questions raised by the many facets of human rights: moral, legal, political, and historical. Its original chapters, each accompanied by a critical commentary, explore topics including: the purpose and methods of a philosophical theory of human rights; the "Orthodox-Political" debate; the relevance of history to philosophy; the relationship between human rights morality and law; and the value of political critiques of human rights. --- A rich collection of focussed dialogues ― a provocative gift for teaching ― in which the lively ferment over human rights in recent years is deepened, often by becoming refreshingly interdisciplinary, and exciting new formulations are proposed by a diverse range of leading scholars. (Henry Shue, author of Basic Rights (1996)) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights may be the single most influential document of the twentieth century, but is also one of the most controversial. In Human Rights: Moral or Political? Adam Etinson has brought together more than 30 leading legal, political, historical and philosophical commentators on human rights to discuss one anothers claims. The authors range from those who see human rights as successors to natural rights, so as providing universal moral standards, to those who see human rights as positive legal and political instruments that are changing the international order... this collection is seriously and usefully critical not only on these fundamental issues, but also on knotty questions about specific rights, about principles of legal interpretation and about the limits of juridification. (Onora O'Neill, author of Justice Across Boundaries: Whose Obligations? (2016) and winner of the 2017 Berggruen Prize) This is an impressive collection of essays by outstanding human rights scholars from a variety of disciplines. It is certain to make a lasting impact on contemporary thinking about human rights. Taking off from the current debate on the proper status of human rights as "orthodox" or "political," the essays in this volume not only move this important debate forward but also enable a genuine dialogue across disciplines on fundamental philosophical, political and legal questions surrounding human rights and human rights practice. The collection thus excellently represents the depth and scope of engagement across disciplinary boundaries that understanding human rights in all their complexity requires. It will be mandatory reading for anyone interested in the past, present and future of human rights. (Cristina Lafont, author of Global Governance and Human Rights (2012)) Those of us whose work is focused on 'applied' human rights in law, politics, or ethics may nevertheless experience a need for fundamental reflection on the 'big' philosophical questions regarding human rights. Such craving can now be satisfied with a single book. With no less than 30 chapters and an unseen concentration of stars of the philosophical and other firmaments, it can also be read as a sample book, introducing readers to different ways of philosophical rights reasoning. The majority of the chapters engage in discussions at a very abstract or general level. While this may be off-putting to the practical-minded, it also guarantees relevance across the entire field of human rights scholarship, regardless of disciplines, jurisdictions and thematic specialisations. (Eva Brems, Professor of Human Rights Law, University of Gent)
"When the Practice Gets Complicated: Human Rights, Migrants and Political Institutions"
Moral and Political Conceptions of Human Rights, CUP, 2017
Reconstructing Human Rights: A Pragmatic and Pluralist Inquiry in Global Ethics
2016
'Now architect, now archaeologist, now a man whose hand is in the past. Somebody is made to face the changes; somebody is built to last. What do you know, still living so young? Tomorrow is no burden; time can be overcome.' -The Constantines, "Time Can Be Overcome" I am a human being. You are a human being. We are human. These simple propositions have become ethical claims of the highest order. They express expectations of recognition, concern and equality. Those expectations take social form as rights: rights that protect us from torture, from arbitrary imprisonment, from hunger and deprivation, which entitle us to standing within our communities, participation in politics, productive work, engagement in cultural life, privacy sufficient to live without undue interference and many other protections and privileges. In promising these protections and privileges human rights redefine political relationships by altering how we see ourselves and how we share our lives with others. Human rights are a transformative political idea, although one that many of us now take for granted. Yet, if we take the ethical value of human rights seriously then we need to recognise the profound claims they make along with the radical social changes they demand. Human rights assert that everyone (whether alone or in community with others) counts for something; that we are owed respect and voice whomever we are, irrespective of existing hierarchies of protection and privilege; and they assert that political authority is only legitimate when everyone counts. These profound claims force us to reconsider the known coordinates of social justice and in doing so upsets the given order. Human rights are disruptive.
Developments and Challenges for a Political Idea of Human Rights
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2020
Much ink has been spilt and hairs split in the battle between orthodox and political conceptions of human rights. No doubt, much in the confrontational approaches has been clarifying. There is a wide array of collected volumes and articles that illuminate obscure angles, pros and cons. 1 But since John Rawls made explicit a seminal conception of international human rights in his Oxford Amnesty Lecture in 1993 we have also had a fair share of straw-figures and shadow-boxing between misrepresented positions. The recurrent points of contention are: whether a political-not-metaphysical conception of international rights is necessarily an amoral one; whether all elements in a human rights conception should mirror moral ones or whether they are best understood as part of a philosophy of international law (Buchanan, 2013; Raz, 2010); whether 'political' necessarily implies that we can make universal assessments of human harm without moral standards, without 'dignity' as moral standing (Luban, 2015), or without moral recognition in a discursive practice of rights (Benhabib, 2013); also, whether the subject of duties for universal rights should be the states, or any agent whatsoever; whether the political view must lead to maximalism about the list of human rights; whether the political account of human rights can be claimed for human rights politics by women's groups and other local activists (Ackerly, 2018); whether a practice-based conception can be critical, progressive and aspirational (Moyn, 2018); or whether statist human rights are just enough and not a distraction from real cosmopolitan justice (Beitz & Goodin, 2011; Song, 2019). The purpose of this volume is not to add up to the pile of confrontational accounts. On contrast, we wanted to mark the 10 th anniversary of the publication of Charles Beitz's The Idea of Human Rights (Beitz, 2009)-perhaps the best articulated and detailed elaboration of this political turn, as an occasion to take stock of this decade of developments and to figure out new challenges ahead. According to the political conception defended by Beitz, human rights are best understood as an evolving practice and, consequently, the public doctrine that articulates its purpose can only be conceived as a work in progress. Beitz's own CONTACT David Álvarez
On a Radical Politics for Human Rights
Douzinas and Geatry, Cambridge Companion to the Idea of Human Rights
'Achieved not given': human rights, critique and the need for strong foundations
In this article we focus critically on the normative foundations of the project outlined by Benjamin Gregg in The Human Rights State (2016). In developing our analysis of Gregg’s project, we consider it in the context of the inspiration it draws from the work of Hannah Arendt and Jacques Rancière. We argue that Arendt does not give Gregg any robust support for his anti-foundationalism, and that Rancière’s politics of dissensus makes an uneasy ally for Gregg’s constructivism. We argue that we need strong moral foundations to motivate critique and ground valid construction, and that they need not draw us back into the authoritarianism so often associated with classical foundations on which human rights claims have sometimes relied. We suggest that the right kind of thin but strong moral foundations are most clearly articulated in the work of the critical theorist Rainer Forst, and that Forst’s constructivism and his emphasis on dissensus makes his perspective particularly compatible with Gregg’s project. In the final parts of the article, we expose what we see as the unacknowledged normative foundations of Gregg’s position. We conclude by briefly examining the practical significance of his neglect of those foundations and the moral context that are crucial for tackling the governance gap in business human rights issues.
Towards a Politics for Human Rights: Ambiguous Humanity and Democratizing Rights
Philosophy and Social Criticism, 2013
Human rights are a suspect project – this seems the only sensible starting point today. This suspicion, however, is not absolute and the desire to preserve and reform human rights persists for many of us. The most important contemporary critiques of human rights focus on the problematic consequences of the desire for universal rights. These criticisms are pursued with varying intensities, as some defenders of human rights are willing to accept elements of this critique in their reformulations, while staunch opponents remain wary of the desire to think and act in language of human rights because of the deep pathologies of rights-thinking as a political ethics. Yet, we hesitate to abandon human rights. In this paper, I look at the political critique of human rights in greater detail. I argue that an agonistic account drawing on the work of William Connolly and Bonnie Honig offers the best response to the most important contemporary critiques of human rights, and a clearer account of what it means to claim that human rights do valuable work. The key developments of this agonistic view of human rights are its focus on the ambiguity of “humanity” as a political identity, and the challenge to legitimate authority and membership that new rights claims make. In the end, human rights are defended as a universal political ethos focused on the pluralization and democratization of global politics.
Related papers
Some Paradoxes of Human Rights: Fragmented Refractions in Neoliberal Times [2011]
Journal of Indian Law and Society (Vol. 2/ Monsoon 2011)
The Human Rights of Migrants with Irregular Status: Giving Substance to Aspirations of Universalism
IMISCOE Research Series, 2020
Human rights law aims to provide comprehensive legal protection for fundamental rights. However, this universalist aspiration is often not translated into reality when it comes to the treatment of migrants with irregular status. The protection human rights law affords to such migrants is often diluted-either as a matter of law, or of de facto political reality. However, human rights law can still serve as an important tool for challenging exclusionary policies directed against irregular migrants. This chapter sets out to explore when and why this can be the case. 4.2 The Universalist Orientation of Human Rights Law Human rights are supposed to be universal. By definition, they require every individual to be treated as entitled to a certain baseline level of dignified treatment, irrespective of nationality, race, gender, or any other distinguishing markers. Their universalism is affirmed by the founding text of the modern international human rights movement, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Article 1 of the Declaration states that "all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights", while Article 2 asserts that "everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex…national or social origin…birth or other status". Indeed, this quality of universality is often regarded as the special ingredient that (i) differentiates human rights claims from other important interests, entitlements, or values, and (ii) gives them a special prioritarian status that justifies why they
Introduction: contesting human rights – pathways of change
2019
Human rights scholarship, and human rights themselves, stand at a crossroads: expanding and contracting, deepening and collapsing. In this project, we identify fundamental changes in pathways to the realization of rights and the quest for human dignity. The volume will interrogate the decline of democracy as a guarantee and now often a threat to rights; widening issues of translation and domestication of the international regime; and the decline of a consensus on the ethos of cosmopolitan universalism that may foster backlash -but also seems to spark dialectical debates on inclusion and solidarity. Our inquiry is organized around the following questions which are pivotal to contemporary human rights scholarship: 1. Pathways of influence: How do human rights circulate and gain traction in particular places/communities? Human rights scholarship outlines the main dynamics of how transnational human rights pressure works: interdependence, diffusion, legalization, framing, and shaming. In an era of widespread democratization, access to information, and mobilization in social capital, domestication and citizenship may also be a parallel pathway that was not envisaged in the original international institutions and transnational campaigns. scholarship tell us about the diversification of the global institutions of the international human rights regime to new treaty bodies and processes, regional courts, multi-purpose multilateral bodies, local implementation and other venues of rights adjudication beyond criminal tribunals? What are the potential and pitfalls of these evolving pathways in the international regime -and its diffusion and translation to the local level? 3. Emerging contradictions: Where and why do we see contradictions in the logics or impact of the global human rights regime: human rights foreign policy, humanitarian action, and NGO campaigns? Can pathways be
Reframing Human Rights in a Turbulent Era
2021
In a turbulent era, with illiberal nationalism on the rise and international laws and institutions under persistent threat, this book asks what future the international human rights system has. It rejects the claims of those who view human rights law and advocacy as ineffective or worse in challenging injustice. Instead, it presents an experimentalist account of human rights which emphasizes the ongoing engagement between domestic activists and international and domestic institutions and actors in promoting rights-based change. Rather than the monolithic movement depicted in some academic critiques, it discerns a rich and diverse human rights movement which has helped significantly to challenge injustice and advance progressive change in many contexts. Drawing on case studies of gender justice, disability rights, children’s rights and reproductive justice from Pakistan, Argentina and Ireland, the book argues that the human rights movement has made an important difference around the ...
'Human Rights do not exist': thinking about and beyond the existence of human rights
Australian Journal of Human Rights, 2023
This article examines the critical positions taken by two prominent figures of the twentieth-century philosophical tradition, Panajotis Kondylis and Gilles Deleuze, regarding the existence of human rights. In their ways, both thinkers identify a problem with the (non)existence of human rights, particularly with human rights' invocation of universal or eternal values. According to Deleuze, this all-encompassing, universalist language of human rights promotes a problematic way of thinking that 'thinks' in abstraction. For Kondylis, human rights do not exist, as their universalist claims are a matter of political exploitation and/or conceptual confusion. By focusing on the interplay between nonexistence and 'sham' or 'abstract existence', this article aims to critically examine our ways of thinking, in terms of human rights or beyond them, and how such a problematisation may pave the way for further discussions regarding the (non)place of human rights in our contemporary and future state of affairs.
Critiques of Human Rights
Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2018
Empirical critiques of human rights have reached a crescendo. Despite their centrality in late modernity, human rights face claims of irrelevance and predictions of demise. These social science–inflected assessments follow a familiar repertoire of critique. Concerns surrounding sociological legitimacy, material effectiveness, and distributive equality are foregrounded and undergirded by a growing body of empirical evidence, especially in sociology, political science, and anthropology but also in economics and social psychology. However, the critique has also catalyzed a counter-critique. A contending body of evidence accompanied by mid-level theorizing suggests that the turn to human rights has been more successful than imagined. This paper argues that it is difficult to reach any definitive conclusion given the role of normative biases in the research and a failure to agree on common benchmarks for evaluation. Nonetheless, with an emerging postliberal order, and a deepened concern ...
Moral and political conceptions of human rights: rethinking the distinction
The International Journal of Human Rights, 2016
In one important strand of the philosophical debate, human rights are seen as a practical benchmark to evaluate and orient matters of national politics, international relations and global governance. The article investigates the possible benefits and problems of this approach. Problematising the well-established distinction between moral and political human rights in philosophical human rights debate, the author follows Paolo Gilabert's attempt to alternatively discuss human rights under the perspective of rights having both an abstract and a specific dimension. Discussing the (self-) understanding of the contemporary human being as representing the subject of human rights, Axel Honneth's recognition theory is applied to concretise Gilabert's humanist claim to do justice to the 'essentially social' nature of the human being. While holding on to the traditional idea that human rights are in first instance to be understood as individual rights human beings have in virtue of being human, the important international political function of human rights is accounted for by introducing the term cosmopolitan rights.
Chapter 4: To What Extent Are Migrant Workers’ Rights Positioned within the Discourse of Human Rights?
“World community has entered into the varying degrees in to a universal community and violation of rights in one part of the world is felt everywhere…the idea of cosmopolitan right is therefore not fantastic and overstrained; it is a necessary complement to the unwritten code of political and international rights, transforming it into a universal right of humanity. Only under this condition can we flatter ourselves that we are continually advancing towards perpetual peace” (Immanuel Kant, 1795). This statement succinctly summarises an ideal picture of an international system of rights through the lenses of cosmopolitanism; the only way to accomplish perpetual peace is to have a universal system of rights that makes states and people responsible for their actions and holds them to account within a realm of universal responsibility i.e. ICC (International Criminal Court) is an example of a cosmopolitan approach to moral and legal conduct of states/individuals. The cosmopolitan approach helps us to establish a universal system of law on the grounds of moral values. Thus, in this paper, I aim to analyse the rights of migrant workers taking a Human Rights (HR) based approach in the light of the concept of cosmopolitanism. I will explore the key components of cosmopolitan right which are as follows in this context; migrant workers as autonomous agents, the state and universal system of rights (UN agencies). I will then look at the key factors that become an obstacle for recognition of migrant workers’ rights.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.