Analysing The Universality Of Human Rights Philosophy Essay

Analysing The Universality Of kind Rights Philosophy EssayAbstractThis paper aims to critically ask and assess the different perspectives on the oecumenicity of gentle homos gentleman objurgates,and patch up the position of the perspectives according to Dembours four schools of popular opinions. The perspectives of homo mightys on ethnical divesity and linguistic sort take hold similarly been emphasized upon here.Universality of piece race Rights its miscellaneous Pespectivesmilitary personnel Rights ar rights that one is authorize to enjoy simply because of thefact that he is a charitable bes being. These ar mate and inalienable for all , and can non be denied to anyone gentle in temperament and recoil. Thus they argon Universal in nature, and function as a legitimate standard for a governmental system. This ofcourse willlead to a discussion of being human and enjoying the human rights(Donelly 2003).Being pitying beings, bothone deserves to enjoy certai n rights after fulfilling certain obligations to the participation. These fulfillment of obligations be found on morality of the people as an individualist and as a class, judged by the club at large and then being enable with certain privileges to be enjoyed in the form of Political rights.Rectitude and entitlement, the cardinal cheeks of a right, are directed towards a preset standard of conduct, which bings fore the duty and obligation that an individual is expected to perform, and calls for individual and universal tutelage towards righteousness . Performance of this duty entitles the individual to enjoy the et of privileges in the form of a right. To have a right to something, makes one entltled to own the doctor authority to enjoy it, denial or repression of which entitles one to have particular(prenominal) claim for justice. Rights enjoyed by one cannot be reduced because it clashes with correlative duties of another, incomplete can it be reduced for enjoying a b enefit. Hence, rights give authority to its holders , and not just benefits( Donelly 2003).Rights are meant to be exercised, enjoyed, evaluateed, and enforced.These are the four principle dimensions of a right. Respecting ones rights gives other the privelege of enjoying and asserting his own rights, otherwise it is liable to be motioned , jeopardize or denied. A violation of a right is an injustice doneto someone, and is battlefield to distinctive force and remedial logic(Donelly 2003).Ludwig Wittgenstein, the analytical philosopher propagated that a conceit should not be defined by what one thinks it means , yet by its meaning and practice in all(prenominal)day life. One should rather examine facts on the nates of observation, rather than thinking. This led to the introduction of his supposition of Family semblance The concept of Human rights when approached through the family resemblance matrix, highlight the watch overing factors religionTheir humans disregarding fr iendly recognitionPossessed by every human beingTheir arbitrarinessEmergence through semi policy-making and social struggleTheir usage for political communicationServitude to bourgeoisBasis on human natureBear a socio- ratified concensusAbility to besot transformed into sanctioned rights( Dembour 2006).Dembour argues that , although thoroughly-nigh people believe in the combi demesne of the first triad factors as the essential element of the concept of Human Rights, or that human rights exist irrespective of bein having social recognition as every man is deemed to enjoy it being human beings as the rights are framed on the basis of human nature, it should not be assumed that it rests on a socio- legal consensus, or bears arbitrariness in its state. He believes that Human Rights have come into earthly concern as result of force of nomenclature use, and believes that they would kibosh to exist if conversation ordiscussions close them die down Different competingconcepts of Hu man rights exist inthe society,and people fight to establish their own opinions disregarding others. Donellys concept og Human Rights though is encouraging for many, but highlight some political or intellectual inadequacies in termsof moral integrity in his book of account Universal Rights in Theory and Practice. Harshers Philosphy Of Human Rights points disclose that Human Rights demands that every single individuals dignity is go steadyed in an existing political norm, where one individuals credential of Human Rights leads to the security of another , mankifesting this security to an in decided expanse and sentence in the society(Dembour 2006).Every individual craves for recognition in the personal and imply level where an identity is formed, as hearty as in the broader socio-politcal level. The resembling organisation or malformation of an identity and recognition leads to infringement or violation of rights by one on the other. The authorities of universalism emphasize s on pertain dignity of all citizens, barring di tidy sum in the society wind to classes of citizenship. However, from the politics of Universalism grows the politics of differences, when one shifts from the universally familiar and accepted practices in the society (Taylor 1994). This is the basis of differentiation amongst the fellow members of the society , which bratens the universality of theHuman Rights and oft leads to its violation.While enjoying their human rights,individuals tendto forget that their forbearers had to fight to acquire them,and hence they submit to be defend. Hence it is often found that Human Right issues are treated with a Machiavellean approach, with the sole intention of allegeing ones interests and dominion power( Dembour2006).A study of Dembours four schools of thought would further help to understand the different perspectives of Human Rights.Position of the PerspectivesDembours 4 schools of thought on Human RightsBased on the analysis of the thoughts of the scholars, Debmour has broadly categorised all discussions on human rights to be based on four schools, namely-The Natural Scholars These group of scholars believe inthe existence ofthe Human Rights independent of social recognition, laying their basis on the Universe,God, close or any Transcendental source. Their basis of Human rights is much contradictory according to Dembour, as they propagate that it is based on human nature as well as consensus. The Natural Scholars argue that human rights present tense a social choice of a particular moral vision of human potentiality, which is directly linked to the historical rise and consolidation of liberalism in the modern west. This according to Dembour is contradictory as human rights cannot have their existence always as well as historically. The Natural scholars according to him discriminate Human Rights as universal even though they come to fix a single means of press oution. They do not depend on an actual mani festation of it on the context of t he internationalistic law, disregarding the metaphysical basis.Some natural scholars again, do not agree that consensus is the basis of Human Rights.In this regard , Michael Freeman disagrees with Donelly for considering consensus as a basis of Human Rights in order to avoid conflicting and contradictory philosophical theories on Human Rights. Scholars like Donelly consider Human rights to be readily protected,and wantedthe most when they are not enjoyed. The Natural scholars on the aspect of embodiment of human rights by human laws opine that human beings can actually have human rights because they are humans.The Protest SchlarsThese scholars believe that, Human Rights is lyric to express a protest, and is not an entitlement as thought by others. Harscher, one ofthe prominant scholars of this schol of thought argues that thebasis of human rights on God and reason should be should be dead discarded for the sole reason that god is non existent, and reason does not reach as it is focused only on itself. The protest scholars depend more(prenominal) on things that are less specific and deal with social consciousness.However, Harschers adopt of considering the existence of a society where human rights are efficiently protected of course is very m,uch surprising as the protest scholars are naturally never satisfied with whatever they receive in this world but ask for more. They always visualize human rights injustice, and want tofight the abuses of the rights. On the aspect of embodiment of human rights by human laws, the protest scholars argue that ,human rights are always beyond reach, being the negative principle at the flavour of social imaginery. Dembour points out, Rights therefore according to the Protest scholars are -moral claims or aspirations, which dispute the status- quo, and are chiefly concerned with the oppressed class of people. They evolve historically and are directed towards a more free and egalitaria n human society.The Deliberative Scholars The most interesting part about this group ofscholars is that, they stick about committed to human rights withou believingin them, though both the natural scholars as well as the protest scholars healthfully believe inhuman rights. The Deliberative scholars consider human rights to be an essential string of procedural principles or legal and political values that is necessary for running the government. They believe human rights should not dictate howthings should be substantively , but rather act as directing principles of a process. Both Michael Ignatief f and Conor Gearty ,the two prominent representatives of this school are of this opinion.They believe that there cannot be any human rights beyond human rights law, and the sole objective of human rights should be about the process, and not attaining the right moral solutions. The Deliberative scholars are non-religious in their approach to human rights and get itassociated with the con cept of liberalism.The Discourse Scholars The Discourse scholars are a bit cynical about the existence of human rights. Makau Mutua in his book Human RightsA A Political And CulturalCritique presents his scepticism saying that human rights cannot necessarily present the best means to alleviate suffering. He further mentions that, to him the very concept of human rights seems dangerous as far as the human society is concerned, and Universality in terms of Human Rights is even more shocking. Wendy Browm has a different opinion than Mutua, but expresses her doubt pertaining to Human rights asking about the standpoint of Human rights, in the perspective of International justice project, or should it be considered as a progressive international justice project. The deal scholars not only insist on the non-naturalness of human rights, but also question the benefits of human rights on the individuals as well as the society.They point out at the inefectivity of the concept of the human righ ts , but fail to provide an conquer standpoint on this discourse, and explain what their alternative would rather be. (Dembour2006)Human Rights Perspectives on DiversityCultural diversity in any state calls for heathen recognition in the political governance of a state,and have been reflected by various ethno-national movements, language groups, indegenous people, migrant communities. Cultural diversity has become a major gainsay for many nations, and affects their policy making. Globalization is one ofthe major factors responsible for cultural diversification. The intense capital flow in the market, the post-Fordist mathematical product methods, and the widespread western consumer culture globally has given rise to various social movements that lay emphasis on their own distinct ethnicity, linguism or religion. The common claim of all these movements is to be included equally in the mainstream society, and their particular identities be recognized publicly. Cultural diversity has become a major threat to the nation states,where claims of cultural recognition put forwarded by different social movement groups has started to be considered as a majotr threat to the stability of the state and national unity.Theoretically,authorities a culturally diversepolity has become a major challengingand controversial issue for the nation states, with the institutionalization of Human Rights in the cultural and social platform. The international human rights have far reaching contributions in the periphery of national citizenship. Its institutionalization in both goverment and non-governmental organizations has led to the establishment of a Universal Personhood,which go beyond the arena of classical modern political tradition. The Right of equality and non-discrimination have thus been specifically mentioned in articles peraining to individual rights to cultural identity andnonage rights, obliging governments of the state to take up a pro-active approach in promoting the identity of all minorities within their territories(ICCPR Article 27 adopted by the UN in 1996)(Koenig Guchteneire 2007).Multi-Culturalism In GeneralMulticulturalism terminoligically refers to practice of communion a set of positive evaluation of cultural traditions and ethnic identities of minorities. The literatures, arts and even politics cites evidences about it, acknowledging the intellectual and artiostic contributions of the minorities, though multiculturist thought is often accusedof promoting nihilism as they are considered to be influenced by Derrida.The basic challenge faced by multicultural societies is,on one hand they are entitled to enjoy the rights and opportunities of a liberal democracy, on the other hand they also have the right to maintain their identity and remain different. This directly contradictsthenationalistic visual modality of a state which maintains that a state should have a consistent culture. This refers to necessity of cultural uniformity, shar ed territory and citizenship as the basis of nation integrity and political legitimacy. The Classic Enlightenment thought highlights that a universal human civilization existed, which was accessible to all human beings. Propagators of German romanticism emphasized that every nationality has their own linguistic and cultural character, which it had a right to defend. This concept developed as a defense against french Universalism suppress itself from interfering with individual human rights. Every society is a multicultural one irrespective of the fact of holding diverse ethnic groups, as it id full of individuals havinf different values and views peraining to the world. The practice of Multiculturalism in a society in thas respect can be a practice of instigating strong individualistic thinking, about personhood. If the core practices of multiculturalism is based on institutionalised diffrerences, it has the definite poossibility of regressing into apartheid, nihilism, or enforced ascription of cultural identities( Eriksen 1996,pgs 49-53).Linguistic Diversity phrase is one ofthe three major dimensions of cultural diversity. Historically it is evident that land States have been formed on the basis of linguistic homogeneity,so as to still the process of communicatrion in the governance. The most sensisite challenge that a government faces is mix a embodied identity with the territorially based national movement. though Linguistic diversity does not lead to seccesionist movements, it sufficientently threatens a democracy. Language being the most essential form of communication, no state can maintain a state of neutrality as far as language is concerned. Apart from carrying out communicative and instrumental function,language also performs symbolic functions and contributes to the cobnstruction of collective identity. State building is often characterised by linguistic homogenization as found in the case of France. The standardization of scripts, grammar , se mantics and cannonization of literatures are the most fundamental policy tools involved in the process of state building. The Classical democratic Theory is essentially develop on this linguistic characteristics of a state, where language is considerd as the main public discourse. This modular concept is presently challenged by the defacto linguistic diversity that arises out of international migration abnd social networks which is basedon the new electronic media communication,and by dejure linguistic pluralism imposed on the nation states by the international human rights regimes.Ferdenand de Varennes argues that, language rights are generally considered as basic human rights of freedom of expression and non-discrimination both in the global as well as various regional human rights regimes. Thet are inadequately captured by notions of unenforceable collective or minority rights. It is argued that claims to the privalkte and public use of minority language rights are more justifi ed as individual human rights. However since minorities cannot be termed as bearers of collective rights, the transnational legal discourse on human rights de-legitinmizes strong policies of language homogenization and clearly obliges states to respect and promote linguistic diversity (Koenig Guchteneire 2007).ConlusionTo conclude, it can be said that governing cultural and linguistic diversity is a very important and controversial issue in contemporary politics whethe in the domestic politics or international politics. States in order to accomodate increased cultural diversity has to balance by recognition of the diferences. They also have to promote equal participation of the minorities, ethnic groups and indegenous groups publicly, and with a vision towardsthe future should frame policies accordingly. This job alls for framing suitable policy making pertaining to trhe issues of the ethnic, linguistic and religious claims for recognition, discharge beyond classical institutional contours and modern nation-state. They also highlight that tour human rights provide some normative yardsticks for making policies pertaining to these issues there are no simple or easy solution for dealing with the intense challenge of cultural diversity. The dynamics of ethnic ,linguistic, and religious diversity follow their own logics which are varied depending on the historical trajectories of state formation and nation building. Therefore,to accomodate cultural diversity it is essential to find highly context-sensitive pluralistic policy designs. Having knowledge of socio-historical context are pre-conditions for framing successful pluralistic policies that would contribute successfully to the political governance of cultural diversity. (Koenig Guchteneire 2007).