Human Rights as a Hegemonic Political Discourse - Essay Example

Human Rights as a Hegemonic Political Dis Human Rights as a Hegemonic Political Dis IntroductionHuman rights have become highly politicisized in the modern world. Fundamentally, human rights are supposed to ensure that the dignity of human beings is respected irrespective of an individual’s background. The basic tenets of human rights accentuate on equality. Across the globe, human rights activists have always focused on the enhancement of equality across all social contexts.1 Within the framework of this tenet, the main aspect of emphasis is that no human being is superior to the other.2 However, the reality is massively different from this stipulation. The basic human rights of millions of people around the globe continue to be exploited.3 According to Jack Donnelly, human rights have become a hegemonic political discourse. Based on this assertion, human rights have been diluted with extensive political interferences. Additionally, this statement underlines that the powerful nations are increasingly dictating on the nature of human rights within the poor countries in the developing world.4 This perspective undermines the very goal of human rights-to promote equality and freedom among people from all walks of life. There are numerous perspectives towards the framework of human rights. Racial discrimination is among the most notable dimensions of human rights. This is epitomized by famous human rights activists like Martin Luther King Jr. His contribution towards the cause of human rights remains even today. His ideologies towards human rights have greatly contributed towards making the modern society increasingly equal. Despite the efforts of such people, powerful nations continue to influence other countries on the direction that is supposedly acceptable for human rights. For instance, the extensive fighting in the Middle-East region over the past decades is a notable dimension of how human rights have become a hegemonic political disburse. Hundreds of thousands have been killed in these fights. In essence, the fighting has been largely triggered by political factors such as clamour for power and dominance. In view of these kinds of aspects, it is extremely pertinent to evaluate Jack Donnelly’s claim about the development of human rights as a hegemonic political discourse. This research narrows down on these perspectives while also evaluating the distinctive dimensions of human rights in the modern world. Human rights- Broad Overview Human rights comprise of numerous dimensions. Within some contexts, human rights might refer to the prevention of any aspect of human exploitation. Within this context, human rights seek to protect people from being misused by others who might be in a better position than them.5 For instance, an individual might be in dire need of employment. On the other hand, another person might have the chance to employ the needy person. However, the employer must not take advantage of the needy person and pay him or her less that he or she deserves. 6There has to be mutual respect between the two parties in line with the fundamental stipulations of human rights. While this is a vital dimension of human rights, it has been violated for many years across different parts of the world. For instance, the Middle-East region is characterized by high rates of employee exploitation. Workers are paid peanuts compared to the donkey work they do. Additionally, the mistreatment of people is an aspect that is tantamount to the violation of human rights. No one has the right to undermine the wellbeing of other people in the way of mistreating them. This dimension of human rights has also been violated in many parts of the world. This occurs when people are deemed invaluable and irrelevant in the society. This is against the framework of human rights because it undermines the very reason of man’s existence. From a distortive outlook, racial discrimination is among the most notable aspects or dimensions of human rights. In the latter centuries of the past millennium, the rights of human beings were continuously exploited from the perspective of racial discrimination. In essence, this violation occurs when people are treated and considered based on third race or ethnic background. In essence, some races like African Americans were viewed as lesser than other races. The onset and spread of slavery was inherently based on racial discrimination. The needs of whites were essentially considered as more important compared to those of African Americans.7 Based on this aspect, blacks were simply considered as second class citizens. This is why African Americans were used as labourers in white plantations and homes.8 Despite being treated as donkeys, they were not paid or given sufficient food. This accentuates the extensive level of mistreatment that characterized the era of slavery. Under no circumstances should any person be treated like a salve by another human being.9 This is because of the immense significance of human equality and the significance of dignity within the human race. In addition to slavery, the violation of freedom of speech is another pertinent dimension of human rights.10 According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, all people have the right to communication. However, the rights of people to communicate have increasingly been infringed upon around the world. For instance, dictatorial regimes in different countries have violated the rights of people to communicate. The archaic political regime of North Korea is a notable example of how politics have violated the right to communicate. North Koreans are increasingly monitored by the government. 11This seeks to prevent them from communicating with the so-called ‘outsiders’. In many third world countries, governments have also infringed upon the fundamental right to communicate. The infamous regime of Adolf Hitler in Germany was also characterized by extensive infringement of this human right. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights accentuate on the need to ensure that all people can communicate freely without being monitored. The only exception is when such communication poses risks to national and international security. However, this right continues to be violated even in the modern world as a result of hegemonic forces. In addition to speech, the framework of human rights also includes freedom of worship. It is inherently against the doctrine of human rights to dictate upon the religion or spiritual choices of any person. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes strongly on the need to ensure that people can choose the religion they want without any kind of coercion. However, extreme Muslim Radicalization has been at the epicentre of the violation of the right to religion. In most countries within the Muslim world, Christians are increasingly sabotaged for being in the ‘wrong’ religion. There has also been extensive fighting in Nigeria between Christians and Muslims. 12These aspects can be strongly aligned to political influence. However, such perspectives do not conform to the stipulations outlined within the framework of international human rights. It is not the role of the government to determine what religion or spiritual group is suitable for an individual. In recent times, the framework of human rights has also been characterized by the infringement of the sexual freedom of people in different parts of the world. Homosexuality and same-sex marriages have been illegalized in some countries.13 This has made it difficult for people in such countries to exercise their fundamental right to sexual choice. This is an aspect of human rights that has also been strongly influenced by hegemonic political forces. The right to move freely has also been violated immensely in some parts of the world. Unless the movement of a given person can cause security or health problems, it is unacceptable to dictate on the movement of people.14 As with the other human rights, the freedom of movement has also been strongly violated even in the modern world.15 The fundamental goal of human rights is to promote human dignity across all realms of the society.16 However, the violation of the aforementioned dimensions continues to jeopardize the standards of human dignity within distinctive global communities. From the various perspectives, the influence of political forces is evident. It is thus massively crucial to evaluate the influential role of hegemonic forces or aspects on human rights in line with Jack Donnelly’s claims. Analysis Jack Donnelly’s argues that ‘human rights have become a hegemonic political discourse, or what Mervyn Frost calls ‘settled norms’ of contemporary international society. In order to support his claim, Jack Donnelly has evaluated the issue of human rights based on different dimensions. Firstly he analyzes the extensive controversy surrounding the role of governments in the infringement of people’s human rights. Hegemony pertains to the influence of powerful political forces on other nations.17 The first thing that comes into mind with respect to hegemonic political discourse is the United States. As the world’s most powerful economy, this nation enjoys immense influence over other nations. It has an excellent bargaining position due to its vast resources.18 Additionally, the country is the only Super Power in the world. It then follows that the country uses its advantageous position to advance distinctive interests. The country’s political agenda is extensive. It ranges from foreign policy to economic affairs. It also includes international security and the maintenance of harmony across different nations in the international community. Based on such an expansive political agenda, it is inevitable that the USA seeks to use all available platforms to promote its interests at both the local level and in the international community.19 The purported promotion of human rights wi0thin the international community is a notable aspect or platform used by the USA to promote its political agenda.20 One of the most notable aspects of the country’s usage of hegemony is the issue of conflicts in the Gaza Strip. The Israelis and Palestinians have fought over this strip for ages. Due to such fighting, thousands of lives have been lost. The right to live is an inherent component of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.21 However, the extensive loss of lives at the Gaza Strip is a notable indicator of the violation of a basic tenet of the doctrine of human rights. While the United States continue to emphasize on the significance of respecting people’s right to life, it supports Israeli forces in the country’s tussles and conflicts with Palestine. This is a contradictory aspect that underlines the United States’ hegemonic influence on the cause for human rights.22 Over the years, successive governments of the United States have tussled with different foreign nations over issues related to human rights. In essence, human rights have been an influential tool for the country’s diplomatic framework. For instance, the country’s relations with Zimbabwe are extremely strained. This is because of the immense infringement of human rights by the political administration of Zimbabwe. For instance, the country’s president banned foreigners from owning farms and companies in Zimbabwe. This is a violation of basic human rights. The United States uses its supreme political influence to enforce trade embargos on the Zimbabwean government. In addition to the United States, other powerful global economies have also imposed trade embargoes on this nation due to the immense violation of basic human rights. These countries include the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Germany among other powerful economies.23 They use their superior political power to pressurize the lesser economies to enhance their policies on human rights. From a distinctive outlook, numerous global problems have been approached from the perspective of human rights. International terrorism is among the most notable global issues addressed from the context of human rights. The 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and 2003 invasion of Iraq are two notable examples of situations in which human rights have been used to solve global problems.24 The entry of US-led forces into Afghanistan was a based on the goal of protecting the human rights of the international community.25 It was noted that terrorists were increasing violating the rights of innocent people across the globe. In view of this aspect, the global war on terror is strongly aligned to the enhancement and promotion of human rights. However, it is important to underscore that a lot of innocent lives were lost in both Afghanistan and Iraq after the US-led invasions.26 This means that human rights were used to promote the interests of powerful nations. Racial discrimination is another pertinent aspect of evaluating human rights as a hegemonic political discourse.27 Based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, racial equality is a notable component. In view of this stipulation, people from all races must be treated equally.28 However, this provision of human rights has not been strictly implemented especially at the political level. For instance, it was not until 2008 that the United States elected its first ever black president. The whites have consistently dominated politics in this country for centuries. This shows that some races have not been provided an adequate political space as compared to the whites29. While the USA now has a black president, it is evident that the African American race continues to struggle for political space in this country. This accentuates the influential role of human rights towards racial equality. According to Jack Donnelly, human rights have almost become social norms of the international society. Norms refer to the expected behavioural attributes within a given society. The universal nature of human rights has been called into question because of the distinctive frameworks of applications within different societies. While a given aspect of human rights might be acceptable in one society, it might not necessarily be acceptable in other societies.30 This is why it is immensely complex to generalize the framework of universal human rights. Despite such complexity, political powers have increasingly tried to align human rights as international social norms.31 This has caused immense conflicts across different communities and nations. The immense uprising famously called the Arab Spring can also be evaluated as a hegemonic political discourse. These Arab countries have been dominated for many years by dictatorial regimes. However, the masses in those countries have increasingly felt sidelined from the international community.32 The entire uprising was strongly based on the basic tenets of human rights. Most governments in the Arab world were characterized by extensive abuse and disrespect for human rights. Additionally, most governments sidelined the public from crucial decision making processes.33 The population of these countries demanded similar standards of human rights to the ones evident in the developed world. Aspects like freedom of worship, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech were pertinent claims during the Arab Spring. The outcomes of this uprising are now characterized by changes in political dispensation across most Arab countries. Additionally, this uprising has made the society more free.34 The Arab Spring is hence strongly aligned to the mechanisms of hegemonic political discourse as stipulated by Jack Donnelly. Based on these perspectives, human rights have been used as a platform for change in political regimes. The issue of apartheid in South Africa is among the most notable examples of human rights within the context of hegemonic political discourse. The apartheid regime in this nation was characterized by extensive disrespect for fundamental human rights. The levels of racial discrimination under this regime were extremely high. Black South Africans were denied access to prestigious public institutions and educational facilities. This is because the government considered them as second class citizens. They were immensely sidelined from the national cake.35 This contributed towards the violation of basic human rights. It is also essential to underline that black South Africans were increasingly persecuted and arrested even while they were innocent. Nelson Mandela’s rise to prominence was based on his exceptional passion for the protection of human rights. He enjoined the framework for human rights into politics.36 The international community also strongly supported the Mandela’s quest because his ideologies were excellently aligned to the framework stipulated within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.37 The apartheid regime in South Africa was effectively toppled because of the development of human rights as a hegemonic political discourse. Martin Luther King Jr. Was a globally reputed activist for human rights.38 He strongly believed in the equality of all human beings irrespective of their place in the society or their racial backgrounds. His campaign for an end to human rights violation in the United States contributed massively towards the enactment of numerous policies.39 The government of the time was immensely pressurized by Martin Luther’s campaign for racial equality. In view of these stipulations, human rights are strongly influential from the perspective of politics.40 It is notable that human rights have been more or less indispensable as tools for change across the globe. Conclusion The analysis evaluates the claim made by Jack Donnelly. The analytical insights of the paper provide evidence in support of Donnelley’s claim on human rights. No one has the right to undermine the wellbeing of other people in the way of mistreating them. This dimension of human rights has also been violated in many parts of the world. This occurs when people are deemed invaluable and irrelevant in the society. This is against the framework of human rights because it undermines the very reason of man’s existence. From a distortive outlook, racial discrimination is among the most notable aspects or dimensions of human rights. In the latter centuries of the past millennium, the rights of human beings were continuously exploited from the perspective of racial discrimination. In essence, this violation occurs when people are treated and considered based on third race or ethnic background. In essence, some races like African Americans were viewed as lesser than other races. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes strongly on the need to ensure that people can choose the religion they want without any kind of coercion. However, extreme Muslim Radicalization has been at the epicentre of the violation of the right to religion. In most countries within the Muslim world, Christians are increasingly sabotaged for being in the ‘wrong’ religion. There has also been extensive fighting in Nigeria between Christians and Muslims. These aspects can be strongly aligned to political influence. However, such perspectives do not conform to the stipulations outlined within the framework of international human rights. It is not the role of the government to determine what religion or spiritual group is suitable for an individual. In recent times, the framework of human rights has also been characterized by the infringement of the sexual freedom of people in different parts of the world. Homosexuality and same-sex marriages have been illegalized in some countries. References Arat, K 2006. ‘Forging A Global Culture of Human Rights: Origins and Prospects of the International Bill of Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, 28(2): 416-437. Burton, E 2007. ‘Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law to Matter Where Needed Most’, Journal of Peace Research, 44(4): 407-425. Donnelly, J 1998. ‘Human Rights as an Issue in World Politics’, ‘Theories of Human Rights’, and ‘International Human Rights in a Post-Cold War World’ in International Human Rights, 2nd edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 3-35, 149-163 Donnelly, J 1999. ‘Post-Cold War Reflections of the Study of International Human Rights’, in Joel H. Rosenthal, Ethics and International Affairs: A Reader. 2nd ed. Washington: Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs, pp. 242-270. Finnemore, M & Sikkink, K 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’, International Organization, 52(4): 887-917. Fleay, C 2008. ‘Engaging in Human Rights Diplomacy: The Australia-China Bilateral Dialogue Approach’, The International Journal of Human Rights, 12(2): 233-252. Foot, R 2008. ‘China and the Tian’anmen Bloodshed of June 1989’, in Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases, ed. by Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 301-320. Forsythe, DP 2000. Human Rights in International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Franklin, J 2008. ‘Shame on you: The impact of human rights criticism on political repression in Latin America’, International Studies Quarterly, 52(1): 187-211. Goodman, R & Jinks, G 2008. ‘Incomplete Internalization and Compliance with Human Rights Law’, European Journal of International Law, 19(4): 725-748. Heyns, C 2001. ‘The Impact of the United Nations Human Rights Treaties on the Domestic Level’, Human Rights Quarterly, 23(3): 483-535. Kent, A 1995. ‘China and the International Human Rights Regime: A Case Study of Multilateral Monitoring, 1989 –1994’, Human Rights Quarterly, 17(1): 1-47. Langlois, AJ 2002. ‘Human Rights: The Globalisation and Fragmentation of Moral Discourse’ Review of International Studies, 28: 479-496. Li, Y & Drury, A 2004. ‘Threatening Sanctions When Engagement Would Be More Effective: Attaining Better Human Rights in China’, International Studies Perspectives, 5(4): 378- 394. Neumayer, E 2003. ‘Is Respect for Human Rights Rewarded? An Analysis of Total Bilateral and Multilateral Aid Flows’, Human Rights Quarterly, 25(2): 510-527. Smith, J & Lopez, G 1998. Globalizing Human Rights: The Work of Transnational Human Rights NGOs in the 1990s, Human Rights Quarterly, 20(2): 379-412. Susan D 1998. ‘Mobilizing Principles: The Role of Transnational Activists in Promoting Human Rights Principles’, Human Rights Quarterly, 20(4):905-923. Vincent, RJ 1992. ‘The Idea of Rights in International Ethics’, pp. 250-269 in Joseph Boyle, ‘Natural Law and International Ethics’, pp. 112-135 in Terry Nardin and David Mapel eds., Traditions of International Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Read More