lecture 9 Flashcards
what are the 4 enlightenment-based intellectual foundations of human rights
Humanity
reason
Functional secularism
hope
what is humanity
All humans are similarly endowed with the potential for reason and personal growth (Bildung).
what is reason
Common sense is made sharper by training in logic. Opponents of reason=Church, state, class division, superstition, prejudice, poverty, vice. Reason is removed from socialization
wha is functional secularism
Not abandonment of the idea of God, but of religious institutions and dogma. “Natural salvation
the secular orientating as essential for the success of this document
administration of justice and rights is what eves humanity forward to conditions of improvement
what is hope
The age-old problems of discovering the essence of human nature and creating the just society are resolvable
what do the 4 elements make up and how do they relate to the enlightenment
all these things constitute the current bill of human rights
ideas go back to the enlightenment— ideals of a unified humanity, these are core ideas
no question in human rights discourse that humanity is one, and it shares that with anthropology and in some ways anthropology and humans rights have gone together (first point)
can resolve the problems of humanity through the use of science (idea), and the real authority of justice does not lie in elite but in our common humanity so there is a questioning of authorities like the church— it doesn’t matter what beliefs you belong to, what really matters is the objective reasons of science (second point)
what does samuel Moyn say about human rights
contemporary historian of human rights— makes an argument of discontinuity of the projection fo human rights
de-emphasizes the idea of utopian— points to it as changes in the 1970s and sees in this period the disillusionment toward existing utopian design
communism no longer had such a hold on people and human rights he saw as replacing a lot of these promises that didnt pan out and that fell apart in th 70s/80s and what he argues instead is that human rights, while the history is complex, you can point to the idea that it was a universal scheme (a type of utopia) that is now sort of a point that people refer to
Human rights . . . Have come to define the most elevated aspirations of both social movements and political entities—state and interstate. The evoke hope and provoke action (1).
The ideological ascendancy of human rights in living memory came out of a combination of separate histories that interacted in an unforseseeable explosion . . . [W]hat mattered most of all was the collapse of prior universalistic schemes and the construction of human rights as a persuasive alternative to them (7).
can trace the contemporary regime of human rights to the WW2, but that doesnt mean that it is the human rights era we are living in today
what are the different human rights
individual and collective
what are human rights
it is the tension between individual and collective human rights that give rise to questions
Individual human rights:
1. orientated to protecting individuals from abusing states (states could not be trusted to protect citizens and human rights were built around this perceptions)
2. it can be understood that even if the states have the welfare fo their citizens in mind, the individual has to be protected from discrimination (you cannot have discriminatory politics that favour to disfavour certain people)
what is the question that gives rise to human rights
Are the obligations to which I am subject reasonable requirements of social belonging?
Eg. Female circumcision (FGM) and forced marriage.
Culture is invoked as a potential (or actual) source of oppression.
what are collective rights
the idea of protecting the community to which a person belongs, their source of education, nurturing and support outside of their family
what is the key question of collective rights
What are the collectivities with rights?
how does collective rights Redefinition of rights holders
Redefinition of rights holders as “ethnic minorities” or “indigenous peoples.”
the groups themselves become the subjects of law
and we have culture that is something we have to protect and measure
with culture we have the subject matter of anthropology coming in
what does collective rights say about culture
Culture is invoked as a source of vital heritage, something to be protected and treasured
what is important about self determination
idea of self determination of peoples is key to collective rights, not just culture— culture is what is used in anthropology
but in law, self determination is the key
and int is the self determination of peopleS that is key— it is not the state or state members in the definitions, but the peoples, these are the subjects of rights and so there is tensions in places like Quebec where there is tensions between the aspirations of the minority and the states