The 20th century saw the formulation of a series of important Human Rights treaties; herewith, a long Western tradition of claiming and establishing rights was continued, which saw the creation of such important documents such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen in 1789; attempts made to codify basic rights in an absolute prose, whose circle was slowly but continually widening as to eventually include the entirety of humankind, most notably the Universal Declaration of Human Rights under authority of the United Nations in 1948. However, with the rise of post-modern thought, the concept of human rights as such was starting to be contested; more and more questions regarding the universal validity of the Human Rights agenda arose. In the theoretical fields of thought of feminism and multiculturalism, theories pointed out the semantic superficiality of the notion of the Human Rights regime, especially its most prominent manifestations such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the numerous biased elements it contains. In order to point out the similarities and the differences between the multiculturalist and the feminist critique of the Human Rights regime, I will first deliver an analytical exposition of the Human Rights criticism that both the theory of multiculturalism and that of feminism share. Secondly, I will discuss the characteristics unique to each of the theories in question. Thirdly, I will expose the incompatibility of these two theories; this makes it very difficult to enforce them in practice simultaneously.
Criticism of Human Rights as Brought Forth by Multiculturalism and Feminism The starting pointing for the critique of the ambitions of Human Rights is in the multiculturalists' as well as in the feminists' historical analysis of the notion of human rights. Multiculturalists regard human rights as a product of Western values; due to cultural imperialism, Western civilization has imposed its ethics on the rest of the world and has started to consider them as universal, while ignoring other system of beliefs and values. Having roots in the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome, the traditional legal notions spread first throughout Europe with the rise of Christianity, and developed progressively into a set of values and concepts that can be regarded as the foundation of the Western understanding of law and morality (Brown, 2000). Since the Western civilization rose to power, and since it is generally assumed that the Westphalian system largely determined international relations, it is the narrow legal framework of Western moral standards that has continued today's perception of human rights (idem). The fact that this historic narrative is one that, for the most part, was constructed by males in the West, established, according to multicultural theorists, a claim to the universality of human rights that is in sharp conflict with the cultural diversity one observes in reality; in other words, the claim is that what might seem as universal norms, are actually Western norms. The same way, feminists base their criticism in the historical analysis, and point toward the Greek state building history, and its discriminatory emphasis on the male citizen as the bearer of "rights" (Peterson et al., 1998). The origin of the Human Rights regime is thus, according to multiculturalist and feminist theories, firmly rooted in male Western traditions, values and the assumptions resulting from them. Multiculturalists as well as feminists also argue in favor of reexamining the existing modernist approach to the issue Human Rights, since it, due to its discrepant integration of historical diversity, ignores reflections on identity and difference. Much like totalitarian theories, modern human rights are based in positive law; that is to say they establish a certain notion of the term "human" that is universalistic in ambition, but narrow-minded in its focus. The Modern Politics are...
...To whatextent are humanrights universal?
The Universal Declaration of HumanRights goes beyond the national interest of a state. It outlines the obligations of every state within the international arena. Humanrights are a controversial issue with many conflicting arguments. Some may argue that humanrights should be mandatory to all, universally. While others may argue that the notion of humanrights is dynamic and complex and cannot be applied towards every state, as every state functions in a different manner. As a result, humanrights should apply to every state universally to an extent, however in some degree should not be applied to all.
When a states ruler governs in a way that harms, imprisons, without due cause, or captivates its citizens of the moral right to raise their voice of their concerns to their leader or denies them of the right to freedom and equality, the individuals have the eternal right to rebel and challenge these institutions in order to achieve justice. Among the ‘132 states that have signed both the 1966 international covenants on civil and political rights…’ Syria is a clear example of a state that has breached countless laws and regulations on human...
...taking a life to save five others. People always think about their own personal gain first whether it involves money, property or something else. Therefore, these dilemmas were not easy to solve, somebody has to sacrifice something.
If we were to ask any number of people the question: “What is the right thing for me to do?” they would have different answer according to their own beliefs. The beliefs that people value are the structures in which they live by. “Morals are personal beliefs, and ethics are those beliefs and rules, which are set by a larger group of people for the greater good” (Butts & Karen, 2013). Ethics are in place to prevent endangerment of others wellbeing. Although one person can hold their own personal morals and values above others, society will always expect someone to conduct themselves in an ethical manner according to their rules and standards. Despite the fact that people have a set of beliefs, they may violate them in different situations. A person who is deemed innocent and honorable based on what their society believes are the right standards, are thought to be the ones that determine natural justice. Natural justice is known to be right or wrong.
There were many examples specified in Michael Sandel's Harvard video but he discusses more on the following topics. First, given an abstract choice between the death of 1 person...
...To WhatExtent is Lysistrata a feminist play
In the play Lysistrata, women have absolutely no political rights. There is a war going on and one woman wants to put an end to it. It is my opinion the character Lysistrata can be viewed as a modern day feminist. She takes charge in the self-titled play and claims that war shall be the concern of Women! It is too important a matter to be left to men, for women are its real victims. Lysistrata wants to end the long war for it is taking a toll against the wives of the soldiers and the whole of Greece. The means by which Lysistrata wants to end the war may not be done in a traditional feminist manner, but it is effective and it does what the definition of feminism states, and that is to create change.
The problem is how can she address the issue of peace when at the time, women, according to the character Calonice just sit around all dolled up in silk robes, looking pretty in our sheer gowns and evening slippers. Lysistrata suggests the women do just that so her peace plan can work. She tells the women to take a strike against sex as a means of ending the war. This ties into the theme of Lysistrata being a modern day feminist and relating to our own times. The first strike did not occur until the 1800 s, but the first successful strike that resulted in the strikers favour happened in the 1900 s, and here...
...To whatextent is Britain a liberal democracy?
The balance of evidence would suggest that Britain conforms very well to the principles of a liberal democracy. Whilst there are always points of evidence that could be used against this view, it is my view that these are outweighed by the positive evidence and examples.
When determining whether the country is a liberal democracy, one has to begin by discussing and defining the features of a liberal democracy. A liberal democracy is defined as one where there are free and fair elections, where the right and liberties of citizens are taken into account and protected, where the government is clearly accountable to people and the powers of government are controlled and limited by law and conform to a written constitution. In addition, a liberal democracy is a tolerant democracy where a variety of opinions, cultures and lifestyles are accepted and accommodated, as long as they do not threaten the security and peace of the state. In a liberal democracy, information is freely available to its citizens and the political parties all accept the legitimacy of the election process and all commit to peaceful and orderly transfers of power.
Those that argue that Britain is not a liberal democracy often argue that it cannot be because it does not have a written...
...Are humanrights innate and universal?
Post WWII on the 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of HumanRights (UDHR) was espoused by the General Assembly of the United Nations in order to agree on the notion that such atrocities that occurred throughout the Great War and the Second World War would not ever be reciprocated. The document that was drawn up in less than two years by the UN and Western states, and although ambitious it would guarantee a premise for life and living for every individual all over the world. The UDHR are founded on nobility, equality and reverence, and are said to be aimed at all cultures and religions within the West and East of the globe. However there is great discrepancy regarding the justification and practicality of humanrights all over the world due to political, economic and cultural differences and limitations. Universal means that ‘something’ affects, applies or is completed by everyone all over the world – there is no distinctive bias shown and equal policies are applied. Innate, in relation to humanrights, means that people are given natural rights purely based on the fact that he/she is human and alive. Therefore, are humanrights universal and innate or is the Universal Declaration of Human...
...Humanrights in today’s world have become pivotal to the functioning of our society as a whole, largely due to the increased occurrences which in turn have led to greater awareness and repudiation of the same in the world community. In present times the humanrights field encompasses a broad range of civil, political, economic and social rights which shows its all pervasive nature, and the accountability for the violation of these rights by state and non-state actors alike. The scope of humanrights in today’s day and age has thus widened considerably as gradually the individual becomes an end in himself and is recognized as being of primordial concern.
Humanrights law is a subset in the field of humanrights. Humanrights are what define a society; hence the humanrights law takes primacy over all the laws. There is nothing more important than the development of humanrights in an evolving society
Humanrights and criminal law are closely inter - related. My personal interest lies towards humanrights as under the criminal law. Today we see all kinds of crimes being committed- state or non-state, say torture of prisoners, child labour, or most...
...To whatextent was there a threat of domestic Fascism in 1930s France?
The ambiguous, often contradictory, nature of fascism and the gaps which often exist between fascist ideologies and policies, and the different forms in which fascism took in Europe make fascism extremely difficult to define. Between World War I and II fascism did not come to power in France, in contrast to other European countries. Yet the threat of domestic fascism in 1930s France was still very real and substantial. The 1930s saw the growth of far right leagues in membership and strength, often seen as proto-fascist if not fully fascist organisations, and the polarization of French politics as a whole. The Stavisky Riots and the events that took place in Paris on the 6th February 1934 saw some of the most serious street violence in Paris since the Paris commune of 1871 and led to the resignation of the Daladier government.1 The transformation of the Croix de Feu, under the leadership of François de La Rocque, into a mass populist movement from February 1932 is seen as one of the major threats fascism posed to France, and the extreme right’s reaction to the popular front government’s victory in the legislative elections of May 1936 are all signs of the threat of fascism in 1930s France.
There has been much debate surrounding domestic Fascism in France during this period. Rene Remond, one of Frances foremost historian of the right, concluded...
...Multiple Source Essay
What is the Right thing to do?
Cloning offers many applications, especially in medicine, however, in spite of the many advantages, many people still consider the idea of human cloning, and the practice of cloning all together to be immoral. This opinion is rarely based on a careful analysis of facts, often only a spontaneous reaction. Cloning technology has potential for doing much good, research in human cloning should continue, although some applications of it may need to be restricted.
Cloning is the process of extracting the DNA out of a donor's cell and implanting this genetic code in another cell in order to grow a being with identical genes, thus virtually duplicating the donor. The term clone refers to the new being that has identical genes to the donor. There are three types of cloning, when the media reports on cloning they are generally referring to reproductive cloning. There is also recombinant DNA Technology, and therapeutic cloning (McGee, Human Cloning Debate).
Reproductive cloning is a technology used to generate an animal that has the same nuclear DNA as another. Scientist transfer genetic materials from the nucleus of a donor adult cell to an egg whose nucleus has been removed. This reconstructed egg containing the DNA must be treated with chemicals or electric current to stimulate cell division. Once the cloned embryo...