Identity and the Hegemony of Universal Human Rights

Evans, Tony

doi:10.22096/hr.2016.29849

Identity and the Hegemony of Universal Human Rights

Document Type : Research Article

Author

Tony Evans

(retired) Professor of Global Politics at the University of Southampton. England

10.22096/hr.2016.29849

Abstract

Due to an unintentional mistake attribution of the author have been incorrectly inserted. The author's attribution was modified at his request.

Human rights are commonly portrayed as a narrative that passes through several chapters before reaching its inevitable conclusion. This narrative begins with the horror of Nazism, moves to the centrality of human rights in the UN Charter, eulogizes the Universal Declaration, celebrates the achievements of standard setting as set out in the major covenants, offers detailed analysis of methods of monitoring and, finally, speculates on the future of compliance. This narrative is sustained, firstly, by ‘naturalist’ foundationalism and, secondly, by a widely held assumptions about the move towards ‘settled norms’ in the contemporary world order. Although some pessimism is voiced over continued reports of torture, genocide, structural economic deprivation, disappearances, ethnic cleansing, political prisoners, the suppression of trade union rights, gender inequality, religious persecution, and many other violations of internationally agreed human rights, most commentators and activists tacitly adopt an optimistic stance that envisages a future rights based international order. The still prevalent naturalist account of human rights, together with a narrative that boasts ‘settled norms’, suggests that the human rights regime represents a final ‘truth’ about the essential nature of all humankind; a common identity that describes the individual in an increasingly globalized world.
This paper interrogates the ‘naturalist-settled norm’ account of human rights from the perspective of power and knowledge. It begins by distinguishing between the international human rights regime and the global discourse of human rights. The former adopts a legal approach, where the neutral, value-free, unbiased and impartial nature of the law is tacitly accepted. The latter refers to human rights as social, political and economic practice, and must therefore include an account of power. From this perspective, the discourse of human rights might be said to ascribe a particular identity to human beings as agents of a particular type and kind, which serves the interests of some groups over others. While the human rights regime is presented by world leaders, commentators and the majority of academics as the legitimate articulation of norms founded upon timeless ‘truths’ about human nature, the argument presented in this paper suggests that the norms associated with the discourse of rights offer a more cogent insight into the status of human rights in the current world order. Thus, complex questions arise about power/knowledge, foundationalism, the status of international human rights law, and the politics of rights.
The paper begins with an account of discourse as a meeting place for power and knowledge. A second section discusses ‘discipline’ as a mode of social organization that imbues the individual’s identity with particular ways of thinking, knowing and behaving, thereby instilling a particular social consciousness. A further section looks at the global development of ‘market disciplinary’ norms (as opposed to legal norms) that act as a guide for action. The paper concludes with a discussion on issues of human rights and identity in the age of globalization.

Subjects

A) Books and Journals
1. Aziz, N (1999). Human Rights Debate in an Ear of Globalization: Hegemony of Discourse, Ed: by P. Van Ness, London: Routledge, pp. 32-55.
2. Bauer, J. R, and D. A. Bell (1999). The East Asian Challenge for Human Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Carver, T (1998). The Postmodern Mar, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
4. Cassese, A (1990). Human Rights in a Changing World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Chandler, D (2002). From Kosovo to Kabul: Human Rights and International Intervention, London: Pluto.
6. Chinkin, C (1998). International Law and Human Rights, Ed: by T. Evans, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 105-29.
7. Chomsky, N (1994). World Orders, Old and New, London: Pluto.
8. Clark, I (1999). Globalization and International Relations Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, Vol.17, No.4, pp. 19-26.
9. Cox, R (1997). Democracy in hard times: economic globalization and the limits to liberal democracy, Ed: by A. McGrew, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 49-75.
10. Cox, R (1999). “Civil Society at the turn of the Millennium: Prospects for an Alternative World Order”, Review of International Studies, Vol.25, No.3.
11. Cozens Hoy, D (1995). Power, Repression, Progress: Foucault, Lukes, and the Frankfurt School, Ed: by B. Smart, Vol.5, London: Routledge, pp. 173-91.
12. Donnelly, J (1989). Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
13. Dunér, B (2002). The Global Human Rights Regime, Lund: Student litterateurs.
14. Evans, T (2000). “Citizenship and Human Rights in the Age of Globalization”, Alternatives, Vol.25, No.4, pp.415-438.
15. Evans, T (2001). The Politics of Human Rights: A Global Perspective. Human Security, Ed: by C. Thomas, London: Pluto Press.
16. Evans, T. (1996). US Hegemony and the Project of Universal Human Rights, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
17. Foucault, M (1977). Discipline and Punish, Translated by S. A, New York: Pantheon Books.
18. Foucault, M (1994). Two Lectures, Ed: by M. Kelly, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 1-46.
19. Fraser, N (1995). Michel Foucault (2): Critical Assessments, Ed: by B. Smart, Vol.2, London: Routledge, pp. 133-48.
20. Fraser, N (2000). “Rethinking Recognition”, New Left Review, Vol. May-June, No.3, 107-20.
21. Frost, M (1996). Ethics if International Relations: A Constitutive Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Fukuyama, Francis (1989). “The End of History”, The National Interest, Vol. summer, pp. 3-18.
23. George, S (1999). The Lucano Report, London: Pluto.
24. Giddens, A (1990). Modernity and Self-Identity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
25. Gill, S (1995). “Globalization, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neoliberalism”, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol.24, No.3, pp. 399-423.
26. Gramsci, A (1996). Selections from the Prison Notebooks, Ed: by Q. Hoare, and G. Smith, London: Lawrence and Wisehart.
27. Held, D. (1999). Global Transformations, Cambridge: Polity Press.
28. Hindess, B (1992). “Power and Rationality: The Wesern Conception of Political Community”, Alternatives, No.17, pp. 149-63.
29. Hoogvelt, A (2001). Globalization and the Postcolonial World: The New Political Economy of Development, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
30. Hormats, R (1998). Globalization and Human Rights, Arlington: Public Broadcasting Service.
31. Hunt, A (1993). Explorations in Law and Society: Towards a constitutive Theory of Law, New York/London: Routledge.
32. Huntington, S. P (1997). The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order, New York: Touchstone.
33. Ivison, D (1998). The Disciplinary Moment: Foucault, Law and the Reincription of Rights, Ed: by J. Moss, London, Sage, pp. 129-48.
34. Keeley, J (1990). “Towards a Foucauldian Analysis of International Regimes”, International Organization, Vol.44, No.1, pp. 83-105.
35. Kotheri, S (1994). Global Economic Institutions and Democracy: A View from India, Ed: by J. Cavanagh, D. Wysham, and M. Arrunda, London: Pluto Press, pp. 39-54.
36. Langlois, A. J (2002). “Human Rights: the globalization and fragmentation of moral discourse”, Review of International Studies, Vol.28, No.3, pp. 479-96.
37. Linklater, A (1998), The Transformation of Political Society, Cambridge: Polity.
38. Mahbubani, K (1992). “The West and the Rest”, The National Interest, No. Summ, pp. 3-12.
39. Marks, S (1998). “From the Single confused Page to the Decalogue for Six Billion People: The Roots of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the French Revolution”, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol.20, No.3, pp. 449-514.
40. Marx, K (2002). Kark Marx: Selected Writings, Ed: by D. McLellan, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. McGrew, A. (1992). A global Society, Ed: by S. Hall, D. Held, and A. McGrew, Cambridge: Polity.
42. Millen, J. V., E. Lyon, and A. Irwin (2000). Dying for Growth: The Political Influence of National and Transnational Corporations, Ed: by J. Y. Kim, Monroe: Cameron Courage Press, pp. 225-233.
43. Mutua, M (2002). Human Rights: A Political and Cultural Critique. Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights, Ed: by B. B. Lockwood, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
44. O'Brien, R. et al (2000). Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements, Ed: by S. Smith, Cambridge Studies in International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Opsahl, T (1989). “Instruments of Implementation of Human Rights”, Human Rights Law Journal, Vol.10, No.1, pp. 13-33.
46. Panitch, L (1995). Rethinking the Role of the State, Ed: by J. Mittelman, Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
47. Pasha, M. K., and D. L. Blaney (1998). “Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Perils of Global Civil Society”, Alternatives, Vol.23, No.1, pp: 417-540.
48. Peterson, V. S., and L. Parisi (1989). Are Women Human? It's Not An Academic Question, Ed: by T. Evans, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 132-160.
49. Prado, C. G (1995). Starting with Foucault: An Introduction to Genealogy, Boulder: Westview.
50. Pupavac, V (2003). Multiculturalism and its discontents in SFR Yugoslavia and Bosnia: A critique of the Multicultural Rights Model, Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
51. Raphael, D. D (1966). “The Liberal Western Tradition of Human Rights”, International Social Science Journal, Vol.18, No.1, pp. 22-30.
52. Rouse, J. (1994). Power/Knowledge, Ed: by G. Cutting, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 92-114.
53. Salmi, J (1993). Violence and the Democratic State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Scholte, J. A (1996). Towards a Critical Theory of Globalization, Ed: by E. Kofman, and G. Young, London: Pinter, pp. 43-57.
55. Spybey, T (1996). Globalization and World Society, Cambridge: Polity Press.
56. Stammers, N (1993). “Human Rights and Power”, Political Studies, No.41, pp. 70-82.
57. Stammers, N (1999). “Social Movements and the Social Construction of Human Rights”, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol.21, No.4, pp. 980-1008.
58. Taylor, C. (1995). Foucault on Freedom and Truth, Ed: by B. Smart, Vol.2, London: Routledge, pp. 326-51.
59. Tetrault, M. A (1988). “Regimes and Liberal World Order”, Alternatives, Vol.13, No.1, pp. 5-26.
60. Tomasevski, K (1993). Development Aid and Human Rights Revisited, London: Pinter.
61. van der Pijl, K (1998). Transnational Class and International Relations, London: Routledge.
62. Vincent, R. J (1986), Human Rights and International Relations, Cambridge: CUP.
63. Watkins, K (1995). The Oxfam Poverty Report, Oxford: Oxfam.
64. Wilson, R. A (1997). Human Rights, Culture and Context: An Introduction, London: Pluto, pp. 1-27.
B) Documents
1. UNDP. “Human Development Report 1997 - Human Development to Eradicate Poverty”, United Nations Development Programme, 1997.
2. UNDP. “Human Development Report 1999 - Globalization with a Human Face”, United Nations Development Programme, 1999.