The Myth of Western Opposition to Economic Social and Cultural Rights.docx
- 文档编号:14864579
- 上传时间:2023-06-28
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:23
- 大小:34.77KB
The Myth of Western Opposition to Economic Social and Cultural Rights.docx
《The Myth of Western Opposition to Economic Social and Cultural Rights.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《The Myth of Western Opposition to Economic Social and Cultural Rights.docx(23页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
TheMythofWesternOppositiontoEconomicSocialandCulturalRights
Volume31,Number1,February2009
E-ISSN:
1085-794XPrintISSN:
0275-0392
DOI:
10.1353/hrq.0.0063
TheMythofWesternOppositiontoEconomic,Social,andCulturalRights?
AReplytoWhelanandDonnelly
AlexKirkupandTonyEvans
Abstract
ThisreplyquestionsthemethodologyWhelanandDonnellyhaveappliedtothequestionofeconomicandsocialrightsinthepost-warera.Wearguethatbytakingtheglobalhumanrightsregimeatfacevalueandneglectingtheroleofpolitics,power,andinterests,WhelanandDonnellyhavepresentedadistortedandpartialviewoftheinclusionofeconomicandsocialrights,whichinaccuratelyportrayssuchrightsas“universal.”Weputforwardanalternativeperspectivethatplaceshumanrightsinthecontextoftheglobalpoliticaleconomy.Thisallowsustounderstandthepost-wardiscrepancybetweentheformalhumanrightsregime,whichpositstheuniversalityofallrights,andactualhumanrightspractice,whichhasbeenfoundeduponthedistinctionbetweenuniversalcivilandpolitical“rights”anduneveneconomicandsocial“entitlement.”[EndPage221]
I.Introduction
Intheirrecentarticle,WhelanandDonnellyarguethatinthepost-1945era“Westernadvocacyofeconomicandsocialrightswasstrong,consistent,andessentialtocreatingthepost-warinternationalorder,whichwasintendedtoconsolidateandstrengthenWesternwelfarestates.”1Alongwithcivilandpoliticalrights,theyargue,economicandsocialrightsinthisperiodwereestablishedas“universalrights,”2inboththerhetoricandpracticeofWesternstates.Theircaserestsuponanempiricalandpositivistapproachthatremainscommonintheliteratureonhumanrights.Thisallowsthepresentationofawealthofempiricalexamples,referencestointernationallaw,speeches,andregionalhumanrightsregimestodemonstratethatthe“themythofwesternopposition[is]patentlyludicrous,”3“simplynottrue,”4and“apreposterouslie.”5Ourconcern,however,isthatbecausetheirmethodologytakestheglobalhumanrightsregimeatfacevalue,anddoesnotquestiontheroleofpoliticsintheregime’sconstructionandday-to-dayexistence,WhelanandDonnellyhavepresentedadistortedandpartialviewoftheincorporationofeconomicandsocialrightsinthepost-warcapitalistorder.Theyobscuretheall-too-obviousdiscrepancybetweentheformalhumanrightsregimeandactualhumanrightspractice,whichcanonlybeunderstoodwhenhumanrightsare,inthebroaderperspectiveofpowerandinterests,contextualizedwithintheglobalpoliticaleconomy,thepost-1945politicalinstitutionalizationofmarketrelationsonaglobalscale.6
II.“True”HistoryandtheGlobalPoliticalEconomy
WhelanandDonnelly’sapproachtohumanrightstakestheinternationalhumanrightsregime,withitsUNdebates,resolutions,andcorpusofinternationallaw,atfacevalue.Undertheirapproach,the“truth”abouttheWest’sconcernabouthowtoincludeeconomicandsocialrightsiswithinthesesources.Lessvisibleinthisapproachisanyreferencetopolitics,interests,andpower.ForWhelanandDonnelly,theratificationofahumanrights[EndPage222]treatyandtheintentiontopursuetheprinciplesembodiedwithinatreatyareoneandthesamething.ButasMichaelBarkunonceobserved,
[a]narrowconcernfortheassertionsofdocumentsorforthepowersoflegallyconstitutedorgansofgovernmentmistakesappearanceforreality,confusesvisibilitywithsignificance,andsubstitutes(howeverinadvertently)sophisticateddescriptionforexplanationandprediction.7
Concurring,LouisHenkinfamouslyremarkedmanyyearsagothattoadoptthepositivistapproachtohumanrightsislikeanalienwho,havingencounteredtheliteratureonhumanrightsforthefirsttime,confidentlyreportsbacktoitshomeplanetthattheprotectionofhumanrightsisoneofthegreatachievementsofearthlings.8Therealityoftorture,economicdeprivation,imprisonmentwithouttrial,slavelabor,andallmannerofotherhumanrightsviolations,remainsoverlooked.WhileWhelanandDonnellymayofferaversionofthe“truth”thatdescribesaparticularlevelofanalysis,itisnotafinal“truth”astheyseektoassert:
thereexistsintheiraccountaproblematicdiscrepancybetweenlegalrulesandactualpractice.
Fromourperspective,whatismissingfromWhelanandDonnellyisanysenseofpolitics.Theirarticleframesquestionsofpowerandinterestwithinconventionallyconceivedconceptsofthestate,sovereignty,andnaturalrights,inthetraditionofinternationalsociety.9Theythendefineinterestsastheinterestsofallpeopleinsecurity,includingeconomicsecurity,forwhichthestateisresponsible.Therefore,theirframeworkdoesnotinvolveananalysisofquestionsconcerningtheroleofhumanrightsinlegitimatingthedominantsocioeconomicglobalorderwhichthestateinhabits,ortheexclusionarypracticesthatarisefromadoptingparticularhumanrightsprocedures.Indeed,undertheiranalyticalframework,theUniversalDeclarationandthetwomajorcovenantsgivereassurancethatsuchquestionshavealreadybeensettled.10Butthediscrepancybetweenlegalrulesandactualpracticesuggestsotherwise.Inshort,weargue,WhelanandDonnellyfailtoexplainthisdiscrepancybecausetheydonotcontextualizehumanrightswithintheglobalpoliticaleconomy.[EndPage223]
Importantly,WhelanandDonnelly’spositivismsupportsanaturalrightsphilosophythatassumesthatallthemostimportantprinciplesofhumanrightsweresettledmanyyearsago.11Thisisacuriousoversight,giventhepoliticalcontextoftheFrenchandAmericanrevolutions,whicharewidelyunderstoodasthestartingpointofthemodernhumanrightsmovementandwhichdemonstratedthecontextualnatureofhumanrightsandtheirusetoadvancesociopoliticalgoals.Inthewakeofthesemomentousrevolutions,whatwasoncethoughtofasthe“naturalorder”—thedivinerightofkings,adutytothecrown,andtheauthorityoftheestablishedchurch—wasrejectedinfavorofaneworder—thepeopleassovereign,therightsofthecitizen,andtheauthorityofcivilgovernment.Theoldorderwasconsideredoppressiveandtyrannical,whiletheneworderofferedtheconditionsforhumandignityandfreedom.Notingthis,NeilStammersarguesthat“ideasandpracticesconcerninghumanrightsarecreatedbypeopleinparticularhistorical,social,andeconomiccircumstances.”12FollowingthesuccessoftheFrenchandAmericanRevolutions,anemergentbourgeoisiesoughttolegitimatetheiralternativeorder—acivilsocietyseparatefromandupheldbythestate—throughtheinclusivelanguageofnaturalandinalienablerights.13Theseparationofprivate(economic)frompublic(political)life,whichremainscentraltonaturalrights,waspresentedasamoralimperativeintheinterestsofallcitizens.Thus,naturalrightsdidnotrevealanyuniversaltruthsabouttherelationshipbetweentheindividual,society,andthestate.Rathernaturalrightsprovidedthehighmoralgroundthatjustifiedoverturningtheoldorderwhilesimultaneouslylegitimatingtheinterestsofthedominantgroupinthenew.14Inthisway,claimsforhumanrightsshouldbeseenasthelegitimationoftheruleoftheeconomicsphereofcivilsociety,orasMarxputsit,“theruleofcapital.”15
OurresponsetoWhelanandDonnelly,then,isthatthepost-1945imageofhumanrightsreflectschangesinthesocialorderandinglobalpolitics.TheUnitedStatesemergedintothepost-warworldasthedominantstatewithinthecapitalistworldorder,whichstoodthreatenedbytheconsequencesoftheGreatDepression,theSecondWorldWar,andthenascentColdWar.16[EndPage224]
Itsprincipalinterestsincivilsociety—legal,business,andfinancial,amongothers—promotedtheexpansionofglobaldemandforUSexportsandthus,throughthepoliticalpoweroftheUSstateandBrettonWoodsinstitutions,promotedtheconstructionofglobalmarketsdominatedbyUSinterests.17Inthissense,thecentralroleofhumanrightsdiscourseinthepost-warorderwastolegitimizetheexpansionofglobalmarketsthroughuniversalandinclusiveclaimsofindividualfreedom.18Theformalregimethuspresentedtheuniversalityanddesirabilityofallrightswithinthecapitalistworldorder,promotingtheideathat,inthewordsofWhelanandDonnelly,thisorderwasfoundeduponthe“internationalnormoftheinterdependenceandindivisibilityofallhumanrights,”includingeconomicandsocialrights.19
Butthisnormdoesnotreflectactualpracticeinthepost-warworld,whichinstead,atitsbase,wasbuiltuponthefundamentalprimacyofcivilandpoliticalrights.Thisisbecause,ontheonehand,“negative”civilandpoliticalrights,whichenableindividualfreedomssuchastheownershipofprivateproperty,constitutethelegal-politicalframeworkfortheexistenceofthemarketandthepursuitofself-interest.20Ontheotherhand,“positive”economicandsocialrightsplaceaconstraintuponthefreedomofmarketactors.Theycanonlyeverbeaspirationsbecausetheirfulfillmentmustcomeatanother’sexpense.Asaresult,civilandpoliticalrightsalonehaveemergedasuniversalandinalienablerightsacrossthepost-warcapitalistorder.Economicandsocialrights,incontrast,haveexistedasnomorethan“entitlement”woneitherinthemarketplaceorbypoliticalstruggleoverthewelfarestate.21Theyhavedevelopedinanunevenpatterndeterminedwithinthechangingstructureoftheglobalpoliticaleconomy.
Wepursuetheseargumentsfurtherintwoways.First,weconsiderthehistoricaldevelopmentofinternationallyacceptedeconomicandsocialrightsandtheconsiderabl
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- The Myth of Western Opposition to Economic Social and Cultural Rights
链接地址:https://www.bingdoc.com/p-14864579.html