Defending the Pluralistic Minimum Universality of Human Rights

Year 2024, Issue: 7, 8 - 16, 28.10.2024

Burak Başkan

https://doi.org/10.62425/culture.1536092

Abstract

The idea of ‘universal human rights’ has emerged as a significant topic on the global agenda with the intensification of globalisation through technological change, the spread of transport and digital communication tools, and the increased visibility of instances of gross human rights violations in diverse regions worldwide. However, the spirit of the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, which emerged in the aftermath of the wave of fascism in 20th century Europe and the devastation of the Second World War, is still unable to penetrate all parts of the world. Furthermore, the rise of authoritarian populism in recent years has the potential to lead to a retreat from the idea of universal human rights. Thusly, the main purpose of this article is to introduce a viable, effective, pluralistic and minimum universal understanding of human rights on which world public opinion can agree. Within this framework, the intellectual elements of radical universalism and radical relativism, which are the parties to the debate on the universality of human rights, have been subjected to a rigorous analysis. A philosophical discussion was held in order to put forward an understanding of human rights that is respectful of multiculturalism and does not leave individuals at the mercy of the countries and societies in which they live, and to overcome the dichotomy in question. Moreover, the possible obstacles to the implementation of human rights worldwide have been discussed and the limits and scope of the pluralistic minimum universalist understanding of human rights have been revealed.

Keywords

Political philosophy, human rights, universalism, relativism, pluralism

İnsan Haklarının Çoğulcu Asgari Evrenselliğini Savunmak

Abstract

Küreselleşme sürecinin teknolojik dönüşüm sayesinde şiddetini artırması, ulaşım ve dijital iletişim araçlarının yaygınlaşması ve dünyanın farklı noktalarındaki ağır insan hakları ihlallerinin dünya kamuoyu nezdinde daha görünür olmasıyla birlikte ‘evrensel insan hakları’ fikri, küresel düzeyde en önemli gündem maddelerinden biri haline gelmiştir. Diğer taraftan 20. yüzyılın ilk yarısında Avrupa’da deneyimlenen faşizm dalgasının ve 2. Dünya Savaşı’nın yıkıntılarının ardından ortaya çıkan İnsan Hakları Evrensel Beyannamesi'nin ruhu, bugün hala dünyanın her noktasına sirayet edememektedir. Son yıllarda yükselen otoriter popülist dalga ise evrensel insan hakları fikrinden geri dönüşe sebep olma potansiyeline sahiptir. Buradan hareketle bu makalenin temel amacı, dünya kamuoyunun üzerinde uzlaşabileceği, uygulanabilir, etkili, çoğulcu ve asgari evrenselliğe sahip bir insan hakları anlayışı ortaya koyabilmektir. Bu çerçevede insan haklarının evrenselliğine yönelik tartışmanın tarafları olan radikal evrenselcilik ile radikal rölativizm anlayışlarının fikirsel unsurları titiz bir incelemeye tabi tutulmuştur. Bir yandan çok kültürlülüğü önemseyen diğer yandan ise bireyleri içinde yaşadıkları ülkelerin ve toplumların insafına bırakmayan bir insan hakları anlayışı ortaya koymaya ve söz konusu ikiliği aşmaya yönelik bir felsefi tartışma yürütülmüştür. Dahası, insan haklarının yeryüzünün her noktasında uygulanabilmesinin önündeki olası engeller incelenmiş ve çoğulcu asgari evrenselci insan hakları anlayışının sınırları ve kapsamı ortaya konmuştur.

Keywords

Siyaset felsefesi, insan hakları, evrenselcilik, rölativizm, çoğulculuk

References

• Altwicker, A. (2020). Non-Universal arguments under the European convention on human rights. European Journal of International Law, 31(1), 101–126, doi: 10.1093/ejil/chaa015
• Aras, F. Ç. (2023). Küreselleşmenin insan hakları üzerindeki rolü. In A. Özer & E. Yazar (eds.), İnterdisipliner Bir Alan Olarak İnsan Hakları (pp. 59-75). Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi.
• The Executive Board, American Anthropological Association [AAA]. (1947). Statement on human rights. American Anthropologist, 49(4), 539-543. http://www.jstor.org/stable/662893
• An-Na’im, A. A. (1987). Religious minorities under Islamic law and the limits of cultural relativism. Human Rights Quarterly, 9(1), 1-18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/761944
• Başkan, B. (2023). International politics and ethics: Positive, negative and reciprocal duties on global poverty. Anadolu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(1), 381-399. doi: 10.53443/anadoluibfd.1203682
• Bowsher, J. (2024). After truth, after shame … after information politics? Rethinking the epistemologies of human rights in the digital-authoritarian conjuncture. The International Journal of Human Rights, 1–25. doi: 10.1080/13642987.2024.2315277
• Boylan, M. (1999). Gewirth: Critical Essays on Action, Rationality, and Community. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
• Caney, S. (1998). Human rights, compatibility and diverse cultures. In S. Caney & P. Jones (eds.), Human Rights and Global Diversity (pp. 51-76). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Cobbah, J. A. M. (1987). African values and the human rights debate: An African perspective. Human Rights Quarterly, 9(3), 309-331. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/761878
• Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural relativism and universal human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 6(4), 400-419. http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/hurq6&div=33&g_sent=1&collection=journals
• Ekefre, E. & Etuk, E. (2023). Human rights and cultural relativism vis-à-vis the eradication of female genital mutilation (FGM) in Akwa Ibom State since 2015. Sapientia Journal of Philosophy, 18, 196-208.
• Fagan, A. (2005). Human rights. The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/hum-rts/#SH5a
• International Crisis Group [ICG]. (2023). Taliban restrictions on women’s rights deepen Afghanistan’s crisis. https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-asia/afghanistan/329-taliban-restrictions-womens-rights-deepen-afghanistans-crisis
• Karns, M. P. & Mingst, K. A. (2010). International organisations: The politics and processes of global governance (2nd Edition). London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Keown, D. (1995). Are there human rights in Buddhism?. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 2, 3-27. http://grover.cac.psu.edu/pub/jbe/acrobat/keown.pdf
• Kim, H., & Park, S. (2024). Expanding China’s influence via membership: Examining the influence of Chinese-led international institutions on responses to human rights issues in China. Journal of Chinese Political Science. doi: 10.1007/s11366-024-09886-2
• Mackie, J. L. (1977) Ethics: Inventing right and wrong, London: Penguin Books.
• Mutua, M. (2001). Savages, victims and saviours: The metaphor of human rights. Harvard International Law Journal, 42(1), 201-245. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1525547
• Narveson, J. (2001). The libertarian idea. Hertfordshire: Broadview Press.
• Nickel, J. (1987). Making sense of human rights. London: University of California Press.
• Nickel, J. (2013). Human rights. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Summer Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#UniHumRigWorDiv
• Open Society Foundations [OSF]. (2023). Open Society Barometer: Can Democracy Deliver?. September 2023 Issue.
• Parekh, B. (1999). Non-ethnocentric universalism. In T. Dunne & N. Wheeler (eds.), Human Rights in Global Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rachels, J. (2012). The Elements of moral philosophy. S. Rachels (ed.) (7th Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Talbott, W. J. (2005). Which rights should be universal?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• The All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief [FORB]. (2021). Commentary on the current state of international freedom of religion or belief 2020. https://appgfreedomofreligionorbelief.org/media/2020-APPG-commentary-final.pdf
• United Nations [UN]. (2024). History of the Declaration. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/udhr/history-of-the-declaration
• Wenar, L. (2011). Rights. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/rights
• Widdows, H. (2011). Global ethics: An introduction. Durham: Acumen Publishing.
• Wu, J. (2022). A perspective of objectivity in international human rights treaties. The International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique, 35, 369–390. doi: 10.1007/s11196-020-09695-9