Date:06/06/2006 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/br/...0600521400.htm Book Review
Human rights discourse
SHALINI UMACHANDRAN
ARE HUMAN RIGHTS WESTERN? — A Contribution to the Dialogue of Civilizations: Arvind Sharma; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 575.
There has always been a tendency to view human rights as rather western with Asian societies having little to contribute to dialogue on this topic that is continually the focus of the contemporary world. That prevailing ideas of human rights are western in origin and nature, and not necessarily of relevance to the rest of the world, is a charge the subject often faces.
This perception stems from the idea that the non-western world was insufficiently represented during the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Many Asian nations were colonies of the West when the UDHR was drafted, and the codified rights were not — and, in many cases, are still not — applicable in the same way across the world.
The identification of certain universal rights in a multi-cultural world was seen as a difficulty even during the drafting of the UDHR but what overcame this was the idea that some practices are so terrible that no one will approve them and "certain things are so good in practice that no one will publicly oppose them."
Rights in Asian societies
Also, Asian philosophical thought focusses on duties and obligations rather than rights, which gives the West the impression that the concept of human rights is alien to Asia. Hinduism, for example, has the concept of Sadharana dharma. Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism and Confucian thought see humans as part of a larger scheme of things and propagate the idea of harmony with and in Nature rather than considering man a special creation, as is the assumption in monotheistic religions. Traditional Asian societies put group rights before the individual; and contemporary rights discourse is often seen as a rather individualistic western concept. Human rights are also perceived as rather western because human rights intellectual discourse is a phenomenon of the West.
However, branding human rights as western based simply on these arguments is to reduce the issue to its most fundamental, as this book by Arvind Sharma points out.
He puts forth 36 senses in which human rights are seen as western, and carefully explains that though each of these reasons is perfectly valid, none of them present an insurmountable hindrance to extending global acceptance to human rights.
Perspectives
The book is divided into nine segments, each one dealing with different aspects of the universality of human rights. Though none of the sections are watertight — the nature of the discussion is such that the arguments often overlap — Sharma has made every effort to approach the issue logically and in sequence.
He examines the various perspectives of the argument starting with the historical and the secular and moving thorough the economic, religious, colonial, rational, philosophical, unilateral and institutional perspectives of rights discourse. Some arguments wander into the realm of the abstruse but for the most part his logic is clear and easy-to-understand, and his language simple and straightforward.
Without drawing explicit conclusions, he leads the reader through the numerous issues confronting the universality of human rights and brings up the many facets of human rights discourse. Sharma's arguments based on the historical, secular and economic perspectives are very interesting and well laid out.
The most interesting chapters, however, are those relating to the religious and the colonial perspectives. The colonial perspective, which includes the concepts of imperialism and racism, is an argument of historical and contemporary significance not only because half the Asian world was once under western rule but also because of the many human rights abuses that occur today as various governments pursue policies that seem increasingly imperialistic in design.
Though human rights are western in many senses, he says, they are not so exclusive as to be unable to move out of the western world and be applied universally.
Reparation for wrongs
However, he does point out that there are three senses in which human rights could be considered absolutely western: the concept evolved in the West with the citizen — rather than the human being — as the primary referent; human rights discourse has not been able to free itself from the western conception of religion, which is not shared by most of the world; that human rights are very western when one looks at the concept of compensation for historical wrongs inflicted by colonial, occupying and other powers. Current human rights discourse only speaks of equality of opportunity but there is no provision for reparation for past wrongs.
As Sharma puts it, "Human rights discourse is Western in the sense that it possesses only a sense of biography and not history."
This dimension is of significance in the contemporary world, "in an age when terrorism fuelled by historical grievances poses a global threat to the human rights of victims and compels states to abridge the rights of its citizens as they prioritise security over liberty." And the debate will continue until historical wrongs are righted.
© Copyright 2000 - 2006 The Hindu
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/t...06/06/&prd=br&
Human rights discourse
SHALINI UMACHANDRAN
ARE HUMAN RIGHTS WESTERN? — A Contribution to the Dialogue of Civilizations: Arvind Sharma; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 575.
There has always been a tendency to view human rights as rather western with Asian societies having little to contribute to dialogue on this topic that is continually the focus of the contemporary world. That prevailing ideas of human rights are western in origin and nature, and not necessarily of relevance to the rest of the world, is a charge the subject often faces.
This perception stems from the idea that the non-western world was insufficiently represented during the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Many Asian nations were colonies of the West when the UDHR was drafted, and the codified rights were not — and, in many cases, are still not — applicable in the same way across the world.
The identification of certain universal rights in a multi-cultural world was seen as a difficulty even during the drafting of the UDHR but what overcame this was the idea that some practices are so terrible that no one will approve them and "certain things are so good in practice that no one will publicly oppose them."
Rights in Asian societies
Also, Asian philosophical thought focusses on duties and obligations rather than rights, which gives the West the impression that the concept of human rights is alien to Asia. Hinduism, for example, has the concept of Sadharana dharma. Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism and Confucian thought see humans as part of a larger scheme of things and propagate the idea of harmony with and in Nature rather than considering man a special creation, as is the assumption in monotheistic religions. Traditional Asian societies put group rights before the individual; and contemporary rights discourse is often seen as a rather individualistic western concept. Human rights are also perceived as rather western because human rights intellectual discourse is a phenomenon of the West.
However, branding human rights as western based simply on these arguments is to reduce the issue to its most fundamental, as this book by Arvind Sharma points out.
He puts forth 36 senses in which human rights are seen as western, and carefully explains that though each of these reasons is perfectly valid, none of them present an insurmountable hindrance to extending global acceptance to human rights.
Perspectives
The book is divided into nine segments, each one dealing with different aspects of the universality of human rights. Though none of the sections are watertight — the nature of the discussion is such that the arguments often overlap — Sharma has made every effort to approach the issue logically and in sequence.
He examines the various perspectives of the argument starting with the historical and the secular and moving thorough the economic, religious, colonial, rational, philosophical, unilateral and institutional perspectives of rights discourse. Some arguments wander into the realm of the abstruse but for the most part his logic is clear and easy-to-understand, and his language simple and straightforward.
Without drawing explicit conclusions, he leads the reader through the numerous issues confronting the universality of human rights and brings up the many facets of human rights discourse. Sharma's arguments based on the historical, secular and economic perspectives are very interesting and well laid out.
The most interesting chapters, however, are those relating to the religious and the colonial perspectives. The colonial perspective, which includes the concepts of imperialism and racism, is an argument of historical and contemporary significance not only because half the Asian world was once under western rule but also because of the many human rights abuses that occur today as various governments pursue policies that seem increasingly imperialistic in design.
Though human rights are western in many senses, he says, they are not so exclusive as to be unable to move out of the western world and be applied universally.
Reparation for wrongs
However, he does point out that there are three senses in which human rights could be considered absolutely western: the concept evolved in the West with the citizen — rather than the human being — as the primary referent; human rights discourse has not been able to free itself from the western conception of religion, which is not shared by most of the world; that human rights are very western when one looks at the concept of compensation for historical wrongs inflicted by colonial, occupying and other powers. Current human rights discourse only speaks of equality of opportunity but there is no provision for reparation for past wrongs.
As Sharma puts it, "Human rights discourse is Western in the sense that it possesses only a sense of biography and not history."
This dimension is of significance in the contemporary world, "in an age when terrorism fuelled by historical grievances poses a global threat to the human rights of victims and compels states to abridge the rights of its citizens as they prioritise security over liberty." And the debate will continue until historical wrongs are righted.
© Copyright 2000 - 2006 The Hindu
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/t...06/06/&prd=br&
Comment