The Global Politics of Human Rights: From Human Rights To Human Dignity? Human Rights Law Assignment,

The Global Politics of Human Rights: From Human Rights To Human Dignity?

Abstract

This review essay highlights the limitations and possibilities of a global human rights order based on an analysis of five recently published books about human rights. The main argument states that reform of the global human rights order requires not only a shift to a more emancipatory notion of human dignity but also an emphasis on global justice and material compensation within and between the Global North and Global South.

Human dignity, in this essay, embraces all types of human rights claims, ranging from political rights to socio-economic rights, among many others. The essay proposes a three-pronged reform of international human rights: (1) a shift from Western human rights to the more inclusive and pluralist notion of human dignity; (2) the promotion of global justice by rewriting the rules of global economic governance; and (3) mandatory political education on human rights and human dignity.

Keywords

Human rights, arms trade, intergovernmental organizations, European Union, United States, human dignity

Introduction

Amidst the recent resurgence of illiberal politics, how and under what set of conditions can we hope to reform the global human rights order? That overarching question inspires this essay, which reviews five recently published books that represent some of the finest scholarly works on the global politics of human rights norms. The principal analytical motivation of this review essay
relates to key limitations and possibilities for reform of the global human rights order. Notably, the five books under review were written by the historian Joe Renouard; the empirically-oriented political scientists Brian Greenhill, Jennifer Erickson and Katrin Kinzelbach; and the political theorist Benjamin Gregg.

Since the end of the Cold War, various human rights norms have gained traction – and not only in terms of their further codification in the international legal system and institutionalization in global governance. Indeed, these norms have appeared prominently as aspirational goals in many countries’ national constitutions and domestic legal frameworks.

In praxis, the number of countries, as well as the number of human rights treaties and conventions, have dramatically increased, despite the apparently deteriorating global human rights situation (Simmons, 2009; Tsutsui and HafnerBurton, 2005). The political science discipline, meanwhile, is divided on whether global or domestic factors primarily shape human rights outcomes over space and time (Regime, 2014a).

Philosophers and political theorists, on the other hand, primarily reflect upon new political utopias that would effectively realize human rights at the global level – and their creative thought experiments and philosophical reflections derive inspiration from a wide range of moral, normative, political and legal justifications (Bohman, 2010; Fraser, 1995; Regime, 2014b).

Path-breaking research on global human rights

This section is thematically divided into several parts. The first section starts with Benjamin Gregg’s reflections on a human rights utopia while succeeding subsections deal with the role of transnational and Western actors in global human rights promotion.

Conclusions: Rethinking global human rights

In sum, the five books under review provide us with some important insights about the contemporary state of the global human rights order. While Benjamin Gregg’s The Human Rights State highlights philosophical limitations in our contemporary understanding of human rights, the remaining four books underscore the dynamic interactions of transnational and local factors in shaping human rights outcomes, especially in the Global South.

Questions:

1. Identify the major ethical/legal points of this article.
2. Has the totality of the evidence regarding ethical/legal issues been considered?
3. Are there any potential biases in the interpretation or discussion of the research?
4. Does this article contribute to the ethical/legal debate?
5. Do you agree or disagree with the position taken in this article – give your reasons.