Sumayyah Siddiqui
Professor Cocozzelli
Senior Seminar
30 March 2017
Book Review:
Universal
Human Rights in Theory and Practice
In
the third edition of his book, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice,
Jack Donnelly discusses and defines the concept of universal human rights, as
it is a widely debated topic in the realm of international politics. The crux
of his argument lay in his assertion that human rights is a concept that is
not exclusive to specific nations or states; instead, it is quite possible to
conceptualize human rights as a universal right, that can be implemented
globally.
The
book is divided into five parts, all of which work together to heighten
Donnelly’s argument. In the first section, Donnelly creates a conceptual
framework of human rights by examining what they are and how they are defined.
Donnelly then points out the problem with the philosophical foundations of
human rights theories, and introduces the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
as a model for human rights, arguing that “states have near-exclusive
responsibility to implement them for their own nationals” (Donnelly 2013, 28). In
doing so, Donnelly associates human rights with Western liberalism, arguing
that “a particular type of liberalism provides a strong and attractive
normative foundation for the Universal Declaration Model,” thus arguing that
this kind of liberalism upholds this system of human rights the best (Donnelly 2013,
65). In part two of the book, Donnelly discusses the relativity and
universality of human rights, and distinguishes between the two. He argues here
that it is not important whether human rights are relative or universal, but
rather what makes them particularly relative or universal. In one chapter,
Donnelly specifically focuses on the cultural relativity of human rights, taking
a firm stance against cultural relativist arguments, asserting that “culture
does not provide a plausible justification for the practice of human rights”
(Donnelly 2013, 107). Furthermore, Donnelly claims that there is no inherent
connection between Western liberal societies and the practice of human rights.
In
part three of the book, Donnelly discusses human rights and human dignity,
briefly discussing the historical practice of human dignity in societies such
as Confucian China and Hindu South Asia. Part four takes a look at human rights
and international action, devoting chapters to international human rights
regimes and human rights and foreign policy. Here, Donnelly analyzes
international regimes through a realist perspective, arguing that global human
rights are not fully implemented because “a strong global human rights regime
simply does not reflect the perceived interests of a group of states willing
and able to supply it,” (Donnelly 2013, 170). At the same time, however,
Donnelly rejects this argument – claiming that national interest should not be
defined in terms of power when it comes to human rights, but rather in terms of
national interests, or what is best for a states’ people. Thus, this assertion
is quite interesting – human rights is not just a moral concern for a states,
but can also be in the national interest as an “intrinsic interest in living in
a more just world fully justifies including international human rights in a
country’s definition of its national interest” (Donnelly 2013, 197). The last section of the book focuses on contemporary
issues within the realm of human rights, taking the theories discussed and
putting them into practice in the modern day realm. Donnelly discusses economic
and social rights in the West, humanitarian intervention against genocide, as
well as non-discrimination against minorities—all modern day facets of human
rights struggles today.
Donnelly’s argument essentially lays
in his rejection of cultural relativism, and assertion that culture is not
relevant to the establishment of human rights and practices. He does this through
various examples of different states throughout history and different cultures.
Donnelly’s argument, in my opinion has merit, however his argument gets very
convoluted at times, and a bit dense. The use of historical examples serves to
strengthen his arguments, and does put the theories he proposes into practice.
Donnelly’s book, I believe, is important to the realm of political science
because it offers some insight into every day human rights violations and
international law. With respect to my own thesis, Donnelly has pushed me
towards a more institutionalist point of view – I too, in my paper will reject
this idea of cultural relativity with regards to human right violations in
Syria – the oppression and violence committed by the Assad regime isn’t a
result of Middle-Eastern and Islamic culture, as there is no cultural relevance
(as Donnelly argues). Rather, the violence is used as a method of exerting
control over the population, and creating a perception of a strong,
authoritarian regime.
References
1. Donnelly, Jack. 2013.
Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell
University
Press. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=3138459.
No comments:
Post a Comment