Human Rights: Individualism, Universalism, and the UDHR
Core Ideological Debates in Human Rights
Individualism versus collectivism is a central debate in human rights, concerning whether to prioritize individual liberty and independence or collective security and well-being. Different countries and cultures prioritize these values differently. Universalism versus relativism is another key debate, questioning whether human rights should be universally applied or relative to different cultures. Amartya Sen bridges these perspectives, advocating for cultural relativism while highlighting shared values across diverse cultures. The universalist argument underpinned the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights, aiming to prevent future atrocities like the Holocaust by applying inherent rights to all people.
Real-World Scenarios: Ideological Debates in Action
These debates manifest in real-world scenarios. For example, in France, strict laws regarding security and religious neutrality restrict Muslim women from wearing veils or niqabs in public spaces, illustrating the conflict between collectivist safety measures and personal freedom of expression. During the COVID-19 crisis, lockdowns balanced the collective right to safety with personal freedom of movement, sparking debate about the infringement of individual liberties.
Natural Rights: Christianity vs. the Enlightenment
Both Christianity and the liberal English Enlightenment defended natural rights but based them on different concepts of nature. Christianity views nature as God’s creation, with rights derived from divine law and human dignity rooted in being made in God’s image. The Enlightenment, conversely, views nature as rational, asserting that natural rights (such as life, liberty, and property) stem from human reason rather than divine will. Christianity relies on religious teachings for moral law, while the Enlightenment emphasizes social contracts and individual autonomy.
The Convergence of Traditions in Universal Rights
Both perspectives contributed to modern universal rights. Christianity reinforced the idea of equal human worth, while the Enlightenment secularized this concept, making rights applicable to all based on reason. Today’s human rights frameworks, like the UN Declaration of Human Rights, reflect a mix of both traditions, acknowledging human dignity while justifying rights through rational, secular principles.
The Universal Nature of the 1948 UDHR
The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is considered universal rather than relativistic because it was founded in the aftermath of World War II, marked by atrocities like the Holocaust and widespread human suffering. There was a global consensus that certain fundamental rights should be guaranteed to all people, regardless of cultural, religious, or national differences, in order to prevent future atrocities and promote peace, dignity, and equality.
Historical Context and Global Commitment
It was adopted after WW2 to ensure rights for anyone no matter what religion, culture, or race. The UDHR was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, representing a global commitment to these universal human rights. Specifically states that human beings are “born free and equal in dignity and rights”. Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly which shows the global commitment to making the UDRH universal.