Brian Orend writes about human rights’ basic concepts in the first part of the book and historical context in the last part of the book. Human rights are not properties, but reasons. Therefore, one has be a biological man, can think consistently and respect others’ rights. It means that if one demand values of human rights, he or she has to devote his or her effort to know why rights is necessary for survival and how can the rights obtained. Orend writes in a simple and explicit way to explain objects of human rights and principles that justify reasons of human rights. This book is suitable for a learner who starts to study human rights issue and also solve criticisms of human rights concepts. The author compares rights between two categories in most issues and questions. The author’s concepts of human rights are fair and strong enough to realize that human rights is a thing that has gradually grown up and important in the society to prevent injustice of the world.
The author tells about a serious argument among first, second and third generations of rights which develop according to ages. Second generation of rights, socio-economical rights are more concerned with developing countries than first generation of rights, legal and political rights, because to get basic necessities in life is more vital than to be decently treated. The author describes about Legal positivism and Michael Walzer’s thick and thin morality. Thick morality is a complex issue that includes moral rights, believes and social morality which are not universal, because it varies according to culture or religion. Most ambiguous issue in human rights concerns with thick morality; therefore, it cannot be differentiated what is right or wrong. But, humans do not always behave what they should do. Though they acknowledge what is morally right, they may behave in immoral way.
Human rights concern with holding duties because human rights are justified claims. Therefore, the author analyzes who hold the main duty between person and institution, and he concludes that both person and institution have duties. But, institutions should have more responsibilities because there may be some people who cannot take care of themselves enough, for example, children and uneducated people. Moreover, the more power and influence on someone’s vital need, the more responsibility is concerned with his or her rights. In Burma’s issue, as the military regime exercises isolation on the Burmese people to brainwash them, the regime alone has the responsibility on economic and social development of Burma. Since human rights protect and secure vital needs of human, negative rights, duties of justice are necessary and positive rights, duties of benevolence are just only supplementary. However, duties of benevolence frame moral requirement of humans’ lives and assist to enjoy minimally decent treatment that human rights specify.
As human rights develop in the western and Christian society, it is possible that human rights have bias of religion and culture. The author argues that human rights’ basic consensus of moral, legal and political protections do not have cultural difference and human rights are thin and minimal enough to fit in expression of cultural diversity. However, human rights may possibly vary in levels and values according to cultural, religious and economic background. In some developing “close-knit” society, advocacy for personal freedom and self-governance cannot be efficient. In American Rights document (1776), the concept that all men are equal as children of God is not consistent with all religions. In Buddhism, Buddha had never created men; therefore, explaining human rights can be sometimes biased in socio-cultural ways.
The criticism that human rights are anti-democracy is a surprising fact, because countries under dictatorship consistently ask for integration of human rights and true democracy. Human rights ensure everyone secure access to the objects of vital human need regardless of what majority prefer, but democracy favors what majority want. Both individual’s minimum decent treatment and majority’s maximum happiness are important. The author writes that there are still some connections between ideologies of democracy and human rights. Democracy’s “one person, one vote” is similar to universality and equality of human rights. The nature of self-governance plays a role in both ideas, because people should be free from interruption and unjust harm and create their own way of living.
Finally, in the context, the author discuses about the relationship between globalization and human rights. Though free-market capitalism is economic goal of poverty alleviation in future, some people worry that developing countries gain little benefit from international trade and market development. However, people from some isolated countries, such as North Korea or Burma, get almost no benefit and still struggle in poverty. Some countries produce goods and services with cheap labor and sell back to developed countries with low prices; therefore, the real work force do not get deserved wage of labor. Moreover, the author highlights an interesting question about immigration and refugee status as a possible matter for human rights advocates. According to United Declaration of Rights, only stateless or nationless people or people who lack personal security in his home land can enter into a country and ask for asylum. However, a right to allow entering the country one’s choice does not seems equal for everyone especially if the country is a developed country. Because of this issue, people from developing countries do not try to reason to get rights themselves and just only request to move into high-living status- countries. Therefore, international society should find a right solution for these refugees. Developed countries cannot give shelter for all people who are in poverty in third-world-countries.
In “Human Rights: Concept and Context”, the author gives a complete understanding of ideology of human rights. However, to apply concepts in the real world, some case studies or examples of violations of human rights in world history. Though the author writes about history in the context, it is not enough to explain how historical facts apply human rights. Therefore, the author should go deeper in historical data with interesting criticisms of concepts. Moreover, the author ought to add the context how Asians and other non-western civilization raise up concepts of human rights, since countries whose problems of violations rights have taken place in Africa, Asia and Middle East. After the reading the book, human rights are meaningful and every human being should understand basic of human rights to protect themselves and their society from violation.
No comments:
Post a Comment