Human Rights and the Age of Inequality
 |
| Samuel Moyn |
About the author
· Samuel Moyn is Jeremiah Smith, Jr. Professor of Law and Professor of History at Harvard University.
· In 2010, he published The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History, and his most recent book is Christian Human Rights. His areas of interest in legal scholarship include international law, human rights, the law of war and legal thought, in both historical and current perspectives.
· In intellectual history, he was worked on a diverse range of subjects, especially twentieth-century European moral and political theory.
· He has written several books in his fields of European intellectual history and human rights.
· His book Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World (2018) is the most recent work.
· He is currently working on a new book on the origins and significance of the humane war for Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
· Over the years he was written in venues such as Boston Review, the Chronicles of Higher Education, Dissent, The Nation, The New Republic, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal
Central Idea
In “Human Rights and the Age of Inequality’, Samuel Moyn deals with the drastic mismatch between the egalitarian crisis and the human rights remedy that demands not a substitute but a supplement. He points out that human rights regime and movement are simply not equipped to challenge global inequalities.
Understanding the text
Answer the following questions.
a. What is the first human rights declaration adopted by the United Nations?
The first human rights declaration adopted by the United Nations is the mobilization for the economic and social rights.
b. When is Human Rights Day observed?
Human Rights Day is observed every year on 10th December. It is the day when United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
c. What is the goal of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
The goal of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is to provide a list of the basic entitlements that humans deserve thanks to being human itself.
d. What are two big stages that involve writing the history of human rights in relation to that of political economy?
There are two big stages that involve writing the history of human rights in relation to that of political economy. They are:
i. The first, clearly, was the heroic age of the national welfare states after World War II.
ii. Political economy ascended beyond the nation in the 1940s.
e. What are the facts that have been missed in Roosevelt’s call for a “second Bill of Rights”?
The facts that have been missed in Roosevelt’s call for a ‘second Bill of Rights’ are:
i. It marked a characteristically provincial America’s late and ginger entry into an already foreordained North Atlantic consensus
ii. In promising ‘freedom form want’ and envisioning it ‘everywhere in the world’
iii. Though Roosevelt certainly hoped it would span the globe, it was to nationally rather than internationally organized – in stark contrast to the assumptions of both political economy and human rights as they have prevailed in our time.
f. Write the truth expressed in Herodotus’s Histories.
The truth expressed in Herodotus’s Histories is global socio-economic justice, like local socio-economic justice, would require redistribution under pressure from rich to the poor, something naming and shaming is never likely to achieve, even when supplemented by novel forms of legal activism.
g. Why is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights important to you?
To me, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is important for it aims at providing a list of basic entitlements that human deserve thanks to being human itself. It is a milestone document which proclaims inalienable rights entitled to every human being regardless of race, religion, sex, colour, origin, language and other status.
h. What is Universal Declaration of Human Rights? (Extra question)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document that proclaims the inalienable rights that everyone is entitled to as a human being and humans deserve thanks to being human itself.
Reference to the context
a. Does the essay give ways on how to stigmatize inequality? Explain.
Yes, the essay "Human Rights and the Age of Inequality" by Samuel Moyn provides a framework for how to stigmatize inequality. Moyn argues that a key aspect of a successful human rights movement is the stigmatization of practices and institutions that contribute to inequality. He believes that by casting a critical eye on the systemic drivers of inequality, such as the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few, and framing these issues as human rights violations, it is possible to mobilize public opinion and effect change.
Moyn suggests that the human rights movement should focus on the most extreme forms of inequality and the injustices they entail, such as poverty, homelessness, and discrimination. By highlighting the human costs of inequality and linking them to the failure of existing human rights norms and institutions, he believes it is possible to generate a popular movement that puts pressure on those in power to address these issues. In this way, the essay provides a roadmap for how to stigmatize inequality and build a new human rights movement that is better equipped to tackle this ongoing challenge.
b. Is another human rights movement necessary? Why?
Yes, another human rights movement may be necessary in light of the ongoing issues of inequality and violations of human rights. In his essay "The Human Rights and the Age of Inequality," Samuel Moyn argues that the current human rights regime has failed to eradicate inequality. A new human rights movement would focus on effective implementation of Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and maintaining equality. The persistence of poverty, discrimination, and other forms of inequality in many parts of the world highlights the need for a renewed focus on human rights that addresses these issues and works towards a more just and equitable society.
Reference beyond the text
i. What are the challenges in maintaining human rights in Nepal?
Lack of political stability and governance issues: Political instability and ineffective governance has made it difficult to ensure the protection and promotion of human rights in the country.
Poverty and economic inequality: A large segment of the population still lives in poverty, which exacerbates the challenges of ensuring access to basic human rights such as healthcare, education, and adequate housing.
Discrimination based on caste, gender, and ethnicity: Despite efforts to address it, discrimination remains a significant issue in Nepalese society, particularly against marginalized groups such as women, Dalits, and ethnic minorities.
Limited access to justice: The judicial system in Nepal is often slow, corrupt, and ineffective, making it difficult for individuals to seek recourse for human rights violations.
Poor human rights protection infrastructure: There is limited capacity for protecting human rights, including inadequate resources for human rights organizations and insufficient training for law enforcement and other government officials.
Post-conflict challenges: Nepal is still recovering from the decade-long civil conflict that ended in 2006, and efforts to address human rights abuses committed during the conflict have been slow and inadequate.
Summary
Summary of Human Rights and the age of inequality
In this essay, the writer Samuel Moyn says that the drastic mismatch between the egalitarian crisis and the human rights remedy demands not a substitute but a supplement. He points out that human rights regime and movement are simply not equipped to challenge global inequalities.
Moyn opens the essay with a parable about the wealthy king of Lydia, Croesus, who used to think of himself as the happiest person in the world. He wished his citizens would be happy and free from suffering, but he didn’t want to invest his money to solve the poverty of his people. His collection of huge property was captured by the army of the Persian King of Cyrus the Great. The author associates this situation with the modern world where inequality exists since the resources are distributed unequally among the countries and people. A democratic regime needs to respect basic civil liberties. Extreme poverty needs to be eliminated from society. Atrocities of war, torture and cruelty are some of the challenges to human rights. It is hateful that some people are at the top of affluence while others are at the bottom.
The writer opines those human rights after 1940 suffered much. The world was divided into two groups: US-led democratic nations and USSR-led communist nations. It resulted in the cold war. Likewise, the decolonization of the world during the post-war era made the countries think only of themselves. The states favored ‘national welfare’ instead of supporting universal human rights.
American president Franklin Roosevelt issued his famous call for “a second Bill of Rights”, a year before his death. But the bill was criticized for missing three important points. It marked provincial America’s entry into the North Atlantic consensus and nothing more. Secondly, he understated the real egalitarian aspirations which could not be beneficial for the mass but privileged few only. It was like a national project of reconstruction.
There is a wealth gap between the rich and the poor. The universal declaration of human rights acts as the directing principle saying that all human beings are born free and are equal in dignity and rights, but despite the declaration, inequality prevails. People’s rights and laws are limited in official documents and not in practice. There is racism and hierarchy. During the period of the cold war, the capitalist nations signed enthusiastically to welfarism, but it remains only in the documents. After the world wars, welfarism has been limited to national concerns. It has overseen global importance.
The wealth gap between the rich and the poor after the decolonization was another reason that countries adopted national welfarist ideas. The author Samuel Moyn does not opine that the replacement of the human rights forms that are in practice shall correct this mistake. The moral significance of the existing form is not problematic. He says there should be a match between the need and the remedy for the guaranteeing of human rights. He cites the example of truth and reality mentioned in Herodotus’ history which dealt with the need for redistribution of global socioeconomic justice from the rich to the poor.
December 10 is celebrated as Human Rights Day each year. Besides celebrating the day, there are no measures forwarded for equal access to rights and property among the rich and poor. The solution to these all sorts of obstacles, according to the writer, is to distribute the means and resources equally. Though human rights activists argue that the declaration of human rights emphasizes equal freedom and rights to all, they are confined only in the papers. It has not been applicable in real-life situations.
The writer says all people, irrespective of their countries and race, cannot receive freedom and human rights in the existing sociopolitical structure. Massive and radical movements, equal distribution of wealth from rich to poor, relocation of means and resources, formulation of laws for maintaining justice and effective implementation of law and order by the respective governments are some of the solutions the writer forwards. The equal distribution of wealth between people, which is the major solution, seems almost unrealistic or inapplicable in the current structure. Our common destiny is like that of the people of Croesus where the rich enjoy happiness, luxury, and freedom while the poor have to live in misery.
