Inequality and Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharine Young

The human rights movement has done little to address economic inequality. So says Samuel Moyn in Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World. Reviewer Katharine Young disagrees. The good work promoting equality has been done, but this time, it has been done outside the United States. Had Moyn originally looked to where Young is now pointing, his book would have been much improved.

Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier

This chapter explains that the driving force behind the protection of human rights worldwide, today and for roughly the past thirty-five years, has been the nongovernmental human rights movement. Intermittently during the last two-and-a-half centuries, citizens' movements did play important roles in efforts to promote human rights, as during the development of the antislavery movement in England in the eighteenth century and the rise of the feminist movement in the United States in the nineteenth century. The contemporary human rights movement responds to victories and defeats by shifting focus from time to time, but it shows signs that it will remain an enduring force in world affairs. Efforts by those outside governments have been particularly important in extending the protection of rights beyond national boundaries, and it is in the present era that they have been most significant.


Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier

This chapter highlights the significant role of the human rights movement after September 11, 2001. It points out how Al-Qaeda made no claim to respect rights after 9/11, making them insusceptible to the human rights movement's main weapon: embarrassment. It also details how the United States played a crucial role in the promotion of human rights worldwide during and after the Cold War. The chapter analyzes the consequence of the decision to make prevention the defining concern of U.S. government policy in responding to the threat of terrorism for human rights. It looks at the consequences of the primacy given to prevention that removed one of the restraints on the use of torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.


Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier

This chapter analyzes Amnesty International, the best known and by far the largest human rights organization in the world, which was established in London in 1961. Its creation was a major milestone in the emergence of an enduring human rights movement. From the start it was intended to be a global organization. That is, those who would participate in its efforts would come from all over the world, and those on whose behalf it campaigned would be persons everywhere who suffered abuses of human rights. Today, Amnesty International is probably somewhat less influential, both in the United States and globally, than it was at its high point in the 1970s and the 1980s. Some would argue that this reflects the extension or dilution of its mandate to cover the full range of human rights issues, including economic and social rights.


2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.


2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 70-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Gallagher

Public opinion in the United States and elsewhere celebrated the liberation of Afghan women following the defeat of the Taliban government. The United States promised to stay in Afghanistan and foster security, economic development, and human rights for all, especially women. After years of funding various anti- Soviet Mujahidin warlords, the United States had agreed to help reconstruct the country once before in 1992, when the Soviet-backed government fell, but had lost interest when the warlords began to fight among themselves. This time, however, it was going to be different. To date, however, conditions have not improved for most Afghan women and reconstruction has barely begun. How did this happen? This article explores media presentations of Afghan women and then compares them with recent reports from human rights organizations and other eyewitness accounts. It argues that the media depictions were built on earlier conceptions of Muslim societies and allowed us to adopt a romantic view that disguised or covered up the more complex historical context of Afghan history and American involvement in it. We allowed ourselves to believe that Afghans were exotic characters who were modernizing or progressing toward a western way of life, despite the temporary setback imposed by the Taliban government. In Afghanistan, however, there was a new trope: the feminist Afghan woman activist. Images of prominent Afghan women sans burqa were much favored by the mass media and American policymakers. The result, however, was not a new focus on funding feminist political organizations or making women’s rights a foreign policy priority; rather, it was an unwillingness to fulfill obligations incurred during decades of American-funded mujahidin warfare, to face the existence of deteriorating conditions for women, resumed opium cultivation, and a resurgent Taliban, or to commit to a multilateral approach that would bring in the funds and expertise needed to sustain a long-term process of reconstruction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document