Benjamin Dirks

POLS 321

Professor Sum

02/10/2022

What are human rights? The Oxford dictionary states they are “a right that is believed to

belong justifiably to every person.” The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

defines human rights as, “universal legal guarantees that belong to all human beings and that

protect individuals and groups from actions and omissions that affect fundamental human

dignity.” According to the Philippine Commission on Human Rights, “human rights are

supreme, inherent, and inalienable rights to life, dignity and self-development. It is the essence

of these rights that makes man human.” The United Nations states that, “human rights are rights

inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or

any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and

torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more.

Everyone is entitled to these rights, without discrimination.” Human rights tend to be

overlooked. Much of the world still has a problem with acknowledging basic rights and those

who violate them. It has gotten better since World War II. But, if you look at the current

situation in China and the “genocide” with the Uyghurs, there are few rights being protected.

Human rights truly depend on where you are at in the world.

There are many different views of the right and wrongs of human rights. Different

religions can have different ways they interpret human rights. Countries all have their own laws

based on what their culture and past dictate. No matter where you go, there will always be
different ways to do things. Some things are legal in countries where in others they are not. This

should not apply with human rights. Human rights should be the same across the board

wherever it is you may be. Humans are born with basic human rights, regardless of race,

religion, geographical location, to name a few. It is a tough subject to talk about and try and get

people to be on the same page as you and others. But if you think about it, there are still people

in the US doing things without hesitation that are clear cut violation of basic human rights. Not

only here but almost everywhere in the world. There is not one easy way to make it all go away

and never have to deal with violations of human rights again. It is a huge process and needs help

from pretty much everyone on the planet. We will not get universality because there are too

many places that if they were to adopt the way that other countries view human rights and its

violations, they would not have any more power because that is how their regime is set up.

Even economically there are states hesitant to go in and do something about current situations

happening in the world now. The Genocide Convention (1948) defines the violations as such,

killing/serious harm to members of a group, inflicting conditions on a group likely to cause

harm, and preventing births/transferring children. The convention also defines culpability as

committing or conspire acts of genocide, attempting to commit genocide, and complicity in

genocide. All the states that have deemed Chinas actions against the Uyghurs genocide are

committing an international crime by not stepping in to do anything.

How countries apply the ideals of human rights changes as societal perception of those

rights evolve. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech if it does not incite violence.

As recently as 2007, hate speech that did not incite violence was protected by the First

Amendment. As we have seen in current society, hate speech in any form is not tolerated.
 Universality is a utopian goal. In a perfect world, all people would be afforded basic

rights. Universality is not attainable in the US, let alone the whole world. It is not attainable

because of the sheer number of different cultures in any given state. Each identifiable by their

unique customs and beliefs. This is magnified and its likeness is found globally. Too many

leaders are willing to minimalize segments of their own countries populations to further their

own agendas. To them, their people are just a mean to an end. It is all about power and the

people are just the pawns. Throughout the United States, our society tends to minimalize certain

populations. Some of these include the homeless and mentally deficient or ill. The elderly are

also targeted as such unless they are in a position of authority, power, or political importance.

How often have we seen a young person with a mental disability thought of as less than whole

while an elderly person, in a position of power, that has diminished capabilities is covered with

excuses and given respect. Where are the basic equal rights in that? Throughout the pandemic,

we have seen hospitals given the order to deny the patients their basic human rights.

Nicole Sirotek, a registered nurse specializing in critical care, trauma and flight, as well

as a mastered prepared biochemist, gave testimony to congress about, “the gross negligence,

medical maleficence… and complete medical mismanagement of these patients.” She further

testified of the “handicapping of medical professionals doing their job,” Siroteks testimony

included accusations that pharmaceutical companies “practiced” on minority, disadvantaged, and

marginalized populations. There were people who had no advocates, as the agencies in place to

advocate for them were closed due to “sheltering in place” orders. Patients were given

remdesivir, which was killing the patients. People who were given two or more doses had a 25%

or less chance of survival. Remdesivir is now an FDA approved drug and is still killing patients.

Is this any different than genocide in foreign countries?

 Cultural relativism plays a large part in explaining why universality will not work. The

difference in culture can be something as simple as the different rules and laws applied to the use

of alcoholic beverages. In China, they view any criticism as an attack on their honor and is seen

as personal. In the US, it is all over the news daily. Within their culture, one of the worst things

one can do is to tarnish another’s honor. If you were to burn Chinas flag in China, they would

have you killed. Whereas, if you burn the US flag on American soil, they will not do anything

because it is protected under the first amendment. The conceptions of good and evil are based on

cultural norms be of each society. You cannot apply the universal declaration of human rights as

they are viewed to all cultures. Each culture human rights differently based on their religion

their past. What is seen and good and evil one country may look different in another. There is

not one right in the universal declaration of human rights that can be seen the same by all

entities.

Diving deeper into the 30 basic human rights listed in the Universal Declaration Human

Rights, we will find that many rights are connected and/or dependent. The concept of all humans

being free and equal directly connect to having the right to life, not being discriminated against,

or enslaved. If one is considered innocent until proven guilty, they must also have been given the

right to trial and fair treatment by the court. As well as being held equal before the law. A

person’s right to privacy should include the freedom to move and reside in a place of their

choice, the right to own property, marry and have a family, believe in what they want, and

openly express how they feel without ramifications. In a democracy one has the right to take part

in the government and assemble, as well as choose their field of work. All rights share the

distinction of allowing a practice or giving something to a human being that permits choice or

gives the opportunity for betterment of one station.

 Indivisibility states that all rights depend on one another. The major categories of rights

considered in indivisibility include civil, political, economic, social, and cultural. Indivisibility

states these rights are complimentary, they reinforce one another and work best when

simultaneously implemented. You need one in order to have the other. Unfortunately, the

concept of indivisibility is often used to further political ends and do little to promote the rights

of the individual. Recent US history shows that in the 1960s-70s economic and social rights were

given greater importance which led to the right to development and there was much economic

growth. Social and cultural rights were emphasized in the 1990s. This led to scrutiny of

underdevelopment and poverty. Depending on the prevailing attitudes of the time, often one area

of rights given precedence over another. While desirable, indivisibility as a whole, is not

attainable.

In a utopian society, the application of both universality and indivisibility could be

achieved. Globally human rights are continually sought after. Unfortunately, universality is

unattainable due to differences between cultures and religion. Religion has a massive impact on

the unattainability to achieve universality. There is also no possibility of it ever happening due

to the different types of governments world-wide. Over time, humans have experienced much

conflict due to cultural differences. Even more, because of cultural differences, we are

seemingly teetering on the brink of war now. The world as a whole is seen through many

perspectives. Can we realistically expect everyone to see it through the same lense and get

along?