Universalism vs.

Cultural Relativism
 With the chartering of UNDHR, human rights became universal and
morally and in some cases legally respected. However, culture still plays a
very important role due to its peculiarities and particularities.

 Due to the presence of intolerant societies and intercultural clashes (even

in the globalized world) protection and respect of human rights is a
challenge especially gender related human rights.

 Varying cultural values, beliefs and norms brings up the debate of

universalism vs. cultural relativism primarily because certain human rights
violations are justified in the name of cultural relativism.
 The Debate
 The American Anthropology Society argued before the enactment of
UNDHR that “values and standards are relative to the culture from
which they derive and the declaration cannot be only perceived in
terms of values of Europe and America.”

 Cultural relativists challenged the UNDHR on four grounds:

1. An attempt by cosmopolitan individuals to draft human rights who
didn’t reflect the rights of ordinary people.
2. UNDHR reflects only Western values.
3. International human rights regime cannot impose human rights that
may be in conflict with local cultural and political practices.
4. Interpreted as a sign of Western cultural imperialism.
 Universalists on the other hand believe that drafting of UNDHR involved
key figures from third world or non-Western societies such as Cuba,
Panama, Egypt and Lebanon and tried to incorporate the traditional
values of such societies.

 Another argument pertains to the fact that UNDHR, for many states has
become a “customary law” where constitutionally these states have
incorporated the provisions of UNDHR.

 Furthermore, they argue that out of the 58 countries which drafted

UNDHR 20 were from Latin America, 4 from Africa and 14 from Asia.
While Communist bloc, South Africa and KSA abstained on the basis of
cultural relativity.
 The Notion of Universalism
 Proponents of universalism believe that UNDHR and related treaties
must be applied in all the countries and they must prevail even if they are
in conflict with cultural and religious practices.

 Universality must not be confused with conformity as universality

promotes diversity by protecting cultural freedom. It is based on equality,
dignity and indivisibility.

 Universalists also believe that human rights and freedoms are inherent in
nature and dignity of every human being and basic standard or principles
must be acceptable to all cultures, religions and political systems.
However, they disregard cultural sensitivities and hence is also
sometimes called as “Radical Universalism” which may not be advocated
by many.
 Three ways in which human rights are universal without being radical are:
1. Almost 90% of UN member states have ratified the UNDHR which makes
it the most important internationally recognized document.

2. Overlapping consensus universality.

3. Functional universality; where human rights articles responds to standard

threats irrespective of cultural, religious or political background.

 Promulgation of human rights in traditional and communal (duty vs.

rights) vs. liberal and individualistic societies.

 Promulgation of human rights in the age of globalization.

 The Notion of Cultural Relativism
 The doctrine of cultural relativism doesn’t only recognize cultural differences
but it also implies specific ways in which evaluations or judgments should be
made.

 Cultural Relativists argue that permitting international norms to override the

dictates of culture and religion is a violation of state sovereignty (but is
sovereignty only culturally relative?)

 According to relativists, rights only exist when a society perceives them as

such and consider culture as the only source of morals and rights. Radical
relativists accepts culture as the only source while weak relativists take
culture as ONE of the sources.

 Cultural relativism is attractive from two aspects; everyone should be

respected and respect entails respect for culture of others as well (but do
cultures respect each other?)
 Cultural relativists use the term “exceptionalism” when it comes to human rights
implementation and use following arguments:

1. Relativity of norms (ethical relativism)

2. As UNDHR is a Western product therefore it can’t be transferred from one culture to
another (incommensurability claim)
3. Powerful states attempt to politically control the weak (imperialism)
4. Introduction of foreign human rights norms will destroy native values (casual
complaint)
5. Human rights norms are irrelevant as traditional values provide better protection
(irrelevancy criticism)
6. Some human rights are suppressed to protect other rights (trade-off argument)

 Cultural relativists believe that the “multi-culturalization” of the human rights is

paramount and in multiple domains. They also believe that the West uses human
rights as a foreign policy tool against non-Western states such as in the case of
development assistance or to civilize the un-civilized.
 Reconciliation of Universalism and Cultural
Relativism
 Kofi Annan stated: “No single model of human rights, Western or other,
represents a blueprint for all states”

 Keeping this in mind both the universalists and relativists can make an
effort to reconcile the two opposing views on human rights.

 Proponents of international human rights law believe that the gross

human rights violation that takes place around the world are not
culturally conditioned. They are mostly the outcomes of interests or
exploitation.

 Opt-out model and a two-stage approach; internal cultural discussions

and a cross regional dialogue.
 Cultural transformation can be also brought about in the following
manner:
1. Promoting cross-cultural universals
2. Cultural development; evolutionary not a revolutionary process
3. Gradualism as opposed to abolition.
4. Indigenous participation
5. Substitutes should be devised to replace undesirable practices.
6. Power of ethno-centric forces must be acknowledged.
7. Presence of patriarchy must be recognized.
8. Importance of economic impoverishment as a common denominator
of all the cultural practices.
9. Positive impact of educational programs.