Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article investigates how the idea of universal human rights has been co-opted by the prevailing (neo)liberal consensus in support of processes associated with capitalist globalization. So-called “civil and political” rights form the core of (neo)liberal values upon which free market, laissez-faire economics are based, but the idealism of the dichotomy of first and second generation rights is profoundly ideological. Through an examination of the idea of the international citizen, it is argued that the attempt to introduce a duty to promote the widest possible social good falls far short of an obligation to respond to claims for alternative conceptions of “economic and social” rights; far less alternative models of social affairs. Drawing on empirical evidence from Africa, the article contends that the dominance of (neo)liberal rights is integral to the emerging (neo)liberal constitution of the global order effected in the name of “human rights”, “democratization”, “citizenship”, “good governance” and “civil society”. Never in the recent past have the founding principles of universal rights been so instrumentalized in the service of power, to such an extent that … in the opening years of the twentieth-century, we can speak of a veritable apogee of hegemony and an unprecedented crystallization of the hatreds that it arouses. (Bessis, 2003 Bessis, S. 2003. Western Supremacy: The Triumph of an Idea?, London: Zed. [Google Scholar]) Rather than being essentially a product of modernity, as I have suggested, human rights are now seen as our principal hope for protection from modernity … As with all successful normative institutions, rights come to be seen as the answer to the very social problems of which they are, in fact, a primary symptom. (Hopgood, 2000 Hopgood, S. 2000. Reading the small print in global civil society: the inexorable hegemony of the liberal self. Millennium, 29(1): 1–25. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar])
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Evans et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: