En anden verden II

I forlængelse af med-punditokrat Foss’ glimrende post vedrørende den “franske syge” og det parallelunivers, de der lider heraf bebor, fandt jeg det relevant, at bringe prøvesmagning på nogle af de herskende tanker indenfor menneskerettigheds”forskningen”, her i form af følgende opslag fra “Journal of Globalization, Education and Society”:

Journal of Globalization, Education and Society

Special issue on Globalization and human rights

Call for papers

Human rights has possibly become the dominant
discourse of moral concerns in global politics. Human
rights education has become a focus for formal
education and for campaigns on expanding public
knowledge and reflection. Yet, the concept of human
rights is also contested for the western and male bias
in its original expressions
.

Some view the rapid expansion of human rights as an
element of political globalization. This is partly due
to the expansion of international law and the
establishment of the international criminal court and
the regional tribunals; partly it is due to forms of
protest that have sprung up in many parts of the world
coming together in global events like the World Social
Forum and UN world conferences
. The rhetoric of
humanitarian intervention has also contributed to the
growth of human rights as a legitimate concern for the
international community.

Economic globalization also highlights human rights
issues related to privatisation, loss of social
security, the rights of migrant workers, global
marketisation of education, etc. Cultural
globalization in turn highlights questions of value
differences and the protection of indigenous cultures
and diversity from the homogenising forces of
globalizing capitalism.

Probably many other connections between globalization
and human rights could be perceived. In this Special
Issue of Globalization Education and Society we invite
work with a focus on globalization and human rights
from any discipline or multidisciplinary field. The
Special Issue will follow the policy of the journal to
include work on education in the wider context of
learning.

Dette tankesæt er mainstream blandt mange af de toneangivende akademikere i menneskerettighedsmiljøet. Jeg måtte i min tid som studerende ved “the European Master of Human Rights of Democratization” i Venedig lægge øre til uanede mængder af lignende meningsløst vrøvl (og naturligvis også pløje mig igennem Habermas).

Menneskerettighedsbevægelsen lider i den grad af den inter-disciplinære tilgangsvinkel, som pt. dominerer, og som har tillokket antropologer, sociologer etc., der sikkert er dygtige indenfor eget felt, men hvis uvidenhed om basale retlig teori, principper og deres konkrete anvendelse gør, at menneskerettighederne er blevet løsrevet fra den juridiske ramme de i sidste ende nødvendigvis må indgå i for at være praktisk anvendelige. Den eneste disciplin der ikke er velkommen i menneskerettighedsbevægelsen er økonomi, som der på dette område ellers kunne være god grund at skele til, især hvis man går ind for omfordeling som en menneskeret.

1 Comment

  1. Fin post. Jeg aner et begyndende Punditokrat-projekt her: Kortlægning af pomo-parallel-universerne indenfor vores respektive discipliner. Jeg bemærkede en enkelt ting i citatet — nemlig argumentet om “den globaliserende kapitalismes homogeniserende kræfter” i forhold til “indigenous culturesand diversity.” At “global-kapitalismen” homogeniserer og nivellerer ind i en tilstand af US-domineret kulturel ensartethed er selvfølgelig konventionel visdom i hele globaliserings-diskussion. Det er naturligvis forfærdeligt for pomoerne fordi de næsten alle sammen abonnerer på myten om “the noble savage”. Men at det stort set er vås og vrøvl leverer den yderst tænksomme Tyler Cowen et meget fint argument for i bogen “Creative Destruction: How Globalization is Changing the World’s Cultures,”

Skriv et svar

© 2017 Punditokraterne

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑