Universal Human Rights in a Culturally Diversified World
UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS IN A CULTURALLY DIVERSIFIED Globe
INTRODUCTION
The preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted on 10th Dec 1948. This foundation of Human rights emphasizes on inherent dignity & of equal & inalienable rights to all members of the human family members internationally.[1] The all-natural law view as expressed in the traditional formulations of that approach or by virtue of the natural rights motion, is that specific rights exist as a result of greater law than positive or man made law. This ideal is supposed to govern everybody in time & space.[two] Seventeenth century natural lawyer John Locke is supposed to have located the existence of such inalienable rights as the rights to life, liberty & property. This inalienable rights to life, property & dignity of a human being is termed as human rights which all indivuals have a right to enjoy from birth irrespective of any gender/ class/race/nation/ethnicity/ color etc. Human rights are universal for getting aspirational goals at all times & places for containing core values like appropriate to life which are indeed universal. These rights initially started developing in the domestic spheres of unique countries which along with time spread internationally. Human rights law assigns legal rights & duties to non-state actors below international law & therefore forms a component of the post westphalian system. The safeguards of human rights are not restricted to any area or doesn't call for different parameters in different parts of the world depending on the culture & tradition in that part of the world.. The 1st generation of human rights basically had a liberal approach based on the concepts of Locke & Rousseau unlike that of the 3rd generation approach by Marx which was based more on survival rights like right to food & shelter comprising the fundamental rights to life of a man rather than perfect to property or worship. With the steady unequal economic development among the countries of northern & southern hemisphere, this trend of 3rd generation human rights have become predominant where South African countries plagued with apartheid concentrate more on economic rights rather than cultural & social rights unlike North American Countries.
WHAT IS CULTURAL RELATIVISM
Cultural Relativity is an undeniable fact which all moral & social institutions evidence as an astonishing cultural & historical variability. This doctrine is strongly supported by notions of communal autonomy & self determination. [three] There are two extreme positions of cultural relativism- radical cultural relativism & radical universalism. Radical Cultural Relativism holds that culture is the sole source of validity of moral proper or rule whereas radical universalism holds that culture is irrelevant to the validity of moral rights & rules which are universal. Radical Cultural Relativism can be broadly divided into two branches- strong cultural relativism & weak cultural relativism. Robust cultural relativism relies heavily upon culture as the sole basis on which moral rights need to emanate from. Weak cultural relativism holds that culture could be an very important source of the validity of moral rights or rule. Weak cultural relativism would recognize a comprehensive prima facie universal human rights & allow only relatively uncommon & strictly restricted nearby variations & exceptions. Weak Cultural Relativism is just a way brief from radical universalism.[4] Whilst discussing cultural relativism the most imperative controversies arise over practices which are defensible by internal standards but unacceptable by external standards. Now internal judgments are those which asks for regardless of whether the fundamental value framework is defensible in the framework of that particular society. An external judgment applies the typical of the evaluator no matter if the practice can or should certainly be accepted or defended. This internal & external evaluations matches up with or further elaborates the distinction between robust & weak cultural relativism. The stronger one's relativism , the greater one's reliance on internal evaluations.[five] Relativism rests on moral autonomy & communal self determination. To rely completely on internal judgments would make one particular abrogate his moral responsibilities as a member of cosmopolitan moral community & would demand for application of universal standards in external judgments. The more necessary a practice inside a system the much more the force of internal standards which can be over ridden only by particular strong judgments. The choice of internal & external judgments therefore is a moral selection. Sturdy & weak relativism can't be solely distinguished by the number of deviations they enable from universal standards, some qualitative measure is also necessary. Even especially weak cultural relativists may well allow considerable variation in the form in which most rights are implemented. Certain human rights are like essentially contested concepts in which there is a substantial but rather common consensus of meaning coupled with no less critical & apparently unresolvable conflict of interpretations. Standard arguments for cultural relativism can be based upon pre colonial African village, Native American Tribes, & classic Islamic social systems exactly where the claims for communal self determination are particularly robust. Exactly where there is a thriving indigenous cultural tradition & community arguments of cultural relativism based on the principle of self determination of individuals offer you a robust defense against external interference including disruptions that could possibly be triggered by the universal human rights.
