Human Rights And The Age of Inequality Essay Summary
Samuel Moyn starts the essay with a parable where he mentions Croesus an ancient Lydian wealthy king. Croesus is wealthy and he is noble too as he doesn’t want to see his people suffering. However, he has one weakness that is he doesn’t want to share his wealth in order to remove the suffering of the people. He has accumulated all the wealth for himself and later, the Persian king Cyrus the Great and his army defeated him and took all his wealth. Similar is the case with today’s modern human rights, the essayist argues. The present-day human rights regime and movement are simply not equipped to challenge global inequalities since we increasingly live in Croesus’s world. And, the modern form of Croesus, as the writer argues, hates repression and suppression of people’s freedom, however, it itself restricts the people to enjoy human rights by creating supporting inequality and unequal distribution of available means and resources to the people.
Though United Nations has adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948 and every year December 10 is celebrated as Human Rights Day, there haven’t been appropriate steps taken to counter the growing inequality among the rich and poor in the world. Though it is often considered that the rich and poor have equal access to enjoy rights, however, in reality, rich people can enjoy their rights to the maximum and the poor people cannot do so because of the limited wealth, resources and power they possess. And, to sort out this problem, there is one solution, i.e. distributive equality, however it is almost non-existence in practice and reality. Thus, the human rights of Croesus’ world, i.e. the present human rights are compatible with inequality.
The essayist in the essay argues two big stages that involve writing the history of human rights in relation to that of political economy. The first was the heroic age of the national welfare states after World War II. And, the second is the political economy ascended beyond the nation in the 1940s. He states that Franklin Roosevelt issued his famous call for a “Second Bill of Rights” that included socioeconomic protections in his State of the Union, but the most important three facts about that call have been almost entirely missed and his highest promise, in his speech, was not a floor of protection for the masses but the end of ‘special privileges for the few’, which further leads to the problem of egalitarian view of human rights.
Human rights after the 1940s suffered from their encounter with the national welfare. The human rights movement got repressed in the name of national welfare and nationalism, though ‘national socialism’ could help to boost the human rights movement to egalitarian human rights. However, the ongoing Cold War between US-led democratic nations and USSR-led communist nations gave priority to their own interests rather than the development of human rights. Likewise, the decolonization of the world during the post-war era too couldn’t bring desired development in human rights development since all these states prioritized ‘national welfarism’ rather than maintaining egalitarian human rights.
Moyn in his essay presents another issue of whether another human rights movement is necessary justice, like local socioeconomic justice, would require redistribution under pressure from the rich or not. The essay cites the truth expressed in Herodotus’ Histories that global socioeconomic to the poor. And, though there has been much progress regarding human rights development lately, there are still so many areas that need to be addressed. There has been a drastic mismatch between the egalitarian crisis and the human rights remedy that demands not a substitute but a supplement. Though the human rights activists argue that human rights regard human beings to be equal and assures their freedom principally (theoretically), there are so many areas that it cannot be applied (practically) in present real-life situations as long as the ongoing system of economy and socio- political structure exists. So, until and unless human beings are not equal economically, their rights regarding equality and freedom cannot be assured. And for this, the redistribution of means and resources is required – the rich should distribute a fair portion of their wealth and property to the poor, which appears to be impractical and inapplicable in the present scenario. However, the only way to make this applicable is to formulate and implement laws that favour fair distribution of wealth by the government and massive and radical movements regarding human rights are required even if it is hard to take place in reality. Nonetheless, the concept, awareness and discussion has already arrived that another radical human rights movement is necessary to maintain an egalitarian society and to ensure human rights to each and every human being that lives in this world. But, until this happens (no one knows when or if happens in reality), our common fate is Croesus’ world – where the rich enjoy human rights to the maximum and the poor live in the illusion of human rights ensuring equality and freedom.
Human Rights And The Age of Inequality Essay Exercises Solution
Understanding the Text
Answer the following questions.
a.What is the first human rights declaration adopted by the United Nations?
Ans.: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the first human rights declaration adopted by the United Nations. The United Nations adopted the first human rights declaration on_10
December 1948.
b.When is Human Rights Day observed?
Ans.: Human Rights Day is observed every year on 10 December.
c.What is the goal of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Ans:
The goal of the Universal Declaration of human rights is to ensure freedom and equality and protecting the rights of every individual everywhere.
d.What are two big stages that involve writing the history of human rights in relation to that of political economy ?
Ans.: The writer in the essay argues two big stages that involve writing the history of human rights in relation to that of political economy. The first was the heroic age of the national welfare states after World War II. And, the second is the political economy ascended beyond the nation in the 1940s.
e.What are the facts that have been missed in Roosevelt’s call for a “second Bill of Rights”?
Ans.: Franklin Roosevelt issued his famous call for a “Second Bill of Rights” that included socioeconomic protections in his State of the Union address the year before his death, but the most important three facts about that call have been almost entirely missed. One is that it marked a characteristically provincial America’s late and ginger entry into an already foreordained North Atlantic consensus. A second is that in promising “freedom from want” and envisioning it “everywhere in the world”, Roosevelt in fact understated the actually egalitarian aspirations that every version of welfarism proclaimed. And, the last is that though Roosevelt certainly hoped it would span the globe, it was to be nationally rather than internationally organized – in stark contrast to the assumptions of both political economy and human rights as they have prevailed in our time.
f.Write the truth expressed in Herodotus’ Histories.
Ans.: The truth expressed in Herodotus’ Histories is that global socioeconomic justice, like local socioeconomic justice, would require redistribution under pressure from the rich to the poor.
g.Why is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights important to you?
Ans.: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is important to all human beings including me because it ensures our rights and safeguards our freedom.
Reference to the context
a.Does the essay give ways how to stigmatize inequality? Explain.
Ans:
The essayist through his essay argues that the human rights movement at its most inspiring has stigmatized such repression and violence; however, it has never offered a functional replacement for the sense of fear that led to both protection and redistribution for those who were left alive by twentieth-century horror. Unlike that, the stigmatization of states and communities that fail to protect basic values is so long. But human rights advocates in their current guises do not know how to stigmatize inequality, and not principles but a new political economy would have to be invented to actually moderate it. But it would need to be so different as to be unrecognizable, and threaten the power to stigmatize in the face of the violation of basic values that activists have carefully and with much hard work learned to achieve. If this is correct, human rights movements face a deeply strategic choice about whether to try to reinvent themselves – or whether to stand aside on the assumption that as inequality grows, someday its opponent will arise.
b. Is another human rights movement necessary? Why ?
Ans.: In my opinion, another human rights movement is necessary. Though there has been much progress regarding human rights development lately, there are still so many areas that need to be addressed. Though the human rights activists argue that human rights regard human beings to be equal and assures their freedom principally (theoretically), there are so many areas that it cannot be applied into practice as long as the ongoing system of economy and socio-political structure exists. The essayist in the essay too, argues that there has been drastic mismatch between the egalitarian crisis and the human rights remedy that demands not a substitute but a supplement. And, the main issue raised in the essay is that until and unless human beings are not equal economically, their rights regarding equality and freedom cannot be assured. So, in order to assure that each human being practices human rights to his/her full potential, the redistribution of means and resources is required. And, for this, the rich should distribute a fair portion of their wealth and property to the poor, ‘which appears to be impractical and inapplicable in the present scenario throughout this world, However, the only way to make this applicable is to implant laws that favour this by government and massive and drastic movements. And even if, it is hard to take place in reality. Nonetheless, the concept, awareness and discussion has already arrived that another human rights movement is necessary to maintain an egalitarian society and to ensure human rights to each and every human being that lives in this world.
Reference beyond the text
a. What are the challenges in maintaining human rights in Nepal?
Ans.: Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in the world, from birth until death. They apply regardless of where you are from, what you believe or how you choose to live your life. They can never be taken away, although they can sometimes be restricted – for example, if a person breaks the law, or in the interests of social and national security. These basic rights are based on shared values like dignity, fairness, equality, respect and independence. These values are defined and protected by law.
In the context of Nepal, though we have a constitutional body for Human Rights and a number of INGOs and NGOs working in Nepal in order to maintain Human Rights, the situation is not satisfactory here at all. These governmental and non-governmental bodies do nothing except collecting data and forwarding it to a global community and asking for the fund to solve the issues. Moreover, political instability and corruption have pushed the country towards extreme poverty, child labour, girls trafficking, organ trafficking and so on. Most of the government and its officials are not found to be loyal to the country as they are not able to maintain the ethics of Human Rights throughout the country.
There have been several occasions that have occurred in Nepal when human rights have been abused. A clash between the Nepalese government forces and the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN-Maoist) occurred between 1996 and 2006, resulting in an increase in human rights abuses throughout the country. Both sides have been accused of torture, unlawful killings, arbitrary arrests and abductions. Nepal was home to the most disappearances in the world during the conflict. Moreover, rich and powerful people in Nepal are manipulating the officials and taking Human Rights as a joke. One of the finest examples which shows that all Nepalese people do not have equal access to Human Rights is “The Rape and Murder Case of Nirmala Panta’.Nirmala Panta, a 13-year-old girl from Kanchanpur, Nepal was found raped and murdered in a sugarcane field near her home on 27 July 2018, after she had gone missing the day before. The news of the incident went viral on social media and received widespread condemnation. Various justice campaigns and mass protests were organised throughout the country in the subsequent days and months to put pressure on the government and the police. But, to date, the culprit of the incident has not been found. This single case shows the present condition of Human Rights in Nepal.
There are several factors such as – nepotism, corruption, bribery, illiteracy and ignorance of people, lack of formulation and implementation of sound’ rules and regulations against offenders, etc have created challenges in maintaining human rights in Nepal. Likewise, in Nepal, rich and powerful people are enjoying human rights to the maximum and are even abusing these rights, however, in contrary to this, the poor and powerless people do not enjoy their rights at all, rather they become the victims of different human rights abuses and there is nobody to support them. In addition to this, human rights movements are not properly mobilized; rather they have been politicized heavily. So, many challenges exist in Nepal in maintaining human rights.