Many will readily acknowledge there being rights of humans which trump the rights of states. Thus, these rights are aptly labeled ‘Human Rights,’ by which we may measure and admonish state-conduct. However, in contemporary Human Rights discourse, there is an emerging strand of thought in the academy that is Anti-Human Rights. To understand the foundations of Anti-Human Rights discourse, and to address the arguments that have been put forth, I analyze and incorporate the works of John O. Nelson, Raymond Geuss, (...) Wendy Brown, and Slavoj Žižek. Based on the same, I argue that the core arguments to these assertions are unpersuasive. I attempt at viewing Human Rights justification in different terms, and, to argue for the legitimacy of Human Rights while abandoning the search for justifications in nature, U.S. Foreign Policy, or Neo-Marxist views. (shrink)

There have been a number of attacks on the idea of human rights recently, both in the course of political and diplomatic encounters across the globe, as well as in the more systematic literature of political philosophy. These attacks do not always distinguish between the Lockean, negative and the more recent positive rights traditions. For example, at the 1993 summer conference on Human Rights in Vienna, Austria, many diplomats from different regions of the world raised such questions as 'When we (...) speak of human rights, are these conditions that everyone everywhere ought to enjoy?’Is it perhaps the case that human rights are one thing for people in one part of the globe and another for those in another part?' These questions were raised in large part about the rights spelled out in the United Nations Declaration of Universal Human Rights, including both negative and positive rights–e.g., the rights to freedom of expression and to public education, respectively. (shrink)

This study investigated how Korean students apply principles of human rights to social issues in Korean and international contexts and how they differentiate between human rights and other values. Open-ended, task-based interviews were conducted with 22 high school students in Korea. Korean students were aware of human rights violations involved in any given social issues, but their explanations focused only on the principle of political and economic equality. However, Korean students showed contradictory reasoning when they pointed to human rights issues (...) in international or Korean settings; whereas they pointed to structural oppression as the cause of human rights violations and applied universal principles of human rights in the international context, they considered individual choices and traditional values in the Korean context. This study indicates that Korean students’ understanding of human rights is influenced by a variety of contextual factors in and out of school, and it suggests that social studies educators must challenge students’ prior experiences with and ideas about human rights issues in settings outside of school. (shrink)