The relevance of Culture to the Human Rights Discourse
Introduction
As a theory, universal human rights must precede over any cultural rights demands. Human rights are however often in conflict with cultural practices and values when it comes to practical enforcement, a phenomenon that is more often than not, oversimplified and misconstrued as less complicated. Human rights are essentially accommodative to cultural values and allow for their promotion and recognition. While there is a legitimate call for cultural pluralism and the need for respecting and celebrating a diversity of cultures, the demand cannot supersede fundamental human rights that allow for the protection of human dignity, integrity, and well-being. This paper delves into empirically discussing the relevance of culture to the human rights discourse.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was established in December 1948 by the international community as their exceptional commitment to observing and guaranteeing a package of fundamental human rights that everyone must enjoy for the simple fact that they are human beings (Chow, 13). Since the ratification of the framework, the world has gained a dominant discourse legitimizing struggles against the violation of fundamental human rights by other rights; political, civil, economic and cultural. Even with the existence of the framework, specific human rights continue to be disproportionately violated in varying intensities.
CULTURAL RELATIVISM AND UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS
Cultural relativism calls for acknowledgment of cultural differences hence respect and sensitivity to people’s cultures that are different from one’s own. Cultural relativism proponents strongly assert that local customs can preserve human dignity, a phenomenon which contends that human rights disrupt and intrude the traditional mechanisms used to protect lives, freedom, security, and liberties of people. The aspect is however weakened by the violation of human rights in some communities, for example, those who sexually mutilate their women and children. Cultural relativism also proposes that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is culturally imperialistic and is morally unjust (Chow, 12-15). By this, it suggests that no particular set of rights is superior to the other for the reason that the context of cultural rights is more specific and different values are embedded in different cultures.
Pursuing universal human rights is close to furthering political liberalism, for instance, good governance, market capitalism and the rule of law. There is, therefore, more emphasis on political and cultural rights than there is on other values. In that context, human rights are considered as an extension of colonialism, expansion of western imperialism and liberalism for the advancement of the interests of the Western people. To some extent, this argument makes sense because embracing Western culture, capitalism and style of democracy are required for one to enjoy human rights, which is not necessarily the case (De Gaay Fortman, 2011).
CONCLUSION
In spite human rights seeming to be a projection of western ideologies and philosophies to serve their interests, they tend to put a stop to abuses of human rights. They particularly downplay violation of women and girls’ rights in many parts of the world and the need to put the situation under control. Essentially, universal rights are not made up of any specific cultural standards but rather one legal standard collectively applicable to the international community. The constitutional rule of human rights to some extent reflects cultural rights. It should not matter where human rights originated from as they cannot be ascribed to any religion or culture and are meant for the advancement and serving of the common good of humanity.