On the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The UDHR is supposed to be a document that elicits positive feelings. After all, the articles outline the human freedoms that all citizens of the world should be granted. However, when I think of the Declaration, all I can muster is a mild sense of amusement at its futility.
Why?
Well…in answer to this question, I present the 5 reasons why I don’t believe in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
1. This document has no legal standing. A compilation of thoughts on what a civilized society should act as cannot be taken seriously.
2. “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration without distinction of any kind….” That is a lovely sounding article. However, countries that signed this declaration have, time after time, denied basic rights and freedoms to citizens who did not, for one reason or the other, fit into their communities. Homosexual people, for example, have struggled with continuous segregation and ostracizing. Minorities have been oppressed and denied education; they have been prosecuted, singled-out and…well, the list goes on.
3. This document has been used to begin wars and justify massacres. “Oh, human rights are being violated! Let’s go and violate some human rights and war treaties, as well as undermine the autonomy of a country in order to prevent more human right violations.” Admittedly, there is a much more coherent way to make the previous statement, but reality remains the same. Having the UDHR facilitates the process of manipulating a country into war for the interests of a few who seek to profit.
4. [People] should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” This is, certainly, the most laughable demand the Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes. Is it not in human nature to compete and create conflict, fight, etc.?
Is this document actually asking us to go against our most basic instincts?
5. Expanding on point number 4, most of the other rights outlined by each of the articles are unattainable. For example, how can we ask a third world country to provide basic education to all of its citizens when many of them are starving? Most malnourished children are not really pondering on the answer to the fundamental question of “what is 2 + 2?”
In conclusion, although it would be utopic to be able to inhabit a world in which our fundamental rights are respected, especially without the need of a declaration to be drafted, the truth is that we don’t. And although the intentions behind the Declaration might have been noble (at least, I hope so), the end result was disappointing.
Hi Monica 🙂
I agree with you in the sense that the UDHR is nonetheless…an ideal. Of course, when you look back on the past history of human conflict and violence, it is clear that it is seemingly impossible to rid ourselves of our instabilities and insecurities. As you have mentioned, the UDHR seems to come from a generally noble stand point, but it is sad to say that it is something that will never be fully recognized by ALL peoples.
Yet, I still have hope that the basis of the UDHR continues to reach out to otherwise, opposing views. It should continue to be acknowledged and considered. I feel that although idealistic, there is always room for knowledge, a change in perspective, and possibilities to improve what is already present.
Still, I am in total agreement that it does sound a bit far fetched in terms of actually being a possibility in this diverse and complex world. Humanity needs to get it together, face the facts, and work on improvement. 🙂
I concur with your statement “there is always room for knowledge, a change in perspective, and possibilities to improve…”
However, I’m still hesitant to see the value of a document that ignores very basic concepts and sets unattainable goals.
On the other hand, I suppose that we should aim for the sky, specially when discussing serious topics such as the universal rights of people.
After your reply, my derision towards the UDHR is somewhat lessened. 🙂
I never thought about tackling UDHR (I just assumed that it is right and good:) ) but from the first reason that you stated, ‘it does not have any legal power’, it made me think about it again. I agreed with you that it does not have any legal authority to put this as a law.