To the Righthouse

To the Righthouse

By Global Campus of Human RightsScienceSocial Sciences
Download on the App Store

To the Righthouse episodes

  • S1.3 - Negotiating tensions

    Are human rights an unrealistic luxury?

    Pragmatically-oriented expressions of human rights scepticism do not take issue with the concept of human rights as such. Rather, they question the relevance and efficacy of human rights in particular settings. They may acknowledge that human rights express a noble ideal to which one can aspire, but in current circumstances it is a luxury that society cannot afford.

    This argument is based on the implicit premise that compliance with human rights inevitably happens at the expense of other societal objectives, notably economic progress and national security and stability, and conversely, that the prioritisation of such objectives sometimes necessitates a disregard for human rights.

    An obvious response is to seek to demonstrate that the given societal objectives can be realised in a human rights compliant fashion. However, in order to be convincing, this needs to be demonstrated in concrete terms in the actual situations that people inhabit. The devil here lies in the detail: How to constructively negotiate such tensions?

    46 min
  • S1.2 - In small places close to home

    Whose values? Whose experience? Are human rights inclusive?

    Value-based objections to human rights are commonly stated with reference to culture and/or religion. They may further be linked with a claim that human rights are shaped by and express distinctly Western values.

    The perception of a certain degree of incompatibility between human rights standards and prevailing cultural norms is widespread and not adequately answered by arguments at the theoretical level. While cultural traditions indeed are dynamic and shaped both by external influences and internal contestations, it must by the same token be acknowledged that value transformations happen slowly and that points of friction between local values and international human rights norms cannot be overcome all at once.

    It therefore makes sense for human rights advocates to ask themselves how to react in practical terms to such concerns and focus on preventing the most egregious abuses while seeking to find points of compatibility that bring human rights close to home.

    48 min
  • S1.1 - Clearly unclear

    Human Rights under pressure: when, why and how to engage with sceptics?


    In the current era of rising illiberalism and backlash against hard won human rights standards, there is a pressing need to stand firm, hold governments to their agreed international obligations and adopt a confrontational 'naming and shaming' approach to abuses and critics of Human Rights.

    If this is a pertinent reaction in many situations, it should also be recognised that voices of scepticism may express valid concerns. There may be something important to be learnt from carefully listening to critical voices. This said, there are clearly also voices of opposition to human rights and patterns of neglect and abuse that call for resolute resistance.

    As it is not clear how best to calibrate and balance the different available approaches, our series starts with the following question: is it possible to determine when to adopt an adversarial 'naming and shaming' approach towards detractors and when to engage in constructive good faith interaction with exponents of scepticism towards human rights?

    48 min

About To the Righthouse

From the publisher's feed

Much as a Lighthouse warns of dangers and guides travellers towards safety, our Righthouse alerts to risks for human rights and points towards secure protection. Like the Lighthouse of literary fame,…