Judith, Bruce, and Bill provide MUCH food for thought for sure! Can't wait to hear more.
An added dimension worth throwing in the mix are the following two: 1) many intentions, groups, political situations, movements, etc., do not actually use the language of human rights, nor, perhaps even the assumptions, structures, etc., of human rights, but are constructing and co-opting (and everything in between) human rights nonetheless; and, 2) I have become more interested as of late in what I am calling "sociologies of resiliencies" to help locate and identify the places, spaces, etc., of human rights, that may or may not actually utilize that terminology.
Dr. David L. Brunsma
Professor of Sociology
Department of Sociology
Virginia Tech
560 McBryde Hall (0137)
Blacksburg, VA 24061
[log in to unmask]
Executive Officer, Southern Sociological Society
(http://www.southernsociologicalsociety.org/)
Founding Co-Editor of Sociology of Race and Ethnicity
(http://www.asanet.org)
Co-Editor of Societies Without Borders: Human Rights and the Social Sciences
(http://societieswithoutborders.org/)
Past Chair, Section of Racial and Ethnic Minorities, American Sociological Association
(http://www2.asanet.org/sectionrem/)
Race and Ethnicity Section Editor, Sociology Compass
(http://www.blackwell-compass.com/subject/sociology/section_home?section=soco-race)
Treasurer, Sociologists Without Borders
(http://www.sociologistswithoutborders.org/)
Co-Editor of The Handbook of Sociology and Human Rights
(http://www.paradigmpublishers.com/books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=298828)
(573) 355-0599 [cell]
"I may never prove what I know to be true, but I know that I still have to try." -Dream Theatre
From: Bill Armaline <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Sunday, April 7, 2013 12:15 PM
To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: U.S. Cooption of the Human Rights Movement Continues | Dissident Voice
All,
This is a worthwhile conversation. It illustrates part of the reason we introduce "the human rights enterprise" in our work as a new (2009) and needed concept in the (critical) sociology of human rights. The HRE allows us to see human rights as a terrain of struggle over power, resource, and political voice within real/actual social and political economic contexts. It allows for, and can explain how and why powerful states and private entities harness a human rights discourse and international legal regimes to achieve empire expansion or capital accumulation. It can also allow for and explain how nearly every empirical example of the expansion of rights/freedoms in practice (not in empty promises) has been achieved and/or secured through struggles against or in spite of the very states and powerful interests legally obligated to facilitate and protect rights practice in the first place (according to international law, hr instruments, and the expectations of dominant scholarship).
This conversation is another example of the limitations of dominant HR scholarship and its failure to wrestle with fundamental contradictions. It also explains how a great deal of hr scholarship has been easily harnessed for dastardly deeds, such as to legitimate war in Iraq and any number of neo-liberal forms of foreign intervention. Moyn's historical fantasies come to mind here, if anyone needs a recent example.
All that said, witness me less than shocked that the state would harness ANY useful discourse to achieve the ends of the owning/ruling class.... It should, however, alarm us when available (hr) concepts cannot explain the most obvious and predictable of social phenomena.
Thanks to David for pushing this conversation forward. I think it illustrates a great deal.
Hope everyone enjoys their Sunday. peace. b.
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 7, 2013, at 7:57 AM, BRUCE FRIESEN <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
There's no easy way to answer this, which would imply that monolithic observations (like the human rights movement has been coopted by the U.S.) are overly simplistic. Aside from the different levels to which David refers, one must consider the intentions of various actors, the strategies (by individuals, informal activities of groups, or formal activities resulting in policy) employed to achieve the intentions, the question of how those strategies are shaped by both domestic and international political situations, where human rights intentions rank at any given time on the list of other competing national priorities, and so on. A good deal more evidence is needed before such a bold claim could be substantiated. It doesn't mean that the claim isn't true, of course, but that the evidence presented is far from sufficient.
Academics are taught to think critically. This generally serves an important public function, but we need also to recognize that we operate with blinders, as this tendency can prevent us from recognizing and accepting that, sometimes, a situation simply is what it is (and in this case, complex). Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner (for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor) was a founding member and eventual President of Human Rights First before accepting his current position. Is this an indication of the cooptation of the human rights movement, or is it simply an indication of the Administration's commitment to putting in place both competent and committed individuals to further human rights?
I mention Posner since I had the opportunity of being part of an intimate gathering at the AAAS last October in which he spoke and then answered questions submitted by the audience. I was struck by his candor, self-reflection, and, well, a lack of professional "polish." He seemed quite authentic. I was equally struck with the simplicity -- perhaps naivete -- of his confession that the basic strategy of the State Department to further human rights worldwide was to provide people in non-democratic countries opportunities to access the internet and connect with each other with new technologies (you're welcome to draw your own conclusions as his presentation was videotaped: http://www.aaas.org/multimedia/. Scroll down). If what he presented is anywhere near the truth, I have to reconcile that information with some of my own favorite conspiracy theories.
Walsh and Rowley's article sensitizes us, of course, to the possibility of cooptation; a thesis that can then be compared to the broader pattern of information and outcomes to which we have access. There's merit in this.
My 2 cents,
Bruce Friesen
University of Tampa
________________________________
From: Human Rights & Social Justice [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Douglas Parker [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 4:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: U.S. Cooption of the Human Rights Movement Continues | Dissident Voice
David: I do not understand what you are referring to by "Both are complex concepts." There are clearly right-wing human rights advocates, e.g., Thomas Cushman, who argues that the Iraqi invasion by U.S. forces was a great humanitarian intervention, and those who are progressive human rights advocates who argue that the Israeli policies concerning the settlements in the Palestinian territories are illegal and immoral. So where has the US successfully co-opted the human rights movement? By appointing liberals to run Amnesty International or other human rights organizations? It's not that the US would not try but too many of us would spot it and point it out. The CIA probably has a unit that is trying to co-opt those who are engaged in critiques of what is going on in the US and other countries insofar as they are failing to uphold civil, political and/or social and economic rights. But there is and has been for a long time a plausible, though I think mistaken, argument that human rights advocacy has been hijacked in order to justify interventions in Libya, Syria and now North Korea as well as other countries. But while NATO did intervene in Libya from offshore, it has not intervened very much in Syria and it has not yet intervened in North Korea although the UN Mandate from the 1950's with Russia boycotting the Security Council probably does allow it to do so. So we should have some guardians who watch for the co-option of
human rights movement(s) but who do not confound their suspicions of the west with those who are advancing arguments concerning human rights. We can continue discussing these issues and others, e.g., when the SSF listserve will reappear (when it was closed down, the SSF Council indicated it would be several weeks before it was reestablished and it has now been several months) at SSS in Atlanta. --Doug
________________________________
From: "Brunsma, David" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Fri, April 5, 2013 2:25:52 PM
Subject: Re: U.S. Cooption of the Human Rights Movement Continues | Dissident Voice
I am curious about a discussion about this piece, because I do not think the US has "coopted" the "human rights movemnt". Both are complex concepts.
Dr. David L. Brunsma
Professor of Sociology
Department of Sociology
Virginia Tech
560 McBryde Hall (0137)
Blacksburg, VA 24061
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Executive Officer, Southern Sociological Society
(http://www.southernsociologicalsociety.org/)
Founding Co-Editor of Sociology of Race and Ethnicity
(http://www.asanet.org)
Co-Editor of Societies Without Borders: Human Rights and the Social Sciences
(http://societieswithoutborders.org/)
Past Chair, Section of Racial and Ethnic Minorities, American Sociological Association
(http://www2.asanet.org/sectionrem/)
Race and Ethnicity Section Editor, Sociology Compass
(http://www.blackwell-compass.com/subject/sociology/section_home?section=soco-race)
Treasurer, Sociologists Without Borders
(http://www.sociologistswithoutborders.org/)
Co-Editor of The Handbook of Sociology and Human Rights
(http://www.paradigmpublishers.com/books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=298828)
(573) 355-0599 [cell]
"I may never prove what I know to be true, but I know that I still have to try." -Dream Theatre
From: Claudia Chaufan <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>
Reply-To: Claudia Chaufan <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>
Date: Thursday, April 4, 2013 12:27 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>
Subject: U.S. Cooption of the Human Rights Movement Continues | Dissident Voice
http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/04/u-s-cooption-of-the-human-rights-movement-continues/
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Tablet
|
