Human Rights and the age of Inequality

  • Samuel Moyn addresses the stark incompatibility between the human rights solution and the equality crisis, which calls for a complement rather than a replacement.
  • He makes the case that the human rights movement and regime are ill-equipped to tackle widespread inequality.
  • Croesus, the final king of Lydia, as an illustration (reigned 560–546).
  • Croesus was a tremendously wealthy monarch who saw himself as the happiest of mortals.
  • He desired for his people to live in happiness and be free from all forms of sorrow.
  • But he had a problem—he didn’t want to spend his money to end his people’s suffering.
  • After being defeated, the Persian ruler Cyrus the Great and his army took control of all of his possessions, including the wealth he had collected for himself.
  • In the present world, where inequality exists and resources and means are unevenly divided, the scenario of Croesus was equivalent.
  • Despite the fact that every year on December 10th is observed as Human Rights Day, no action has been taken to ensure that rich and poor people around the world have equal access to rights and property.
  • The sole answer to all of these problems is distributive equality, but he believes that this is practically unachievable in real life or reality.
  •  The political economics and human rights histories are related. Here, two major eras are at play.
  • The first was the valiant era of post-World War II national welfare states.
  •  The second was the rise of political economy outside of the country in the 1940s.
  • The author draws a comparison between this scenario and the state of inequality and lack of resources in today's society.
  • Equal property and rights for wealthy and poor people worldwide have not been achieved.
  • You need to make sure that everyone receives the same amount of money in order to address all of these issues but in reality, it challenging to accomplish this.
  • He claims that there are two key steps to take in order to link the history of economics with human rights:
  • The first was the heroic era of national welfare states after World War II.
  • Second, in the 1940s, politics and economics took over the country.
  • Franklin Roosevelt's iconic State of the Union address demand for a second Bill of Rights with protections for the poor and middle class neglected three significant points: the participation of provincial America in the North Atlantic agreement, which envisions and pledges a world free from hunger. 
  • Favoritism forced the globe to divide into two camps after 1940, one led by the United States and the other by the Soviet Union. 
  • The human rights were severely harmed by this. Additionally, because these regimes prioritized "national well-being" over "equal rights," post-World War II independence did not bring about the wealth and human rights that were anticipated.
  • Man will not have essential liberties and true rights if this current socio-political system does not exist.
  • Human rights advocates claim that although human rights documents guarantee and claim that all people have equal freedoms and rights, this is not the case in the real world as it currently exists.
  • Should they start a new human rights movement? asks Samuel Moyn. He continues by citing Herodotus as an example of truth and reality in relation to the necessity for social and economic justice to be implemented globally, shifting wealth from the rich to the poor. 
  • Everyone is supposed to have an equal degree of freedom and rights, but in practice, this is untrue.
  • Humans won't be able to enjoy full freedom and liberties unless and until this economic and political system is still in existence. 
  • Huge and radical movements are necessary for an equal society, and the government must create and enforce laws that ensure that everyone has the same amount of money.
  • We are all destined to live in the same world as Croesus.
  • All of these, however, are unrealistic, improper, and extremely unlikely to occur in reality.
  • The need for a new human rights movement was debated by Samuel Moyn, who then illustrates the reality and authenticity of Herodotus’ accounts regarding the need for a redistribution of global socioeconomic justice under pressure from the wealthy to the poor.
  • Therefore, massive and radical actions are needed to achieve an equitable society and a fair share of the transfer of wealth and property from the rich to the poor, redistribution of means and resources, law-making and government enforcement of the proper distribution of wealth.
  • The rich enjoy happiness, freedom, and everything to the fullest extent, just like the colonists under the British administration, while the poor live in a world of illusion with their fragile equality and independence.

- Sarvesh SJB Rana
PhD in Political Science
                &
Honors in Literature 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

UNIT I MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint

Every morning I wake