Individual versus Collective Rights

One class I am taking during my last quarter at DU (almost done!) is the Discrimination, Minorities, and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the major focus of the course is the debate on individual versus group, or collective, rights. Human rights, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, refer to rights as applied to individuals by virtue of being human. Therefore, opponents to the idea of collective rights argue that since individuals are human and individuals are the ones who comprise a group, there is no need to make a distinction between individuals and groups. All individuals, regardless of the group they belong to, are subject to the human rights as outlined in major international documents. On the other side, proponents to the idea of collective rights emphasize that there is often a failure to recognize and celebrate differences among distinct populations and as a result, certain groups consistently have their rights violated. These certain groups must then be afforded additional protections to make sure their rights as individuals, and as group members, are protected.

While I am able to understand the position on each side, I see the problem elsewhere. The issue is not whether human rights belong to individuals, to groups, or to both; the major issue is who falls under the category of a human. The reason certain people are consistently discriminated against is the fact that dominant groups often do not see them as fully humans. If someone is not viewed as completely human, whether on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality, age, or nationality, that someone will not be regarded as deserving the rights afforded to humans. She will be treated as less than human and so will the entire group she belongs to. If that individual’s rights are not respected, why should we expect that the rights of the group she belongs to will be respected? 

In my opinion, a focus on the debate about individual versus collective rights and on creating additional conventions and documents to protect these is a focus away from the real issue. Therefore, even though international documents on human rights are important to the further recognition of these rights, much more needs to be done in order for all people to be regarded as human and treated as such. 

-       Krasi

Victim or Survivor

Ever since I decided to transition from the field of psychology to the field of human rights, I have had to update my resume several times to include the many exciting volunteer, internship, and academic opportunities I have had the privilege to complete. One specific word substitution, however, seems to be the most important revision I have had to make so far. Under the qualifications section, instead of dedication to victim assistance, my resume now reads dedication to survivor assistance. The change might seem subtle and perhaps will not even be noticed by many who review my resume, but it expresses completely the shift from a view that places those in need of assistance as powerless, dependant, and unable to make it without support to a view that regards them as strong, independent, and able to take charge of their lives. 

The debate on whether to refer to abused vulnerable populations as victims or survivors emerged in an Introduction to Human Rights class. The teaching assistant played a video clip of a well-respected journalist visiting a war-torn region in a sub-Saharan nation to speak with those still around and doing their best to keep living. When the clip ended, a discussion ensued and many of my classmates mentioned the role advocates should play to immediately assist “these victims.” At that point, I had to intervene and emphasize that as far as I was concerned, I did not see a single victim in that video clip. I saw women cooking and taking care of children, men searching for shelter to spend the night at a somewhat secure location, and children playing as if they had no care in the world. They had no comfortable and spacious homes, no modern amenities, and no brand-name clothes and shoes, but none of the people interviewed cried, complained, or demanded help. The people I saw in that video clip were survivors, not victims. Survivors who could adapt to the most inhospitable and dangerous environments, who could manage to grasp the value of life even when it is uncertain and painful, or maybe because it is uncertain and painful, and who were content simply to be alive. I have noticed similar attitudes among many human trafficking survivors. These survivors are an inspiration and they need no charity. What they need is an opportunity to enjoy their live, however uncomfortable it might seem to others. 

-      Krasi

Cry or Laugh?

I don't think I've spoken much about this but I'm deeply concerned about the state of things in regards to Muslim Americans. I've been watching as crazy allegations, hate crimes and the public discourse on Muslim Americans has gotten uglier.

I'm Muslim. I'm American. I'm tired of this.

That said, I do see the humor in the ridiculous allegations that are brought up. Let me enlighten you:

Terror babies? Six degrees of separation to terrorism? Really? I don't know whether I should laugh or cry!

National security should be a concern for all of us but what we should not tolerate is mud slinging which is what is happening right now. As shown in the video, terror babies allegations and shady logic based on insufficient and incorrect intelligence is inappropriate especially for elected officials. I formed this opinion long ago and Anderson and Rep. Ellison alluded to it: this is about attention, grabbing on to the political/social zeitgeist of the day to further your own need for attention. Well if that's what these people want, they need to leave for Hollywood because the political arena is certainly not the place to do this.

As for me, I'm gonna go and alternate between laughing, crying and organizing against this type of nonsense.

Great resources:

American Civil Liberties Union

Amnesty International: Security with Human Rights

Muslim Profiling and Behavioral Profiling



- A

Silence is Betrayal

Do we really help when we act on the impetus to help?

Following up on the previous post focused on the dangers of viewing human rights advocates as infallible and accepting their practices and approaches as applicable across contexts and always resulting in positive change, I decided to include a video here that the Introduction to Human Rights lab instructor presented to us in class this past quarter. I actually really enjoyed the video as well as the comments made by Slavoj Zizek and would recommend it to anyone interested in a different outlook toward the idea of helping others. 

 - Krasi

The Human Rights Advocate

With another quarter under my belt, I feel that I am a few steps closer to understanding the multitude of issues surrounding the human rights regime and its attempt to target violations around the world. A particular topic that caused controversy in one of my classes is the role of the human rights advocate and the potential for harm each advocate carry with him or her.

I believe that to think of the human rights movement as a panacea that in and of itself will resolve all the issues in the world causes more problems. Believing that it will work just as long as everyone accepts it promotes the misconception of homogeneity and aggravates the fight for human rights. As David Kennedy warns, responsibility should not be taken from the shoulders of activists and organizations that purport to promote and fight for human rights. The blame should not be on some evil people who refuse to accept the human rights regime. Refusing to acknowledge the potential issues with transferring the human rights regime and the extras it is accompanied by in new contexts harms not only the idea of human rights, but it also has negative effects on those the activists claim to assist. Advocates should be professionals but never at the level of complete arrogance and conviction that what the advocate knows will always, under any circumstances, work. Rather, the advocate needs to focus on a local issue and even though armed with universal ideas and tools, s/he must realize that those will work differently across different contexts.

Change comes and should come from within, not from the outside. Advocates should think globally with human rights as universal, but they should focus on acting locally. They should choose their battle and educate themselves on one particular area with human rights abuses, become immersed in the culture of that area, adapt to their way of life, understand truly where they come from and why they are in this condition. Most importantly, the advocate will be able to see the situation from these people’s point of view and determine, as one of them, what they need to improve their condition. An outsider will always be an outsider. The idea of outsiders as the ones who could help reinforces the establishment of certain groups labeled as victims, refugees, weak, abused, the powerless. These labels do not help with the distinction between those who need help and those who do not. Rather, they further exacerbate the problem by placing the so-called victims on a negative level and expecting them to elevate themselves to a positive one. After all, we cannot start with placing people as completely unable to defend themselves and then expect them to easily become fully independent, productive, and self-confident that they can provide for themselves and can fight for their own freedom.

Ultimately, human rights advocates are not superheroes with super powers and the ability to always bring about positive change. Rather, they are human beings with their own biases, beliefs, and downsides that if unaccounted for, could lead to more problems instead of solutions. Personally, I believe in everyday human beings as heroes who fight the injustices in the world. These are the true heroes, but they are heroes not because they have good intentions and always bring about positive outcomes, but because they acknowledge their humanity, and thus vulnerability and faultiness, and are prepared to face failures and learn from them.

On that note, I just recently saw a movie with a song in its soundtrack that truly made an impression on me. I, of course, could not help but post it here.

-      Krasi

Denver Film Festival

It is almost the end of the quarter and instead of thinking about the two 25-page papers I have to write and the upcoming statistics final, I am mostly concerned about the number of films I can go and see at the DenverFilm Festival. What can I say? It is not my fault the event is taking place right before finals! 

As a film fanatic and a budding human rights advocate, I have chosen two films I definitely plan to go and see. One is about the extent of human trafficking in Eastern Europe and the other one is about a journalist who was not afraid to fight for what she believed in and consequently paid the ultimate price. Even though I have not yet seen any of the aforementioned films, I highly recommend them to anyone with a sliver of interest in human rights. 

The Price of Sex

A Bitter Taste of Freedom

- Krasi

Zara

Ah fast fashion. You allow the average person the opportunity to wear the latest trends at a reasonable price but at what cost to the greater good? I've written about Forever 21's unethical practices and it seems that another fast fashion retailer is now being investigated.

Zara, a Spanish company, is being investigated by Brazilian authorities after being tipped off about alleged slave labor practices. Different company, same structure/policies/pressure as other fast fashion retailers (see: Forever21). You can read all about it on Forbes.

Have you ever shopped at Zara? I've been in one but didn't buy anything at the time and now don't intend to until the investigation is complete.


- A

Wally world

My series on retailers begins with the most villainized: Walmart! Walmart is the largest retailer in the world, operating nearly 9,000 stores worldwide (source). Why has Walmart become so villainized? Many many reasons which is why I'm splitting the information into two separate posts. Today we'll talk about Walmart's unethical practices within the United States.

Walmart, like many large corporations, frowns upon unions. All employees must sign away their rights to join a union. What does this mean? Should you be mistreated, poorly paid, and ignored, who do you turn to? Walmart has been slammed with numerous lawsuits. Just to name a few: gender discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, and racial discrimination. What Walmart, and many large corporations, know is that should these unhappy employees become organized (i.e. unionize), they become a force to be reckoned with. They would then have to increase wages and engage in fair practices and who wants that, right? Walmart is notorious for their union busting tactics. If they catch wind of anything they will exert pressure on individuals to prevent them from organizing.

What kind of pressure? It all begins when the Labor Relations teams come into the stores, holding meetings where they berate unions, presenting only one side of the issue. Team members leave scared and confused about unions, only having heard one opinion. Union activists are banned from stores so they never do get to hear the benefits of unionizing.

Other underhanded tactics include management eavesdropping on employees, threatening employees with pay cuts, benefit loss, or even job loss should they organize. According to Human Rights Watch,



"Wal-Mart’s relentless anti-union drumbeat creates a climate of fear at its US stores. Many workers are convinced that they will suffer dire consequences if they form a union, in part because they do not hear pro-union views. Many are also afraid that if they defy their powerful employer by organizing, they could face retaliation, even firing. Human Rights Watch found that Wal-Mart heightens this fear with its arsenal of unlawful anti-union tactics. Wal-Mart has sent managers to eavesdrop on employees. According to former workers and managers at one store, it has even ordered the repositioning of surveillance cameras to monitor union supporters. It has told workers they will lose benefits if they organize. The company has discriminatorily banned talk about unions and prohibited union flyer distribution, while allowing discussion of other issues and circulation of non-union materials. It has disciplined union supporters for policy violations that it has let slide for union opponents. And it has illegally fired workers for their union activity." Source

Source

Why is this so important? It's important because Walmart has taken away the voice of their employees. They cannot get together and raise concern over how they're treated. Walmart loves to tout that they create tons of jobs in the United States. While they are, no doubt, a large employer, many of their employees are kept just under the requirements for benefits. According to the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UCFW), only 52% of Walmart's workforce has insurance and for those that do, it is extremely costly. Add to that the low amount they are paid in the first place and you have a significant number of their workforce who is on welfare. According to UCFW, Walmart employees are utilizing billions of dollars in benefits a year to subsidize health care that they are not receiving from Walmart. That's money out of the taxpayers' pockets.

Yes we can all argue that the people that are working at Walmart have a choice and if they pursued a better education then they wouldn't be working at Walmart. What about the small towns where Walmart is the largest employer? What about those people who can't go to college either because of financial concerns or they're just not cut out for it? Are we willing to say that these people 'deserve' to be treated this way? Maybe those are harsh words but is that not what we're indirectly saying when we don't stand up for them? Should they not, at the very least, have the right to stand up and be heard?

Source

So what can we do? As I've said before (and sure I'll say again many many times) our money is the most powerful tool we hold. Every time we buy something, we are casting a vote. If you choose to stop shopping at Walmart, you're letting them know that this behavior is not ok.

Let's go one step further. Business is business. While Walmart has made steps as of late to remedy some of their issues, they will not willingly become as ethical as you or I would like. The only way they will do that is if they have to, i.e. laws. There are many movements active right now regarding changing labor laws so that corporations cannot do all the things Walmart is accused of. While I believe in the goodness of people, business is all about the bottom line so we shouldn't expect Walmart (or any other business) to change because they want to 'be good'; we have to force change or it won't happen.

Resources:

WakeUpWalmart

UFCW

Human Rights Watch



- A

International Women's Day

Happy International Women's Day (IWD) everyone! Did you know that it is the 100th anniversary of the holiday? It was first observed in 1911 in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and Denmark. More than one million people attended various events that first year. (source)

  Source

I'll be celebrating today by thanking my mother for being an amazing woman and being mindful of the fact that I am so.darn.lucky to have been born into a family and lived in a country that afforded me opportunities that the majority of women in the world do not have.

Check out how people all around the world are celebrating!

Additional Resources:

Women Watch

International Women's Day

United Nations

Amnesty International

How will you be celebrating IWD?

- A

Why you be hatin?

Most of my friends know of my disdain for Walmart. I try not to mention it because as the majority of people shop at Walmart, saying you hate it makes for awkward moments at parties.

Source

Me: ''Oooh those plates are cute, where'd you get them?' 

'Thanks! They were a great deal! I got them from Walmart'

*Rearing head back* 'What?! I.hate.walmart. You know that they have major ethical violations all around the world, including the United States?! Those plates were probably made by some poor kid who didn't even get paid!'

*Blank look on face* 'Oh. OK. I'm sorry?'                                      

See what I mean? I've gotten a little less intense as I do think it's unfair to attack people for shopping at certain places because most people don't know what they're buying. Sure, I like to get a good deal as much as anyone (OK probably more than anyone); just ask my friends. I don't, however, want to do it in a way that encourages bad behavior on the part of major corporations.

I've talked about this before and I'm now starting regular feature wherein I'll pick a store or brand and evaluate them from an ethical standpoint. My goal is to educate myself and hopefully enlighten you dear readers as to the options we all have to 1) look cute 2) buy cute things 3) waste money stimulate the economy 3) help support honest business practices that help the impoverished around the world rather than oppress them.

My question to you is: are there any brands or companies you would like to see reviewed? Let me know and I'll definitely try to do some digging to see what I find!

-A

TAKEN

I recently saw the movie Taken and was reminded once again of the great obstacles facing human rights activists fighting against the nefarious practice of human trafficking. The movie itself did not portray any human rights activists or organizations seeking the elimination of the practice. Moreover, the story presented is not what truly happens in real life (Although, secretly, I’d like to believe that if one individual can cause so much damage to the traffickers, then just imagine what all of us joined together could do). The movie, however, exposes the criminal activity, serves as a warning to potential victims, highlights some of the major aspects of the criminal activity that make it hard to eradicate, and becomes an eye-opener to those denying its existence.

One aspect of the trafficking in persons that makes it extremely hard to eliminate is the wide-spread involvement of high-ranking officials and law enforcement officers, the people who should be protecting the victims. Even those who are not directly involved in the trafficking and refuse to realize the true nature of the activity contribute to its continued presence by simply closing their eyes. Another important aspect is the outrageous amount of money criminals make off of the kidnapped/forced/coerced women and girls. The cost of obtaining the merchandise is petty; the revenue is mountainous. 

It is very important to note that the girls kidnapped are not necessarily homeless and alone. The common errors, as revealed in the movie, that young women and girls make are not simply talking to strangers (men or women) but allowing that person to find out where they live (by sharing a taxi) and informing them of the fact that they are on their own. The moment they have done this, they have become the perfect preys.  

Regardless of the victim’s background, however, the common denominator is lack of knowledge and awareness on the side of the victim and the strict organization of the trafficking operation. The girls are taken and 96 hours later, they disappear for all those who have known them. 

I think the most heart-breaking moment in the movie was when it was evident that the main character will save his daughter, but all the other girls remained behind. No one came to save them. We can only suspect what their fate would be, but by the looks of it, there was probably no happy ending for them. This is the reason it is of utmost importance that all people are educated about the nature of human trafficking, the signs to look for to notice victims, and the steps to be taken towards the eradication of the practice. Information on how to do that is available at many of the links provided on this blog. If you are interested in making a difference, I would strongly recommend that you review them and learn how to become a modern-day abolitionist.

- Krasi

Human Trafficking

Throughout history, philosophers, scientists, religious figures and politicians across nations have in one way or another proposed, challenged or supported the idea of basic human rights. Human rights refer to the rights as possessed by someone because he or she is a human being; these are rights that transcend beyond one’s socio-economic status, race, ethnicity, sex, and nationality. However, an examination of the history of human rights reveals that even those who strongly support the establishment and preservation of certain rights that all humans are entitled to, will somehow find a sound reasoning that some populations are sub-human and as such, do not deserve to enjoy the luxury of those basic human rights. This rationalization has fostered the maintenance of slavery not only in the past but also in the contemporary modern world of supposed conveniences and freedom for all.

Even though it might come as a surprise to many, slavery is by no means an issue of the past. Furthermore, today’s slavery is much more nefarious as the new slaves are cheaper and abundant and no restrictions exist when it comes to race and ethnicity. Those disadvantaged are enslaved both within the lines of their own nations and by being trafficked across international borders. Currently, it is estimated that 27 million people are held in some form of slavery. Most slaves are forced to work in agriculture, mining, and prostitution. Often slaves work in factories that feed our global economy, like cocoa, cotton, oriental rugs, diamonds and silk (Free the Slaves).

It is important to realize that sweatshops and other exploitative labor is, although terrible, not slavery. Sweatshop workers and migrant laborers are exploited by being paid very little, forced to work long hours and often abused at their workplace. Slaves are subjected to all these conditions, but additionally, they have lost their free will and they cannot walk away. Most slaves are paid nothing at all, and the physical and psychological violence used against them is so complete that they cannot escape their condition as a slave (Free the Slaves).

The traffic of persons is a serious violation of human rights that denies the right for freedom among people. In a world where news travel with the speed of light and the opportunities to acquire knowledge about any world issue are limitless, it is disappointing and a huge disgrace for such a crime to be allowed to thrive and prosper. With human trafficking people are not merely oppressed; they are denied the right to be human and their existence has been reduced to that of a cheap product that brings its owner revenue and that could easily be disposed of once it is no longer needed or becomes damaged. What is even more frightening is that the traffickers as well as the consumers view the victims as products, without feelings, emotions, and desires. For as long as there is a demand for a product, there will be persons supplying it. Therefore, to successfully approach the issue people need to look at both sides of the transaction: the traffickers as well as the consumers. It must be acknowledged that the only successful solution to the problem is not just reducing the number of people trafficked or increasing support for those granted freedom; the only feasible solution is for the above two to occur while all governments show no tolerance toward organizations involved in human trafficking and unite and mobilize everybody in this universal fight for human rights.

-K