The debate between cultural relativism and universalism has been a major issue for international human rights frameworks. Cultural relativism is the belief that different cultures have their own values and norms, which are valid within their respective societies. Universalism, on the other hand, is the view that all people are entitled to certain fundamental rights regardless of culture or society. This debate raises important questions about how these frameworks can balance between respecting diversity while also promoting equality and justice.
One way in which these frameworks negotiate this tension is through the recognition that different cultures may have different views on what constitutes a basic right.
Some cultures believe in female genital mutilation, while others do not. The framework must recognize this difference and not impose its own value judgments on those who disagree. At the same time, it must also ensure that women's rights are protected from harmful practices like this one.
Another approach is to acknowledge that there are universal principles underlying human rights but that they should be interpreted differently in different contexts.
Freedom of expression may need to be understood differently in countries where there is no concept of privacy or free press. In such cases, the framework must find ways to protect individuals without imposing Western values on them.
International human rights frameworks often rely on consensus-building processes that involve both experts and representatives from diverse cultures. By bringing together different perspectives, they can develop policies that reflect a broad range of interests and concerns while still upholding universality. They must also promote dialogue and understanding among different groups to avoid conflict and promote cooperation.
Balancing cultural relativism and universalism is a challenging task for international human rights frameworks.
By recognizing the complexities involved and working towards consensus-building, they can successfully navigate this tension.
How do international human rights frameworks negotiate between cultural relativism and universalism?
International human rights frameworks have been criticized for their lack of consideration for cultural differences, which has led to calls for a more nuanced approach that incorporates cultural relativism into the conversation. On the other hand, some scholars argue that upholding certain universal principles is necessary in order to protect vulnerable groups who may not have access to cultural protections. There are several ways in which this tension can be negotiated.