Poverty, Human Rights, and the Global Society

In a speech delivered by proxy in 1994, the Myanmar Nobel laureate and human rights activist Ang San Suu Kyi, then under house arrest in her home country, argued that economic development would not produce the culture of peace and democracy that the poor need in order to feel empowered and enfranchised. 

In the face of the economic downturn of the past year, the same might be said for the poor even in developed countries where democratic traditions seem firmly established, and where at least domestic peace has prevailed. One might conclude that, no matter where we stand in the course of national development, market-style economic instruments will not secure us the fulfillment that Aung San Suu Kyi’s rights discourse seems to promise.

Since 1948, the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights has served as the standard for international efforts to establish rule of law and a modicum of peace and justice around the globe. At the same time, most of the signatories to the Declaration do not completely live up to the challenge expressed in the document, and the universality of the Declaration has been challenged on grounds that it expresses a Western hegemonic intent towards Asian countries and cultures. Malaysia’s Mahathir bin Mohamad has been perhaps the most vociferous proponent of this view, but it might equally be read out of Lee Kuan Yew’s complex invocation of Western as well as Confucian values as he built his Singaporean success story, and similar claims for traditional values from the leaders of developing countries in the Middle East and Africa.

As we continue to address the problem of global poverty, we will need to determine what standard we apply, at the level of multi-lateral as well as non-governmental organizations, to ensure that the UN Declaration either stands or—if it is deemed irrelevant because outdated—does not obstruct the establishment of a different standard by which to engage in helping the world’s poor. 

We have seen versions of that other standard in the proselytizing for a globalized market economics; nativist political agendas; more evolved, pluralist, cultural traditions such as the democratic institutions Amartya Sen identifies in traditional cultures; and religious fundamentalism that resurrects old values for a new era.

In order to get at the beginnings of a solution, we might ask the following questions:   

What are the intellectual property rights and social capital of the poor?

Is political freedom possible without economic independence?

Property rights and wealth underpin social organization and governance in virtually every society. Given that truth, does economic development by definition upset traditional community values and power?

What role do religious groups play in countering or reinforcing the last half-century’s rights discourse?

Join Theresa Fay-Bustillos in the conversation.