Ellen Messer's "Anthropologists in a World with and without Human Rights"

Humans are the formers of their cultures and the products of them as well. Naturally,

anthropological researches and struggles for human rights are interrelated parts of cultural

studies. Therefore, an Ellen Messer's paper published in Exotic No More is worthy of

consideration within a culture course.

Messer's "Anthropologists in a World with and without Human Rights" exposes

anthropologists' theoretical and practical contributions to the ongoing struggle for human

rights. It also clarifies the contradiction between human rights principles and practices.

The paper opens with some clear evidence of persistent and multiple violations of human

rights by governments even those which have signed human rights conventions. Such

evidence is Zapatista rebellion originated in response to state-sponsored violence against

peasants demanding their rights. Further cases of violations, resistance, plus

anthropologists and other activists' contributions to this field are detailed in four major

sections.

Human Rights Development and Anthropology

This section reviews the historical phasing of human rights compared to a background of

developing theoretical and practical work of anthropologists. It finds out whether their

stances are accordingly supportive of or opposed to governments or institutions.

For instance, the American Anthropological Association's Executive Board officially

rejected in 1947 the notion of universal human rights as ethnocentrically Western. They

were not very satisfied with the umbrella document of The Universal Declaration of Human

Rights UDHR adopted in 1948. Instead, they championed protection of indigenous people

and emphasized that different people have different concepts of rights.

Over the interim of decades (1948-88), the chronology of binding UN treaties is divided

into four generations of human rights paralleled both changing economic developments and

anthropologists roles.

In the 1950s and 1960s, on one hand, the main human rights emphasis

centered on reinforcing civil political rights through enhancing economic

development. Afterwards, anthropologists went further and introduced

nutrition and public health programs.

On the other hand, they defended respect for cultural diversity, indigenous

knowledge against international conventions obligations of sharing Western

technology benefits with the developing world.

Sawsan Fawzy Mohammad Ali European Cultures

1st Presentation Dr Mona Ibrahim

14-11-2011

Session( 2)

Over the 1970s, economic-social- cultural rights received more attention as

development rhetoric shifted to growth-with-equity. Experts recognized that

extra efforts should be put in to meet the basic needs of people especially

the poor. Conferences were held for this purpose like the World Food

Conference in 1974. During this period, anthropologists of medicine and

nutrition further linked human rights to development goals, plans and

practice. They also contributed ethnographic and political economic

insights to official UN discussions about genocide and discrimination

against women such as the UN Convention on the Prevention and

Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1951, the UN Convention on the

Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against women in 1979.

This generation of struggle demonstrated three principles: the interrelation

between civil-political and economic-social-cultural rights, the need to

consider collective as well as individual rights, and the linkages of human

rights to development process.

These three concerns grew together in the 1980s. Third World leaders

introduce the rights to development to their people. Over this period,

anthropologists spoke out against the human rights abuse of political

dictators.

For instance, they organized in Africa and Latin America debates on the

use and the abuse of the US and European aids. They publicized the

Ethiopian famine as not strictly a natural disaster, but mainly a man-made

political one. In Central America, they opposed the US policies in countries

such as El-Salvador that restricted economic opportunities for the poor and

supplied military elite with arms.

The 1990s have seen an increasing number of formulations by states as

well as UN development summits. Anthropologists were then at the

forefront documenting abuses in Central America, Africa, and Asia

protesting against discrimination and economic injustice in the US, Europe,

Japan, and Australia. Furthermore, they suggested ways to expand human

rights concepts worldwide. They considerably supported most of

indigenous rights in Latin America.

In short, anthropology activists' work paralleled UN generations of human rights

supporting and opposing to them accordingly.

Regional Cultural Relativism and Universals

Anthropologists introduced regional perspectives to support human rights all over the

world.

In Africa, their debates defended individual identity against the collective

one meant by African leaders to brutally sacrifice individual rights in the

state—building process. They confronted the challenge of understanding

the local standards of full humans, full social adulthood and community

membership.

Moreover, they had other issues to tackle such as discriminatory legacy of

apartheid, slavery, genocide, involuntary genital surgery performed on

women, and religious clashes.

Similar issues arose in Asia. For instance, gender distinctions plus

improving the lives of women and children were handled by anthropologists

along with NGOs and international agencies such as UNICEF.

In India, the question was reconciling different cultural and religious

languages of duties and obligations with universal human rights notions.

In Latin America, the focus of human rights activists' work was to protect

the rights of local collectivities struggling for autonomy and survival.

Central American anthropologists were the most personally involved

sometimes at the cost of their lives.

In a word, anthropologists struggled for human rights all over the world attempting to

meet regional needs.

Institutional Involvements

Anthropology contributions to institutional work are fulfilling two counterbalanced roles.

The first is to support theoretically and practically coordination among local, international,

official institutions and NGOs, and to facilitate the connecting of the UN initiatives to

grassroots communities.

The second is to monitor and criticize institutional performance and document abuses.

For instance, in the 1980s, anthropologists spoke out against the negative nutritional health

impacts of programs implemented by the World Bank and the IMF.

Partly in response, the World Bank began to hire anthropologists to help evaluate factors

of project success, especially in respecting human rights.

In other words, activities of anthropologists are built on and consistent with international

and institutional principles but limited by them.

Between Action and Theory

This section explores how anthropologists advocating human rights move from action to

theory.

The most important point anthropologists get is that human rights are culturally relative.

They recognized that in order to be effective, rights must be adopted by communities that

already have their own notions of rights and persons. Therefore, their research across

cultures and communities is growing.

This presentation is a chronological and regional exposition of anthropologists'

theoretical and practical work on human rights. It suggests that unless the application is

actually fair, human rights struggle will remain trapped in a vicious circle; the more violations

there are, the more theories are introduced, and consequently, the more people are abused.

HUMAN RIGHTS IN A VICIOUS CIRCLE

UNFAIR

APPLICATION

MORE

VIOLATIONS

MORE

THEORIES