Kruse Kronicle

Poverty is not a human rights violation

—

by

mwkruse
in , ,

Aid  Watch: Poverty is not a human rights violation

The title of this blog will make many think I am callous, and yet I definitely agree that poverty is an EXTREMELY BAD THING. Perhaps some use the words “human rights violation” to be equivalent to “extremely bad thing,” but why? There are many different “extremely bad things,” and it helps if everybody discriminates between them.

The only useful definition of human rights is one where a human rights crusader could identify WHOSE rights are being violated and WHO is the violator. That is what historically has led to progress on human rights. The government officers of the slave-owning antebellum US and the slave-owners were violating the rights of slaves – leading to activism against such violators that eventually yielded the Emancipation Proclamation. The local southern government officers were violating the civil rights of southern blacks under Jim Crow, leading to activism against these violators that yielded the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. The apartheid government officers in South Africa violated the rights of black South Africans, and activism against these violators brought the end of apartheid.

Poverty does not fit this definition of rights. Who is depriving the poor of their right to an adequate income? There are many theories of poverty, but few of them lead to a clear identification of the Violator of this right. …

Easterly posts a response from Amnesty International here, but I think Easterly has it right.

Comments

4 responses to “Poverty is not a human rights violation”

  1. sam carr Avatar
    sam carr

    Michael, even when one cannot identify a specific perpetrator, it does not mean that a crime has not been committed. Sometimes, the system that we collectively tolerate and that we passively or actively keep ourselves as living within, can be a wrong one.
    While it is debatable whether any truly equitable economic system is feasible/sustainable, yet, the desire that no one should have to be subjected to poverty is, I think, a ‘kingdom’ idea.

    Reply
  2. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    No question that the consummation of the Kingdom of God is place without poverty. The issue is the vague human rights language.
    Here is how the language works.
    A. Define poverty as a human rights violation.
    B. Attribute poverty to X.
    C. Champion Y as the solution.
    D. Label anyone who doesn’t agree about X or champion Y as the solution as human rights violator.
    Poverty has been the norm throughout human history. Today, poverty is often a consequence of human communities/nations failing to create a set of laws and customs that allows prosperity to bloosm. The failure can stem from an array of internal difficulties and their can be international impacts that are unhelpful as well. The factors involved are legion.
    There are three types of economic justice:
    1. Distributive Justice – Addresses how capital and goods are distributed throughout the society.
    2. Commutative Justice – Addresses the truthfulness of parties to an economic exchange.
    3. Remedial Justice – Addresses just compensation and punitive action when there has been malicious or careless damage done to life, liberty or property.
    Notice that when the Old Testament prophets cried out they objected to bribes and false scales (commutative justice), and the inabilty of the poor to be heard at the city gates … the place where legal matters were settled (remedial justice.) Solve these two “rights” issues and a considerable amount of the poverty question indirectly is resolved. Distribution becomes more just.
    But also keep in mind that a small minority of people choose poverty. Think of religious orders that take vows of poverty. Other simply choose to live ascetic lifstyles. Still others choose poverty by default because the are unwilling to do what is needed to improve their status.
    All that is to say that, IMO, labeling something a “human right” these days usually has less to do with careful ethical analysis of justice and rights, and has more to do with achieving a rhetorical advanatage in advancing a poltical agenda.

    Reply
  3. sam carr Avatar
    sam carr

    I entirely agree that the concept of human rights is too often misused. That still doesn’t make the reality of choiceless poverty for many millions any less horrendous.
    The rhetoric is usually misleading and the advocated solutions amount to little more than sops. Still, we can yearn for, and should struggle towards, a much more equitable world.

    Reply
  4. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    “Still, we can yearn for, and should struggle towards, a much more equitable world.”
    Amen!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading