Free Essay On Human Rights And Internationalism

Internationalism can be defined in many term. According to Cambridge it is the belief that countries can achieve more advantages by working together and trying to understand each other than by arguing and fighting wars with each other. To Merriam, it is a policy of cooperation among nations and an attitude or belief favoring such a policy. But in general it is an attempt to unify the world under certain basic principles which calls for global unity. It aims to achieve peace between nations. Some view it to focus on ensuring justice between nations which in most cases include global , formation, international law, international organizations (NGOs), international trade and international social movements.
According to Wight, international politics began in Europe at the beginning of the modern period then spread over to other continents. In his writing, it was said that common culture basis of the expansion and consolidation between nations is called international society or what we can call nowadays internationalism. although the idea of internationalism has been studied by several writers, Wight himself has used the thought several times. In one of his writings, he mentioned that the unity international society is thrown into sharpest relief when it is riven by an international civil war (Mazower, 553).
International law on the other hand was designed as an aid to preserve order among sovereign states, and only applies for civilized states.But the question of 'civilization' has arose. And according to Hall international law is only a product of special civilization of modern Europe that forms a highly artificial system which grounds cannot be understood or recognized by other countries as it is there is always a question between the civilization of Christian and non christian nation (Mazower, 555).
The identification of international law or understanding between nations is to identify the right of every individual wherever they maybe. This can be a civil right or human right. But the idea between the two should not be confused. Civil right applies to individual bounded by law of a national state. In other words, state enshrines and protects rights through the means of constitutional and court-based protection. While on the other hand, human rights are recognized globally within the context of agreements and covenants signed, endorsed and enforced by the cooperation of nations.
Modern states has five monopoly of powers. the first one is the monopoly to control the instrument of violence as cited by Weber. The second one is the states' monopoly to control the right off taxation as emphasized by Elias. Third on the list is state's right to control the political loyalties of citizens which is an arguable monopoly right. Second to last is the state's monopoly power in the sphere of judicial settlement that as far as sovereign states are concern, there is no higher court of law than them. Lastly, is the state's exclusive right to represent itself in international organizations and absolute power bind its own community in international law (Linklater, 4).
It was claimed that mentioned monopolies exist to control human loyalty that are very much needed to be organized to take part in major in-state wars.
States are organized societies with a government and a territory. The state’s territory is a region where the government can successfully enforce its rules because it can generally physically overpower internal competitors and discourage aggression by outsiders. As mentioned above, they have monopoly power over it’s constituents.(Risse, 2). But there has always been questions as to why states exist, whether its existence can be justified to its citizens to begin with, and what is a just distribution of goods within it’s boundaries. That is why several people have always been looking at the real function and definition of what power a state can have. But regardless of which, human rights should not be a question if a person can have it or not.
There were claims that said that human rights emerged as a reaction to World War II. But it has been contest as it was said that human rights has always been covered by literature in the historical development and need not to be covered in detail. in line with the Stoics who then was seeking to be in offense with parochialism proposed that individuals should get equal worth and right to full participation in wider community. it has been supported by Christian theology that developed the idea individual salvation is a form of deliverance that can be achieved if an individual in a wider community can have certain rights. While during the Renaissance period, Reformation pushed for the idea that proposed the right and not just duty to rebel against corrupt government. And another example that shows that the history of human rights is rather an innovation than just a discovery is when German romantic promoted the idea of group rights in pursuit of positive freedom (Evans, 7).
All the mentioned conceptual movements tried to show that the history of human rights has been continuous discourse of challenge and counter challenge, evolution and movement that reflects the dynamics of social, political and economic change of their every period. Human rights is a struggle against dominant order that seeks to legitimize moral and ethical values in line with particular interests. It can be viewed as an ideology of the dominant that attracts resistance to assert for a new form of rights, democracy and citizenship. (Evans, 8).
In a report made by the Colloquium, it was discussed if human right have relevance to global economic policy making (International Council in Human Rights Policy, ii). Economic theory focuses in proper setting of priority, while human rights considers that every one has an equal indivisible rights. Many economists judge human right advocates for avoiding tough choices and regard human rights as unspecific and unenforceable policy tools which compromises policy making (International Council in Human Rights Policy, 1). According to International Council in Human Rights Policy, equality is the main goal of human rights (International Council in Human Rights Policy, 2).
Human rights has from centuries to protect the rights of every individual that can cover whatever location they can be. It could be that the reason why internationalism exist is to have a common ground between nations. As per Relationists they are motivated by concerns about “relevance,” the moral relevance of practices in which certain individuals stand. Nonrelationists deny that the truth about justice depends on relations. They think principles of justice depend on features that are shared by all members of the global population or every human, independent of whatever relations they happen to be in rather than focusing on the relevance it self. “Globalists” are relationists who think the relevant relation holds among all human beings, they think that there should be one global relation between all human being (Risse, 4).
Human rights may have risen without the label on it as human right itself. But even before, the act itself that people have been fighting against the dominant power of land or territory that they have, whatever time or period of existence it could have been has always been human rights. It could have started in Europe according to literature but the fact that citizens in various countries rebelled to fight for their rights, that is fight for human rights. On the other hand, probably it could have only been formalized during the course of formalizing internationalism. Internationalism could have been a formal ground that dictated nations in acknowledging rights in a global scope, in a scope outside their state. It could have served a s protection for people who go out of their state. As civilian rights vary form one state or country to another, human right is very handy for cases to be considered specially for those who are outside their homeland although there are still questions as to the difference of Christian and non-christian countries.
International law on the other hand could also pose questions regarding its principles but as it was said, the very aim of it is to establish common grounds to countries all over the globe whatever kind of government they have which at the end still aim to establish fairness to every individual in every land.

Works Cited

Human Rights as a Global Paradigm? Internationalism and the Modern Age. Lecture.
Mazower, Mark. An international civilization? Empire, internationalism and the crisis of the mid-twentieth century. The Royal Institute of International Affairs: 2006. Web.
Linklater, Andrew. The Transformation of Political Community Towards ‘A Cosmopolitan System of General Political Security’. 1999.
Risse, Mathias. Introducing Pluralist Internationalism – An Alternative Approach to Questions of Global Justice. Harvard University: 2013. Web.
Evans, Tony. The Idea of Human Rights in the Global Political Economy. Lynne Rienner Publishers: 2011
International Council in Human Rights Policy. Human Rights in the Global Economy. 2010. Web.