Saturday, January 7, 2012

Human Rights versus Multiculturalism

Divest This has a good article about the BDSers attempts to deal with the conundrum that they are attempting to gin up support among liberals for a polity - the Palestinians - that is anything but liberal when it comes to gay rights.

This speaks to an aspect of the Israeli / Palestinian conflict that I think is indicative of a larger meta-issue within the Western Left - the choice between two of its central values when they come into conflict. These two central values are universal human rights on the one hand, and what I will put under the umbrella of 'multiculturalism' on the other.

Since the end of Western colonialism these two values have come into conflict numerous times, but perhaps no place moreso than in the I/P conflict.

When it comes to human rights, there can probably be no more dramatic contrast among neighbors in the world. Israel is one of the world's most progressive countries for gay rights - gays have the same marriage rights as heterosexuals, serve openly in the military, and there is a thriving gay culture. Israel practices general gender equality at a level on a par with Western Europe, as evidenced by the participation of women in business, government, the military, and society in general. Isreal has widespread sexual liberty, featuring a hedonistic beach and club culture, for example, for those who want it. Israel has widespread religious liberty, with people generally able to practice or not practice the religion of their choice. Israel also strives to reduce the importance of social castes more than its neighbors, and practices environmentalism on a par with Western nations.

In contrast, the Palestinians and Arab societies more generally are terrible when it comes to these manifestations of human rights - pretty much the worse in the world - on gay rights, womens' equality, sexual liberty, and religious liberty. The Arab world is by far the worst for gay rights, routinely criminalizing and even executing homosexuals. They are also among the worst for gender equality, enforcing strict dress codes for women, and practicing honor rapes and killings, among other outrages. Arab societies are also among the worst for religious liberty, featuring a high degree of sectarian conflict and strict laws and social pressure against blasphemy and apostacy. Plus Palestinian society clearly maintains a strict tribal or family-based social heirarchy - so much so that it is no accident that social minorities such as the Druze and many of the Bedouins have chosen to be loyal to Israel over their ethnic brethren.

Based on traditional Left human rights considerations, the Palestinians and Arabs would be a very odd cause to particularly champion, given their conflict with Israel.

But while Israel would seem to be the choice to champion for the values of human rights, the value that I have labelled 'multiculturalism' holds that all cultures and peoples should be seen as valuable, and in a more extreme interpretation, equal. Given the dominance of Western and American culture on the World, multiculturalism generally dictates that one should defer to the less western, less 'white', and less capitalist of any two options - which in a simplified reading of the Middle East situation would be the Palestinian / Arab side.

When it comes to I/P, the values of human rights and multiculturalism are in clonflict within the collective Liberal mind, and the conflict must somehow be resolved. It can only be resolved by deciding that one value set is more important or more consistent than the other. Those that place a higher importance on universal human rights have generally chosen to side with Israel, while those who place a higher importance on milticulturalism have chosen to side with the Arabs. This is certainly borne out by the profiles of the participants in activities within the Left related to I/P.

Certainly, I/P is not the only place these value sets have been in conflict for the Left. Castro's Cuba is another instance, as the Communist regime has brought both economic and racial equality, as well as tremendous social oppression, including of gays, music, and political dissidents. However, I/P might be the most dramatic manifestation of the two values in conflict.

I choose human rights. How about you?

10 comments:

  1. It's not necessarily just human rights versus multiculturalism, but universality versus cultural relativity in the interpretation of human rights.

    And it's not just in the I/P context, but the larger one between the UDHR and the Cairo Declaration. The battleground in Europe is as signifcant, if not moreso.

    Finally, multiculturalism IS about equality of cultures, not just that all should be valued.

    FWIW

    ReplyDelete
  2. I choose human rights. Always have and always will. As a liberal, moral / cultural relativism never has been, and never will be, a 'value' of mine.

    "When it comes to human rights, there can probably be no more dramatic contrast among neighbors in the world."

    Yup.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another realm worth mentioning where Israel is far more aligned with Liberal values than its neighbors is in its economic structure.

    Israel has an economy almost entirely based on knowledge work and human capital. The Arab countries have economies almost entirely based on unsustainable natural resource extraction.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @oldschool: I was indeed using an expansive definition of multiculturalism to include the view that not necessarily every culture is equal. I think you will find differing opinions on this. For example even the most multicultural person probably thinks the culture of the Southern US is inferior.

    Agreed on the unversal versus culturally relative interpretation of human rights. Funny enough, their cultural relativity in the context of human rights does not extend to Mississippi or Utah.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Funny enough, their cultural relativity in the context of human rights does not extend to Mississippi or Utah."

    Heh!

    And yeah re: natural resource extraction. But as someone who's long been involved in active transportation and urban planning issues, the disconnect there amongst many on the self-proclaimed "left" is surely nothing new to me there.

    I've been called a nut for a long time now for suggesting that we need to consider new ways of living. and designing our human habitats...

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Jay: Are you really meeting resistance from Liberals to more livable and sustainable development patterns? In Portland?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Portland's already pretty sustainable unless you think we should all roll around in the dirt and live without power and running water like good little hippies.

    Fuck I hate Eugene.

    ReplyDelete
  8. actually, in the context of international law and relations, I believe the interpretation I provided is more accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not mainly in Portland, but from other areas. But yeah, even here sometimes. And just in general, I mean. Quite a bit of people out there who say all the right things, then turn around and call the city on their neighbor's garden or fight tooth and nail against road diets or even small improvements such as raised crosswalks or bike boxes, etc etc.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This diary gives but one example of why BDS will never gain much acceptance in the US by those outside of the extremist fringe. Another big problem it faces, of course, is the acceptance, among some BDS supporters, of Jew bashing rhetoric.

    ReplyDelete