human rights movement exists because of an abrupt truncation of and recent break with the majority of liberal traditions of thoughts and proactive in modern history
Samuel Moyn, in chapter 11 (Human Rights and the Crisis of Liberalism), bases his arguments on the idea that contemporary human rights are as a result of breaking liberalism. He says, “In theory and practice, human rights movement exists because of an abrupt truncation of and recent break with the majority of liberal traditions of thoughts and proactive in modern history” (261). As a result, the so-called liberals have left behind their commitments to adhere to the rule governing human rights. As an essential part of clarifying his arguments, the author offers some criticisms of contemporary political science, which is characterized by both human rights and liberalism. According to him, currently, political scientists engage in human rights-based activities owing to disciplinary supremacy. In explaining why human rights have been marginalized by liberalism, Moyn claims that liberalism is a result of the invention, just like any other form of tradition.
In chapter 12 titled Human Rights on the Road to Nowhere, Stephen Hopgood’s arguments revolve around the cause of human rights and how, according to him, they have a difficult journey but at least heading somewhere. In correspondence to Hopgood, human rights have been discovered rather than being created. By saying this, the author of this particular chapter means that people decide to make a specific thing human righty, thus protecting it based on its effect on human beings. Through enlightenment as well as the civilization of human beings, several human rights have been discovered and preserved. The journey of human rights, as described by Hopgood, might seem to be ending nowhere, but it is not the case. He ascertains this by stating that “Human rights are not a road to nowhere for their most ardent advocates, they are an often meandering and frustrating…journey towards a clear and predetermined moral destination” (289). The destination is the most important thing here, and it can, therefore, be concluded that human rights lead to moral lives.
Even though I am not pessimistic, being an optimistic person does not hinder future thoughts from crossing my mind. Sometimes I tend to have negative future expectations, but the positive ones take much of my future beliefs. That aside, I believe that human rights should be reframed depending on societal changes and advancements. In the future, a lot of things, both good and bad, might happen. Despite the nature of the anticipated activities, humans should be protected from violations and discrimination of any kind by their fellow humans as well as authorities. I think human rights should be often revisited and revised to ensure that they cope well with changes in our communities. This should be a factor of the level of people’s enlightenment and civilization because as these happen, more dangers are posed to humans while others become less harmful to humans. Reframing of human rights on an occasional basis should, therefore, be advocated for.