My first argument is that a set of cultural values is sold under the auspices of human rights aid. Language, food, and broader features (such as television, sports, etc.) all are presented as part of the package that leads to “getting human rights.†I’ve outlined already how human rights aid is almost exclusively provided in English, though where possible both French and Spanish appear to be adequate substitutes. Thus “Americas†experts will typically know Spanish, and quite a few “Africa†experts will know French. That “expertise†in understanding the continent of Africa can be boiled down to knowing French (if that) is immensely problematic for the simple reason that the near total majority of people receiving human rights aid in Africa do not speak French, or if they do then it is certainly their second language. But that human rights groups typically do their work with a complete lack of any of the cultural context within which they work is not my primary argument in this section. Rather, I’m arguing that culture is actively replaced or eroded by the way human rights is both conceived and the way it’s practiced. Aid is framed in English, where English (and occasionally French or Spanish) is presented as the language of higher learning, of higher attainment, and of higher understanding. Moreover, English is not just the language of the greater power who is “generous†enough to provide aid but it is actually the language within which what people need is framed. Talal Asad notes that this power allows English speaking countries and particularly the US to “take control of vocabulary, concepts and meaning in many fields. We have to formulate the problems it invents in the words it offers.†Asad is referring more broadly than to just human rights, but his criticism applies perfectly to human rights as well. A community determined to be without basic human rights is placed immediately in the context of “being without†that is in American terminology and from an American perspective of “the other.†As such it’s hardly surprising that the vast majority of countries in need of human rights aid exist in countries outside of the West. Human rights workers are selling this language and these concepts in return for providing aid rather than following their own notion of “simple charity work.†Beyond just language an entire lifestyle is created. In many cities, aid communities develop where foreign aid workers mix and mingle. These communities tend to feature lives in compounds or exclusive areas. Such cities (for instance Accra, or Dhaka or Islamabad or even Cairo possibly, though of course many “third world cities†qualify) have entire neighborhoods of foreign restaurants and foreign-membership-only clubs that are dominated by human rights groups. These places actively promote a lifestyle that is simultaneously separate and “above” the lives of those they're supposedly “helping.” This lifestyle is, as a result, projected upon those being aided in similar ways that language and the language of human rights is foisted upon them. Foreign food is presented as superior to local cuisine, foreign dvds are presented as superior to local film industries, and so on across the board.9 These problems fit into the broader critiques outlined earlier regarding the universal nature of human rights. While any specific cultural context is ignored, universal notions about human rights become transferred to a universal application of human rights that includes all the cultural aspects mentioned in this section. **Next week “Undermining Tradition” BM **The beliefs and statements of all Bikya Masr blogumnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect our editorial views.
