In this series I’ve attempted to present a critique of the theory and practice of human rights work, even against the common minimalist defense presented by Michael Ignatieff. I’ve argued that even a worker who defends their work on the grounds of “solely providing food to people who need it, and what could be wrong with that?†is problematic in that it is not “solely†providing, it is in fact selling something in return for provision. I argued that cultural norms are sold, traditions are undermined, and states’ interests are supported all under the guise of “giving aid.†To conclude I would like to briefly acknowledge that while my paper offers critiques aplenty of human rights, it offers no solutions. Naturally this is an entirely separate issue that I don’t plan on elaborating in depth. But I’d like to dispel any notion that aid work in general is futile. In this essay I’ve criticized large scale organizations and universal frameworks for giving aid. As a result, I think it follows that smaller scale aid would not be equally problematic. One of the unarticulated features of my argument is the utter lack of agency I’ve given to groups receiving aid. I believe that they have very little voice in shaping how they receive human rights aid or what they receive because of the nature of human rights discourse and the way it’s practiced. I also believe that large organizations and international bureaucratic structures inevitably lead to many of the problems outlined above. On smaller scales of course aid is not necessarily a bad thing. If someone I meet believes that their lives would be better off for receiving $5.00, for instance, then I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with providing it for them. Similarly, if a group of people presents a problem then I see nothing wrong with an organization developing to deal with the problem. For example, in New York Aardvarc is an organization that provides legal assistance to battered/abused women who need it. The organization is familiar with all the critical legal precedents and has the resources to help people who come to them. While of course any organization necessarily fits into a political context, I see this organization as doing what it can do address a problem within the local context. Clearly people themselves see that they need help and this organization has sprung up to provide the necessary resources. As a result, I see no reason why this organization is necessarily problematic in the way that human rights organizations are necessarily problematic. Though, of course, resources may always be squandered or politics may always play too powerful a role in shaping people’s lives. BM
