Menu

The Boy Who Cried Human Rights

0

Once upon a time, there was a powerful boy named America who stood at the edge of the world and cried, “Human rights! Human rights!” And the world listened. He marched against dictators, helped rebuild nations after war, and spoke boldly at the United Nations about justice, freedom, and equality. When villages far away were crushed by tyranny, the boy sent food, medicine, and even soldiers, claiming to stand for what was right. He helped end apartheid in South Africa, stood up to ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, and told the world that no one was above human dignity. So, when he spoke, people believed him. They looked to him not just for power, but for moral guidance — for courage in the face of cruelty. But one day, the wolf came. It came not from the forests of Europe or the deserts of Africa, but from the skies over Gaza. It came in the form of missiles, airstrikes, and blockades that swallowed entire families. The villagers cried out — their homes turned to rubble, their children buried beneath it — and they looked to the boy who had promised that freedom and justice belonged to everyone. America saw the flames. He saw the hospitals hit, the aid convoys stopped, the suffering broadcast to the world. But instead of rushing to protect the innocent, he hesitated. He looked at his oldest friend — Israel — the wolf dressed in familiar colors. He remembered shared weapons, shared votes, shared history. And […]

More

Nations’ Borrowing from the Future Betrays the Basic Norms of Rights

, 0

Abstract: National debt is often framed as an economic necessity—a tool for growth, stability, and strategic investment. Yet history reveals that debt has also been a recurring instrument of decline, eroding empires, undermining sovereignty, and transferring the cost of ambition onto future generations. This essay argues that public debt must be understood not only in fiscal terms but as a profound human rights issue. When states borrow beyond their means, they bind people who do not yet exist to obligations they never consented to—effectively transforming unborn generations into economic subjects without voice or agency. Drawing on historical examples and contemporary data from the world’s most indebted nations, the essay traces how unsustainable borrowing constrains development, deepens inequality, and compromises the capacity of future societies to uphold basic human dignity. It calls for a reimagining of fiscal responsibility as moral responsibility: a recognition that debt, when misused, is not just a financial burden but a form of intergenerational injustice—a silent exploitation of the future by the present. Throughout history, national debt has been both a tool of power and a moral test. Empires and states have borrowed to build roads, wage wars, and fund revolutions—but also to delay responsibility, to push the burden of today’s ambitions onto tomorrow’s citizens. When governments treat debt as an instrument of control or a source of artificial prosperity, they are not merely taking on financial obligations. They are borrowing against time, against the lives and possibilities of people not yet born. In that sense, debt […]

More

From Bookstore to Empire: The Case of Amazon

, , 0

Hoarding and Human Rights  Introduction This essay examines the distinction between the creation and transfer of wealth through the lens of Amazon’s business model and its broader implications for economic ethics and human rights. It argues that legitimate wealth arises through two primary paths: the production of goods and services, or their distribution through trade and commerce. While Amazon has built its global dominance through the latter, its success depends largely on the labor, creativity, and productivity of others. By profiting from the margins of others’ work rather than creating value in itself, Amazon exemplifies a system in which wealth is redistributed upward rather than newly generated. The essay contends that this economic model, while efficient, raises profound moral and human rights concerns—particularly regarding the fair valuation of labor, the dignity of workers, and the equitable distribution of the fruits of human toil. In questioning Amazon’s claims to “create” jobs or wealth, the essay calls for a reexamination of how modern economies measure value, justice, and the rights of those whose labor sustains them. First, Data and Statistics Amazon frequently defends itself against criticism of harsh labor practices by pointing to two achievements: the vast number of jobs it creates and the wealth it has generated as a trillion-dollar company. Both claims are technically true, but they conceal more than they reveal about who actually benefits from Amazon’s growth. Today, Amazon is one of the largest employers on Earth, with roughly 1.55 million workers worldwide. When the company highlights job […]

More

The First Step to Genocide Is a Word

, 0

The Way Dehumanization Paves the Path to Atrocity Every genocide and every crime against humanity is rooted in one deliberate act: the dehumanization of its victims. Study any instance of genocide, mass atrocity, war crime, or systematic violence—and you will find a consistent, chilling pattern. Before the violence begins, a narrative is constructed to justify it; as it unfolds, that same narrative legitimizes it; and once it ends, the narrative whitewashes it. At the heart of this process lies the dehumanization of the targeted group. We saw this in Syria, where supremacist factions used explicit, degrading language to label religious, ethnic, and secular communities as subhuman. They fabricated stories of atrocities allegedly committed by these groups, framing their own brutal campaigns as “self-defense” or “retribution.” Even the most mundane actions by members of the targeted communities were twisted into evidence of sinister, premeditated aggression—conveniently justifying future acts of mass violence as necessary retaliation. More recently, Israeli leaders—preparing for what would become one of the most extreme asymmetrical wars in modern history—began dehumanizing Palestinians as early as October 8, 2023, calling them “human animals.” Ancient biblical rhetoric was invoked to rationalize the killing of children (Amalek), while labels like “terrorism” and “antisemitism” were weaponized to mobilize public support and shield actions now widely described by credible human rights organizations and scholars as genocidal. Ending the violence in Gaza will not extinguish the deeper impulse that makes such atrocities possible: the reflexive, self-serving belief that some lives are less human than others. […]

More

The Foundation of All Rights

0

Freedom of Speech Abstract Freedom of speech, thought, and conscience constitute the cornerstone of all human rights. Without the capacity to articulate claims, challenge authority, and bring grievances into the public sphere, other rights remain inaccessible and unenforceable. Drawing on the ideas presented in Muslims and the Western Conception of  Rights , this essay argues that freedom of speech must be understood relationally, within the dynamics of power. The protection of vulnerable voices is paramount, while the claims of those with systemic power must be subject to limitation. Historical precedents demonstrate that transformative change has been initiated by the speech of the marginalized, underscoring the necessity of safeguarding this freedom as foundational to justice and human dignity. The discourse on human rights presupposes the ability of individuals and communities to make claims against authority. Yet claims are not self-executing; they require articulation, dissemination, and recognition. As argued in Muslims and the Western Conception of Rights, the right that enables these processes—freedom of speech—is therefore not simply one right among many but the very foundation upon which all other rights depend. Absent this freedom, no individual or community can effectively assert their humanity or contest violations of dignity. The indispensability of freedom of speech is most evident when examined through the prism of power. Rights are always situated in asymmetrical relationships. Individuals and groups with political authority, economic wealth, or social capital enjoy disproportionate access to platforms of communication and to the means of amplifying their voices. By contrast, marginalized communities […]

More

Added Value and Human Rights

, , 0

Cocoa and the Economics of Global Inequity AbstractThe denial of “added value” lies at the core of global economic inequity and its human rights consequences. While underdeveloped countries supply the raw materials that fuel global industries, developed economies capture the real wealth by processing, branding, and selling finished goods. Cocoa is a striking example: West Africa produces most of the world’s cocoa beans, yet farmers earn poverty wages while multinational chocolate companies reap billions in profits. This inequity sustains child labor, denies the right to education, entrenches poverty, and fuels migration. International human rights law recognizes the rights to work, to an adequate standard of living, and to self-determination over natural resources. Yet global trade practices continue to violate these rights by preventing producing countries from sharing in the added value of their own resources. Fairer trade and production systems that respect human rights are essential to dismantling structural inequities and creating global stability. In economics, “added value” refers to the increase in worth created when a raw material is transformed into a finished product. A commodity such as cocoa beans may be cheap in its raw form, but once it is roasted, blended, packaged, and branded, it becomes part of a global chocolate industry worth over $120 billion annually. The control over who gets to add that value—and thus capture the wealth it generates—largely determines which societies prosper and which remain in poverty. The case of cocoa shows the stark injustice of this arrangement. Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana together […]

More

The Genocide Scholars’ Resolution on Gaza–Implications for International Law and Western Legitimacy

, , , , , , , 0

On August 2025, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS)—the most authoritative academic body in the field of genocide studies—adopted a landmark resolution declaring that Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute genocide as defined under the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention. This resolution, endorsed by 86 percent of the world’s leading genocide scholars, represents a pivotal moment not only for international jurisprudence but also for the political credibility of Western governments that continue to deny the genocidal nature of Israel’s policies. The full resolution can be accessed here. The Authority of the IAGS Resolution The International Association of Genocide Scholars occupies a unique position in global human rights discourse. Its membership has historically provided the intellectual and evidentiary framework for recognizing and codifying genocides, including those in Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur, and the Armenian case. When such a body concludes that a state’s actions satisfy the legal definition of genocide, it cannot be dismissed as mere political rhetoric. The resolution makes two unequivocal declarations: That Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide under Article II of the Genocide Convention (1948). That Israel’s conduct also constitutes war crimes and crimes against humanity under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Furthermore, the resolution underscores the convergence of findings by major human rights organizations—including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B’Tselem, Forensic Architecture, DAWN, and Physicians for Human Rights—as well as the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The epistemic […]

More

Business and Human Rights: Ethical, Legal, and Managerial Perspectives

, 0

Florian Wettstein’s Business and Human Rights: Ethical, Legal, and Managerial Perspectives is a timely and ambitious intervention in a field that is still solidifying its contours. Business and Human Rights (BHR) has emerged in recent decades as both a scholarly discipline and a policy arena, spurred by the rise of globalization, corporate power, and mounting evidence of corporate involvement in human rights abuses. This text arrives at a moment when universities are rapidly institutionalizing BHR courses, often at the intersection of law, management, and ethics. Wettstein’s book therefore not only fills a pedagogical gap but also seeks to shape the intellectual and normative foundations of the field. One of the book’s greatest strengths is its breadth and structure. The work includes an impressive arc that begins with foundational philosophical debates (Part I), moves through corporate involvement in rights violations (Part II), develops normative justifications for business responsibilities (Part III), explores accountability and governance mechanisms (Part IV), and finally considers industry-specific case studies and emerging challenges (Part V). Such sequencing mirrors the way students might themselves encounter the field: from history and theory, to problems, to solutions and applications. The introductory chapter, pointedly titled “Learning and Unlearning Business and Human Rights”, sets the tone by destabilizing assumptions about both “human rights” and “business,” situating BHR as more than an extension of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This signals an intellectual seriousness that elevates the book above being a mere manual of compliance or best practices. Wettstein’s interdisciplinary lens is perhaps the defining […]

More

Volunteerism, Inequity, and the Right and Responsibility of Work

, , , , , 0

  Volunteerism is often celebrated as altruistic, yet in unequal contexts it can both exploit unpaid labor and deny vulnerable individuals opportunities for paid work. This article argues that while the right to work is fundamental to dignity, work must also be understood as a responsibility: to sustain oneself, provide for dependents, and fulfill the human condition of becoming. When volunteerism substitutes for employment, it privileges those who can labor without pay while excluding those for whom work is a necessity, thereby reinforcing inequity and obscuring the deeper meaning of work as both right and responsibility. Volunteerism is often portrayed as a moral good, a practice through which individuals freely contribute their time and energy to the betterment of society. Its civic appeal rests on ideals of generosity, solidarity, and shared responsibility. Yet the social and economic structures in which volunteerism is embedded complicate this narrative. In contexts of persistent inequality, volunteerism can become not merely an act of service but a reflection of privilege, and in some cases, a mechanism of exploitation. When organizations rely on volunteers, they often substitute unpaid contributions for positions that might otherwise provide employment. This reliance saves resources for institutions but carries a profound social cost: it normalizes the devaluation of work, particularly in domains such as caregiving, education, and community service, which are already historically undercompensated. The effect is twofold: the extraction of labor without wages from those who can afford to give it freely, and the exclusion of those who cannot afford […]

More

The Algorithmic Erasure of Atrocity: AI, Politics, and the Struggle for Human Rights

, , , , 0

Abstract: This article examines the intersection of artificial intelligence, political influence, and human rights, focusing on how large language models (LLMs) respond to allegations of mass atrocities such as the Uyghur genocide in China and the situation in Gaza. Drawing on documented instances—including the suspension of the Grok chatbot from X after citing credible human rights sources—the analysis reveals how AI platforms selectively avoid or dilute politically sensitive claims. This editorial decision-making is shaped not by the absence of evidence, but by the economic, legal, and geopolitical interests of the institutions that design and govern AI systems. The article argues that such selective silencing undermines the internationally recognised right to truth, shields perpetrators from accountability, and perpetuates the marginalisation of communities excluded from AI training datasets. As AI becomes an increasingly dominant channel of information, its political constraints risk curating the historical record to favour the powerful, thereby entrenching systemic inequities in human rights advocacy and justice. Keywords: artificial intelligence, human rights, right to truth, genocide, AI censorship, algorithmic bias, marginalised voices, accountability, content moderation, digital erasure Artificial intelligence is often presented as a revolutionary tool for truth-finding and justice. In reality, AI systems are not neutral; they are programmed, moderated, and politically constrained by the individuals and institutions that control them. When those decision-makers determine that certain truths are too controversial or politically risky to acknowledge, the consequences are not merely technical—they are a direct threat to the protection and promotion of human rights. The Genocide Questions AI Avoids […]

More

Load More