Right’s, right? (Part 2)

Right’s, right? (Part 2)

The systemic ignorance noted last week, refer to the lack of understanding and appreciating our inter-connectedness1. For example, for extreme poverty to exist in far away country’s does not mean we are unaffected, in truth, we directly affect one another1. Similarly, wars fought on distant shores, does not recuse us from being party to it. Buying designer brand clothing manufactured in “sweat-shops” across the developing world makes us directly accountable in trampling basic human rights1. It is this kind of “systemic blindness” the Universality team strives to make known, as it is the very foundations upon which continued oppression rests.

Multi-lateral organisations are assumed to be fair, just, honest and equitable since their intent & vision was positioned as such. However, for various reasons, they are negligent & unduly affected by forces of Self-interest, Geo-political power mongering, Political expediency, Legal incapacity, Built, Engineering & Medical supremacy1, etc. The very structures setup post World War 2, despite having noble foundations are covertly used to solely beneficiate & grow Western industries2. Consider in 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was setup, but its obligations was only declared in 1966, under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, almost 2 decades to agree upon definitions of rights, when it’s universality, application and implementation is plain to all? Since basic human rights are universal, it should not have challenges, yet the purposefully drawn-out discussions & round-tables proceeded for almost 20 years3. The ploy of encouraging varied viewpoints & incompatible meanings, are used to delay & limit the implementation of basic human rights. So the very institutions we look toward for socio-economic equality and justice are used to frustrate its attainment. The so called ambiguities and vagueness of basic human rights are used to persistently constrain implementation for centuries, allowing abusive practices to continue, since implementation of basic human rights remain suspended3. Without systemic insights, it is impossible to grasp socio-economic dynamics (workings of the institutions, corporations, actors, and processes), relied upon to attain the desired outcomes1. For any single basic human right to exist in practice or real life, rest upon the ability and extent our respective State’s are willing to implement them. The State must be willing to apply all its resources, methods & implementation powers to achieve these goals, which is another systemic layer used to cause a new set of delays. So we have delays at global levels (between nation state’s), then we have delays at the Nation state or Country level, then depending upon the structure of the government, we will encounter yet more systemic levels, like say Provinces’, Regions, Cities, Towns, Villages, etc., all of which are inter-linked systemically. So then from the Country representatives sitting at the United Nations in say Brussels, to the rural farmer in say Thailand, are intimately linked. They seem apart and in all likelihood will never cross paths, but the actions of the one impact the other, i.e. systemic interconnectedness.

This example should provide clarity on the many systemic levels prevalent across all societies and their economies. Each layer or level have different actors able to deter the sought after developmental goals of equality, justice & prosperity for all. The interconnectedness of social systems is most important if we are to understand the evolution of protective human right measures, and indeed how these have become less, as opposed to becoming more robust. New and ever more nebulous threats like “war on terror” are used to change laws so that we “give up” our basic human rights, whilst technologies are used to both eradicate our privacy & limit our right to information. Blindly agreeing to perceived new global threats, we tacitly allow the subtle reduction of basic human rights to continue unabated. Today one may argue that we are less free than ever before, because our leaders are incapable of appreciating the extent of systemic oppression1.

References

• Udemans, F., 2012, The golden thread: Escaping socio-economic subjugation: an experiment in applied complexity science, Authorhouse UK;

• Naess, A., 1973, The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary; & McKinsey Global Institute, 2015, The future & how to survive it, October 2015;

• Meier, B. M, 2009, The Highest Attainable Standard: The World Health Organization, Global Health Governance, and the Contentious Politics of Human Rights, Columbia University, School of Arts & Sciences;