Barriers to a Robust Human Rights Culture and the Importance of Bottom-Up Advocacy and Education
The "Good for Corporation, Good for Country" Ideology and its Consequences
This prevailing ideology, dating back to at least , asserts that corporate interests align with national well-being.
Corporations often wield influence through advertising, communication, and media ownership (due to corporate consolidation), shaping public perception.
Example: An elderly man at the post office exhibited anger and a "minor meltdown" over paying extra duty on a package. He directed his frustration at a post office employee, suggesting he talk to Donald Trump, and then generalized about post office union members being "lazy."
This reflects a societal disdain for collective action and unions, despite such organizations advocating for living wages from companies like Walmart, which make billions. There's a resistance to the idea that some of this wealth should trickle down to the working class.
This mindset is indicative of a "non-robust rights culture."
The Problem of "Rugged Individualism"
The notion of "rugged individualism," particularly prominent in the United States, emphasizes self-reliance ("it's all about me").
This mentality relegates the idea of a collective good to a secondary thought, prioritizing individual immediate concerns.
It often fails to recognize that collective advocacy for "second-generation rights" (social, cultural, economic rights, as opposed to civic and political rights or "first-generation rights") can benefit individuals.
Political discourse frequently frames rugged individualism and capital accumulation as paramount, hindering the development of a robust rights culture. This is an ethnocentric perspective, especially of the West and the United States.
Corporate Power and its Role in Governance and Society
Corporations thrive under capitalism and, in more extreme cases, fascism, due to their immense wealth and influence.
They can facilitate fascist agendas through their platforms, wealth, and political contributions, especially in the US where corporate donations to campaigns and self-funded advertisements are increasingly permitted.
This creates a self-perpetuating cycle where corporations operate within and influence systems that benefit them.
The "Permanent" vs. "Provisional" Government (Harry Glasby):
Harry Glasby, a Canadian socio-legal scholar, conceptualized two forms of government.
The provisional government refers to elected political parties and leaders (e.g., Justin Trudeau) who come and go with political changes.
The permanent government, as correctly identified by a student, consists of powerful corporations and Fortune companies. These entities maintain constant influence, have the ear of the government, and shape policy, often pushing for deregulation (e.g., environmental deregulation for economic projects).
Implications of Deregulation: While framed as economically beneficial (e.g., Canadian economy in the wake of US trade war), deregulation can severely impact Indigenous communities, Indigenous rights, and third/fourth-generation environmental rights.
Society often venerates economic laws over natural laws, acting as a barrier to the development of rights culture, particularly for Indigenous and environmental rights.
Neoliberal Capitalism, Globalization, and "Toxic Capitalism"
The course will explore "neoliberal globalization capitals" and deploy Thomson's Peers' concept of "toxic capitalism."
The global economy is structured to allow the fluid flow of capital to areas of least regulatory resistance, often the Global South.
This leads to immense social, economic, and environmental exploitation (e.g., exploitation of workers, lax environmental regulations).
Ethnocentric Techniques of Neutralization: Western societies often accept this exploitation due to ideological frameworks that neutralize moral concerns, facilitated by a "social distance" or "cognitive distance" from the impacted populations.
"Walmart: The High Cost of Low Prices": This documentary highlights the hidden costs of cheap goods:
Environmental damage.
Exploitation of workers in the Global South.
Erosion of the North American middle class, as companies relocate to areas with low wages and weak union/environmental protections.
Rana Plaza Example (Bangladesh): The collapse of the Rana Plaza sweatshop, where Jo Fresh clothes were made, killed and injured thousands of workers. Many survivors, despite profound injuries, returned to work due to economic dependence.
The media often downplays or suppresses such stories to prevent public outcry in the West, maintaining the cycle of exploitation by allowing consumers to enjoy low prices without confronting the human cost.
Barriers to a Robust Rights Culture in the Criminal Justice System
"Tough on Crime" Policies: Reforms like harsher bail policies, often favored by the public, benefit the criminal justice system (e.g., increased revenue) but exacerbate inequities by disproportionately impacting those unable to pay bail.
Systemic Discrimination: Discrimination at all levels of the justice system (e.g., police targeting) is a significant barrier.
Lack of Outrage/Education: A lack of widespread education on systemic issues and a "blind faith" in institutions contribute to less public outrage.
Prioritizing Safety over Rights: People often prioritize their own safety and a "clean" society over the rights of those in the system, viewing criminals as "the other."
Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt (FUD) Mongers: In the neoliberal context, FUD mongers (media, politicians) sell security by exploiting insecurity. The media plays a crucial role in perpetuating a "master narrative of crime."
The Master Narrative of Crime: This narrative, widely communicated by media, portrays crime as:
Consistently rising.
Perpetrated by marginalized individuals (often young).
Primarily violent.
This narrative often diverges significantly from the reality of crime statistics and focuses on newsworthy, often petty violent crimes, rather than less visible issues like white-collar crime. It fuels moral panics.
Shift from Penal Welfare to "Nothing Works": The 1970s saw a shift from understanding society as a cause of crime (and thus focusing on rehabilitation) to a neoliberal "nothing works" approach that disregards offenders' biographies, focusing purely on who, what, when, where of crime and portraying criminals as deranged or morally bankrupt. This fosters fear and dehumanization.
Building Human Rights Culture: Bottom-Up Advocacy and Education
While individuals experience oppression (e.g., gender, race, workplace exploitation), liberation is often best achieved through bottom-up solidarity and advocacy for collective rights.
Examples: Desmond Cole's experience of being carded over times as a Black man, despite never committing a crime, highlights how racial embodiment leads to rights impingement.
Gap between Top-Down and Bottom-Up:
Top-down pronouncements (e.g., UN Declaration of Human Rights, legislative rights for LGBTQ communities) provide an aspirational framework but don't automatically translate to social or structural change on the ground.
Scholars like Dean Spade argue that legal victories (e.g., marriage rights) often show a gap between law inception and actual impact on people's life chances (e.g., disproportionate hate crime rates against LGBTQ individuals despite anti-hate crime laws).
Bottom-up human rights culture is essential to enact these aspirational rights and foster genuine social justice.
Defining and Practicing Human Rights Cultures
A human rights culture involves a culture of equity, addressing structural inequalities.
Education: Key for developing perspectives on structured inequality, racism in policing, and historical injustices.
NGOs: Play a vital role in promoting human rights education and understanding.
Debates: Online debates (e.g., equality vs. equity, systemic racism, white privilege) highlight differing understandings, particularly relevant in tough economic times.
Colonization as an Ongoing Process: Understanding the ongoing impact of colonization, slavery, redlining, and systemic racism is crucial for developing an equity-focused human rights culture, countering attempts to suppress critical historical education (e.g., banning Black history courses in Florida).
Australian Survey Data on Human Rights Understanding (The Reading)
Data revealed a significant lack of understanding of human rights among the population, especially concerning the criminal justice system.
of respondents considered human rights to be contingent on good behavior.
This is problematic because it presupposes guilt and justifies the erosion of rights for those accused or convicted.
It contributes to the "if you don't commit a crime, you have nothing to worry about" mentality, which allows for the dehumanization of those deemed "criminals." Even convicted individuals retain fundamental human rights (inalienability principle).
Example: The disparate sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine offenses in the 's and 's, which disproportionately affected racialized demographics due to differing drug use patterns and policing strategies (vigilant policing in "hotspots" of intersectional marginalization).
felt it was reasonable to restrict an entire group's rights if a member of that group abused the wider community's rights.
This invites systemic bias, racial profiling (e.g., "driving while Black," carding), and creates "categorical suspicion."
Example: The post-9/11 age and the "war on terror" led to "random" special airport screenings disproportionately affecting certain racial or national groups (e.g., an Iranian father with Canadian citizenship banned from the US due to inability to prove leisurely purpose, despite no wrongdoing).
Didier Biego's "Banopticon": This concept describes a surveillance assemblage that doesn't monitor everyone equally but targets those who embody "categorical suspicion," limiting their mobility to facilitate the free flow of the hegemonic male (those without suspicion).
Giorgio Agamben's "States of Exception": This practice creates socio-political contexts where certain marginalized groups (racialized, intersectionally marginalized) have their rights removed during emergencies or prolonged conflicts, essentially living in a "permanent state of exception."
This raises the ethical question of how long populations should be punished for the actions of a few.
felt it was okay to torture enemy soldiers in some circumstances.
This reflects a willingness to disregard fundamental human rights, often fueled by FUD mongers (government, media) who create fear and anxiety.
"Enemy combatants" are often arbitrarily designated, denied due process, and subjected to torture, reflecting a breakdown in a robust rights framework.
Ontario Human Rights Commission Data (2017)
Reveals similar problematic trends in Ontario's rights culture, suggesting a need for educational campaigns.
of respondents think discrimination is a problem, indicating an overarching awareness.
Negative stereotypes persist against transgender individuals ( positive attitude), refugees (46\%$), Muslim (46\%$), Arab (44\%$) people, Indigenous people, homeless individuals, and people receiving social assistance (39\%$ positive attitude).
The low positive perception of social assistance recipients reflects ideas of "lazy people" and "rugged individualism" (pull yourself up by your bootstraps).
The perception of homeless people has likely worsened post-COVID, highlighting a lack of consideration for second-generation rights (housing, social security).
A large minority (44\%$) agreed police are sometimes justified in profiling or targeting specific groups (Muslim/Arab populations, young people).
40\%$$ believe it's okay to target Black/African Canadians, South Asians, homeless people, Indigenous people.
Conclusion from Ontario Data: These numbers indicate a problem with human rights knowledge and suggest that human rights legislation alone is insufficient to foster social change. Human rights education is a necessary and complementary corollary to rights laws. There is a great need to improve human rights education in Ontario.