Instructions
Once you have read the Hajjar chapter and the UDHR, please complete this eResponse by writing concise but thorough answers to all of the following questions.
You must include page numbers in each question–your score will depend on it. I do not require any specific citation format. Just include (author last name, page number) at the end of the relevant sentences. Please note that you must cite when you draw any ideas from the text, whether or not you explicitly quote it. And you must draw your ideas from the text because that is the assignment.
Please be sure that if and when you use a direct quotation from the reading, you also explain what that quotation means in your own words.
Questions (number your answers)
- Mutua argues that the grandiosity of the human rights movement is underpinned by the savages-victims-saviors (SVS) metaphor. What does the SVS construction say? How is it used?
- What is the tension between local and universal that Mutua discusses, and what does he say tends to happen between the local and universal in the context of colonialism and its legacies?
- What is Mutua’s critique of “the metaphor of the victim” in human rights discourse?
Reply to a classmate
When you have finished posting your numbered answers, please read through and comment on someone else’s post, as well. Your comment should be substantive. If you agree or disagree with their post, explain why with reference to specifics. If you learned something from their post, identify what that is.
- Mutua argues that the grandiosity of the human rights movement is underpinned by the savages-victims-saviors (SVS) metaphor. What does the SVS construction say? How is it used?
- The SVS metaphor essentially states that the human rights project is littered with hypocrisy and urges the project to approach human rights with “neutrality” and self-reflection, as supported by this quote: “The movement does not deeply resonate in the cultural fabrics of non-Western states, except among hypocritical elites steeped in Western ideas. In order ultimately to prevail, the human rights movement must be moored in the cultures of all peoples” (208). This argument reminds me of the white savior complex, as such, the “savages-victims-saviors” construction reflects how savages ( infringe upon the human rights of victims, and saviors (essentially the West), get involved and ‘save’ or ‘rescue’ them. The discussion of good vs bad development is also necessary and that is addressed in Mutua’s writings, “the state only becomes a vampire when “bad” culture overcomes or disallows the development of “good” culture. The real savage, though, is not the state but a cultural deviation from human rights” (203). This discussion is important because the lines of development can sometimes get blurred but there are distinct actions that can prove its true intentions. I highly recommend taking BIS 310: Women, Culture, and Development (heavy content and lots of work but sooo much to take away).
- What is the tension between local and universal that Mutua discusses, and what does he say tends to happen between the local and universal in the context of colonialism and its legacies?
- What I believe to be the tension between local and universal takes place on page 218. Here he states that for much of history European culture has forced other cultures to conform to their systems. I think this is partly why English is the dominant language because we have gone into other countries, and instead of learning their culture and language, we have expected them to learn ours. He goes on to say, “the local must be replaced with the universal – that is, the European.” In saying that, he is stating that when the West goes into other cultures and tries to push their narrative, it denies the local from embracing their lived experience and understanding of their own culture that the West fails to acknowledge. They often go to other countries, particularly the Global South, to “help” them, but when they do that, they are not considering their lived experience, their culture, and their way of life. It is a eurocentric approach that does not work on ‘good’ development at the local level. It therefore perpetuates colonialism and its legacies.
- What is Mutua’s critique of “the metaphor of the victim” in human rights discourse?
- From what I gather of Matua’s critique of “the metaphor of the victim,” argues that the way human rights is looked at in terms of the victim emphasizes an “us” vs “them” narrative (232). As such, it perpetuates the ideology of the West being ‘better’ than other/Third World countries, conforming to a white savior/eurocentric view. When ideologies as such are driving subconscious, or conscious, driving forces behind human rights, those who are ‘non-white’ are typically viewed as the victim, harmed by savages, unable to defend themselves, and the whites are the saviors, swooping in to “save them” (235).
