[afro-nets] Food for a deceptive thought

[Claudio Schuftan <claudio@hcmc.netnam.vn>]

Food for a deceptive thought
----------------------------

Human Rights Reader 79

HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ?WEAPONS OF MASS DECEPTION?:

1. In world affairs parlance, often particular words, short
phrases and slogans briefly (or not so briefly) become fashion-
able; it may seem they do little harm. But, beware, thought is
dependent on words. Cooked-up slogans can cover, hide and divert
from reality. Many words and phrases are symbols and reflections
of conceptual frameworks and economic and political schemes that
influence (and can even distort) the political discourse and
practices the world over. (Do "the axis of evil", "coalition of
the willing" and "pre-emptive defense" ring a bell?). With a
good propaganda apparatus, these phrases can defend the indefen-
sible.

2. Human rights (HR) work is not immune to such deceptions. Gov-
ernments, international financial institutions (IFIs) and many a
development agency or trans-national corporation (TNC) have in-
deed kidnapped and are misusing terms such as ?democracy and
HR?, ?human development?, ?human security? and even plain ?human
rights? and ?peace?. So, it behooves us to openly unmask these
deceivers by denouncing the abstract and/or biased contexts in
which they are using these otherwise very precise terms. After
all, our disagreements with them are not only reflections of
their verbal ambiguities.

3. Language has been a political weapon for ages. Used as such,
it is not out to prove, but to sell -- and, in doing so, it can
devaluate any existing intelligent political discourse. This
?double-speak? can and eventually does become intellectual dis-
honesty at its most perverse. Beware: Those who control the lan-
guage, control the agenda. (J. Stauber, S. Rampton and E. Par-
tridge)

4. Our mistake too often is that we think that facts can counter
these slogans and will surely set us free?eventually! Many of us
have, at some point in time, thought that if we can only get all
the facts out there in the public eye, then every rational per-
son will reach the right conclusion. But it has been and is a
vain hope. When the facts do not fit the frames of important
duty-bearers, the frames are kept and the facts are ignored.
Frames matter; once entrenched, they are hard to dispel. A good
part of the rulers? conceptual framing is unconscious (as is
ours!). The question is: How much do we have to change where-
the-prevailing-values-are-taking-us to advance in our HR work?
(G. Lakoff) [A good start is to say that the (new) HR framework
will have to conform with what has been agreed to in the major
UN conferences and Covenants over the past 20 or more years].

5. I think we simply have to analyze these conceptual frameworks
to uncover which biases their proponents are coming from --and
that is a political act. (*) Such an awareness does matter. Be-
ing able to analytically dissect and then to coherently articu-
late what is going on in the ?frame? in the background can
change what is going on?if we choose to engage in the needed po-
litical debate that brings the underlying motivations to the
fore! Such an exercise will also help us bring clarity to those
leaders who hope to get concessions from governments that (pas-
sively at least) support the neo-liberal order for lack of al-
ternatives.
___________
(*):?The rich are getting richer; the poor are getting poorer?:
Typing this popular slogan into Google gives over 34,000 hits.

6. In HR work, we acknowledge that most governments still need
to address many unresolved questions about rights. Political
leaders thus have to be well briefed in advance, and persuaded
of the case for HR so that, once and for all, the HR perspective
enters their ?frames?.

Claudio Schuftan
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
mailto:claudio@hcmc.netnam.vn
_____________________________
Mostly taken from the South Letter, the South Centre?s magazine,
issue 39, 2003.