Care in a Post-Liberal Conversation
In her chapter “Making Rights Rhetoric Work: Constructing Care in a Post-Liberal World,” Dr. Alison Brysk notes that the rhetoric surrounding human rights is based on an ethos, which she describes as a form of discourse that seeks to shape public action. The human rights ethos is the justification of human rights and their greater purpose, whether that be moral or pragmatic. Dr. Brysk sees human rights as essentially the idea that all humans have inherent and equal moral worth, that social orders exist to promote the humanity of their members, and that authority should be guided and bounded by its impacts on human dignity.
At its inception, human rights discourse was often centered on liberal rhetoric. It was emphasized that people should have rights under the law and that people should have autonomy from state power. This first iteration was primarily focused on freedom. As the conversation evolved, topics such as social and economic rights, as well as collective and cultural rights to self-determination, were highlighted. This continued as globalization expanded.
However, in the current conversation, liberal ideas like free markets, democracy, and globalization are seen in a more nuanced light. Through the influence of economic neo-liberalism, it has become clear that many of these elements can create opportunities for and threats against pursuing human rights. Historically we have seen significant gains, stagnation, and regression. Liberalism has not delivered on its lofty promises. Critics now debate whether there are too few rights or whether we are even striving for the correct goals. We must contend with declining democracies, withdrawals from international institutions, and the rise of nationalism, fundamentalism, and illiberal regimes in countries around the world.
Dr. Brysk advocates for a cosmopolitanism of care. Cosmopolitanism is the focus on individual people as the unit of concern. She adds a doctrine of compassion, which helps lift the conversation towards the idea of connecting across and between societies rather than rights being a set of legal entitlements. She notes that an ethic of care is built on empathy and interdependence. When a feminist lens is applied, we see how we need to view power as it is replicated through social systems. She pulls out three essential questions: Who is Human? What is Right? And who is responsible?
Finally, she highlights the importance of action alongside argumentation. An ethic of care can generate new voices and new mobilization. Care creates multiple levels of responsibility in local and horizontal governance, peer connection and review, and non-state actors. We must act as humans and see others as humans as well. A feminist ethic of care allows room for broader definitions of humanity and rights and gives us many pathways to nurture and protect those rights. An ethic of care has implications at all levels, from the personal to the global. It creates the conversation and environment that will move us from autonomy to empowerment and from individual freedom to enabling social conditions.
About the Author
Stella Hudson is a Graduate Assistant with the Baha’i Chair for World Peace. She graduated from the College of William and Mary in 2021 with a B.A. in English. She will graduate from the University of Maryland with her MLIS in spring 2023.