Abstract
This chapter explores the shifting content of the concept subject (of rights). Although by common assumption the subjects of rights are “all members of the human family”, the divisive ontological and epistemological in(ex)clusionary premise of human rights points to the contrary. The critique of the subject of rights concerns questions regarding what the content of the concept subject is, and how the subject comes into existence. It also questions the privileging of the enlightenment humanist human as pre-existing subject and the privileging of the historic western epistemological framework. The chapter traces the subject of rights as premised particularly on the identity of the enlightenment western male, its metamorphoses into citizen, into human (rights) during the 1940s, and, in recent years, into victim. I argue that becoming subjects of rights is enacted through human rights literacies and processes of political and pedagogical subjectification. I conclude that the ongoing critique and the suspicion of the content of the concept subject (of rights), might open possibilities for the continual (re)framing of the subjects of rights in becoming.
… recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world
Preamble Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) (http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/.)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this chapter I distinguish between the not-human (as the categorised sub-human related to race, ethnicity, gender, class and other classifications) and the non-human. The non-human turn does not make claims to teleology or progress but focuses on the inseparability of human and non-human. It critiques the dualisms constructed between humans, animals, organisms, plants, climate systems, affectivity, materiality and technological systems (Grusin, 2015, p. 3).
- 2.
As illustration, Wolfe (2010), referencing Bostrom, argues that transhumanism has its roots in rational humanism. Wolfe (2010) regards transhumanism as an intensification of humanism. Transhumanism, Garreau (in Wolfe, 2010) poses, aims to enhance human intellectual, physical and emotional capabilities within an engineered evolution of ‘post-humans’. Posthumanism, Wolfe (2010) however advocates, is not an ‘after’ humanism but an opposition to the fantasies of disembodiment and autonomy.
- 3.
This term should not be confused with a police force, as the word commonly refers to in English and French. The police or police order refers to the overall distribution of the sensible which precludes the emergence of politics. Police or the police order is therefore not in essence used to indicate oppression but indicates a totalising account of the population by assigning a title, role or position to each member of the population. It also determines in(ex)clusion (Ranciére, 2012, p. 89). In Greek society, for example, women, slaves and barbarians had determined roles and positions and were therefore included in society but were not allowed participation and therefore were simultaneously excluded from political spaces (Ranciére, 2015, p. 86). Better or worse police orders are indicated by the extent to which the order is open to breaches, dissensus and contestations (Ranciére, 2012, p. 89).
References
Al-Daraweesh, F., & Snauwaert, D. T. (2013). Towards a hermeneutical theory of international human rights education. Educational Theory, 63(4), 389–411.
Arendt, H. (1966). The origins of totalitarianism. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company.
Balibar, E. (1991). Citizen subject. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 33–57). London/New York: Routledge.
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. London: Duke University Press.
Bauman, Z. (1994). Postmodern ethics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Baxi, U. (2007). Human rights in a posthuman world. Critical essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Becker, A. (2017). Moral responsibility and human rights: speaking to the ‘dark side of human rights. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31(1), 45–60.
Becker, A., & Du Preez, P. (2016). Ideological illusions, human rights and the right to education: The in(ex)clusion of the poor in post-apartheid education. Journal of Education, 64, 55–76.
Biesta, G. J. J. (2013). The beautiful risk of education. London: Routledge.
Blattner, W. (2006). Heidegger’s being and time. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Celermajer, D. (2017). The ritualization of human rights education and training: The fallacy of the potency of knowing. Journal of Human Rights, 16(2), 160–177.
Cistelecan, A. (2011). Which critique of human rights? Evaluating the post-colonialist and the post-Althusserian alternatives. International Journal of Žižek studies, 5(1), 1–13.
Coysh, J. (2014). The dominant discourse of human rights education: A critique. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 6(1), 89–114.
Derrida, J. (1991). “Eating well,” or the calculation of the subject: An interview with Jacques Derrida. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 96–119). London/New York: Routledge.
Derrida, J. (2001). Writing and difference. London: Routledge.
Descombes, V. (1991). Apropos of the “critique of the subject” and the critique of this critique. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 120–134). London/New York: Routledge.
Dreyfuss, H. L. (1995). Being-in-the-World. A commentary on Heidegger’s being and time. Division Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Du Preez, P., & Becker, A. (2016). Ontologies and possibilities of human rights: Exploring dissensus to facilitate reconciliation in post-conflict education contexts. Perspectives in Education, 34(3), 1–14.
Golder, B. (2015). Foucault and the politics of rights. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Grusin, R. (2015). Introduction. In R. Grusin (Ed.), The nonhuman turn (pp. 1–10). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York: Harper& Row, Publishers Inc.
Henry, M. (1991). The critique of the subject. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 157–166). London/New York: Routledge.
Kapur, R. (2006). Human rights in the 21st century: Take a walk on the dark side. Sydney Law Review, 28, 665–687.
Keet, A. (2014). Epistemic ‘othering’ and the decolonising of knowledge. Africa Insight, 44(1), 23–37.
Keet, A. (2015). It is time: Critical human rights education in an age of counter-hegemonic distrust. Education as Change, 19(3), 46–64.
Keet, A., Nel, W., & Sattarzadeh, S. D. (2017). Retreating rights: Human rights, pre-theoretical praxes and student activism in South African universities. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31(6), 79–95.
Kofman, S. (1991). Descartes entrapped. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 120–134). London/New York: Routledge.
Mazzei, L. A. (2014). Beyond an easy sense: A diffractive analysis. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(6), 742–746.
Meyer, D. T. (2016). Recovering the human in human rights. Law, culture and the humanities, 12(3), 474–484.
Montefiore, A. (2001). “Talking liberties”. Jacques Derrida’s interview with Alan Montefiore. In G. J. J. Biesta & D. Egéa-Kuehne (Eds.), Derrida and education (pp. 176–185). New York: Routledge.
Moyn, S. (2014). Human rights and the uses of history. London: Verso.
Nancy, J. (1991). Introduction. In E. Cadava, P. Connor, & J. Nancy (Eds.), Who comes after the subject? (pp. 1–8). London/New York: Routledge.
Peters, M. (2001). Humanism, Derrida, and the new humanities. In G. J. J. Biesta & D. Egéa-Kuehne (Eds.), Derrida and education (pp. 209–231). New York: Routledge.
Postma, D. (2016). The ethics of becoming in a pedagogy for social justice. A posthumanist perspective. South African Journal of Higher Education, 30(3), 310–328.
Ranciére, J. (2012). The politics of aesthetics. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Ranciére, J. (2015). Dissensus. On politics and aesthetics. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Roux, C. (2017). Human rights literacies and students’ paradoxical understandings of tolerance and respect. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31(6), 61–78.
Roux, C., & Becker, A. (2017). On critique, dissensus and human rights literacies. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31(6), 1–8.
Schaap, A. (2011). Enacting the right to have rights: Jacques Ranciére’s critique of Hannah Arendt. European Journal of Political Theory, 10(1), 22–45.
Shestack, J. J. (1998). The philosophic foundations of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 20, 201–234.
Simons, M., & Masschelein, J. (2010). Governmental, political and pedagogic subjectification: Foucault with Ranciére. Educational philosophy and theory, 42(5–6), 588–605.
Tascón, S., & Ife, J. (2008). Human rights and critical whiteness: Whose humanity? The International Journal of Human Rights, 12(3), 307–327.
Thapliyal, N., Vally, S., & Spreen, C. A. (2013). “Until We Get Up Again to Fight”: Education rights and participation in South Africa. Comparative Educational Review, 57(2), 212–213.
Tibbitts, F. (2017). Evolution of human rights education models. In M. Bajaj (Ed.), Human rights education: Theory, research, praxis (pp. 69–95). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights (The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). Retrieved March 18, 2018, from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Education/Training/Pages/Decade.aspx; United Nations Commission on Human Rights on a World Program for Human Rights Education (2004/71).
Veroneze, C. (2016). Can the humanities become post-human? Interview with Rosi Braidotti. Relations, 4(1), 97–101.
Wolfe, C. (2010). What is posthumanism? Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press.
Zembylas, M. (2016). Foucault and human rights: Seeking the renewal of human rights education. Journal of the Philosophy of Education, 50(3), 384–397.
Zembylas, M., Charalambous, P., Charalambous, C., & Lestos, S. (2016). Toward a critical hermeneutical approach of human rights education: Universal ideals, contextual realities and teachers’ difficulties. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(4), 497–517.
Žižek, S. (2005). Against human rights. New Left Review, 34, 115–131.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Becker, A. (2019). (Re)Framing the Subject(s) of Rights. In: Roux, C., Becker, A. (eds) Human Rights Literacies. Interdisciplinary Studies in Human Rights, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99567-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99567-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99566-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99567-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)