Poverty as a Human Rights Violation: The Social Order of Injustice?
Poverty is a result of the lack of or violation of basic human rights, but it is not in and of itself a violation of human rights. While global poverty is a byproduct of many global societal functions today the eradication of poverty will not come about through the rhetoric of whether or not it is a violation of human rights, but rather through focusing on perpetuating the human rights which bring about “a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of [one]self and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights §25). Thomas Pogge in his work “Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties” poses the question of whether “present citizens of the affluent countries, in collusion with the ruling elites of most poor countries, are harming the global poor”; for which he responds with a resounding affirmative. However, Pogge responds to the question of poverty as a violation of human rights from the angle of the present global social order perpetuating and causing global poverty through its unjust system and an “imaginary” global social order as the comparison showing the depth of the affluent countries injustice.
In my opinion, poverty is not a violation of human rights because a violation necessitates a violator, but there is not a single entity or factor clearly to blame for widespread poverty. Second, the poverty line is relative and not easily or consistently defined; consequently it is not clear when the right to live above the line has been violated. While poverty is perpetuated by certain aspects of the global social order and its functions, it is not the cause of poverty; even the cause of poverty is not easily defined or globally consistent. Focusing on poverty as a violation of human rights will not solve or begin to change world poverty, but more importantly it is not an accurate discourse.
I argue that poverty is not a violation of human rights because a “violation” implies and requires a violator. While there are many factors which contribute to global poverty there is not a single factor which is solely responsible for it or perpetuating it. There are cases, such as genocide, where extreme poverty in a country is caused directly by clear violation of basic human rights, but this does not necessitate that the greater level of poverty induced is in and of itself a violation of the human rights which the genocide violated, rather the resulting poverty is one of the serious outcomes of a horrific violation of human rights.
Just as poverty is not caused by a single factor the present global institutional order is not caused by a single factor either. Pogge argues that affluent countries are violating human rights by imposing a “global institutional order under which hundreds of millions cannot attain “a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights §25). However, I am of the opinion that while the many factors which comprise extreme poverty, such as a lack of food, clothing, housing, education, medical care (etc), are in fact violations of basic human rights they cannot be lumped together as poverty violating human rights because the causes and remedies for each of these factors is not necessarily the same.
World poverty is an appalling and tragic reality, but it is important to recognize that its existence is not new and that eradicating poverty does not mean total equality. In the World Bank’s report “Global Synthesis: Consultations with the Poor” it became incredibly clear that those living in poverty are not asking for riches or even equality; they are asking for safety, food and for clothing and shelter for their children. Perhaps instead of empty rhetoric accusing rich countries of empty rhetoric perpetuating poverty it would make a greater difference to focus on answering and fulfilling the basic needs and human rights of the poor.
Sources:
Thomas Pogge, “Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties,” Ethics and International. Affairs, 19(1), (2005)
Narayan, Deepa, Robert Chambers, Meera Shah, and Patti Petesch. ” Global Synthesis: Consultations with the Poor.” Washington, DC: World Bank, 1999
© 2010, naomibenedick. All rights reserved.
For a discussion of the potential ‘violators’ missing from the ‘the global economic order violates the rights of the poor’ metaphor see:
S. Meckled-Garcia, ‘Is there really a global human rights deficit: consequentialist liability and cosmopolitan alternatives’, in Brock, G., Cosmopolitanism for and against, OUP forthcoming.
Pogge does indeed claim that we are indirectly responsible for upholding a system that violates the rights of the poor, but beyond a metaphorical notion of the system violating rights, there is no obvious candidate for the agent with whose violations we are complicit. The WTO is not an agent, but a set of negotiated agreements, which is the patter for international finance institutions, and many of the poverty effects are the result of mass, un-coordinated market effects (such as price rises due to supply and demand). Unless there is an argument for a global deux ex machina, the notion of global violation of the rights of the poor, does not seem to make sense. That does not mean we should ignore their plight or there are not cosmopolitan alternatives, it just means that human rights violation is not necessarily the right way to analyse this problem.