Can someone explain what this paragraph is talking about? I do not understand it.
"But Western universalism, again, has two faces: it also promotes the principles of liberty and equality throughout the world. It is not possible to proclaim global human rights, on the one hand, and to have a Muslim, African, Jewish, Christian, or Asian charter of human rights, on the other hand. To respect the otherness and the history of others, one must consider them as members of the same humanity, not of another, second-class humanity. Human rights infringe the local right to wall off cultures from external pressure or assault. Respect for traditions that violate human rights is taken by Western universalism as tantamount to disrespect for their victims. The dilemmas that stem from this attitude are not easily resolved. Raising questions of global responsibility leads to accusations(and to the temptation) of colonialism."
Make sure you are clear on the meanings of "universalism" and "colonialism."
http://www.answers.com
~~~~~~~~~
It is not possible to proclaim global human rights, on the one hand, and to have a Muslim, African, Jewish, Christian, or Asian charter of human rights, on the other hand.
This sentence is saying that there cannot be "universal" (global) human rights, if there are also separate human rights standards for individual cultures. Having separate standards implies that the concept of human rights is different for each of those cultures.
With those two ideas in mind, the rest should make sense to you.
"Respect for traditions that violate human rights is taken by Western universalism as tantamount to disrespect for their victims." What about this part?
Most Westerners don't accept the Saudi traditions and laws that prohibit women from driving cars.
The paragraph is discussing the concept of Western universalism and how it can have two contradictory faces. On one hand, Western universalism promotes the principles of liberty and equality globally. This means that it argues for the recognition and protection of human rights for all individuals, regardless of their religion, ethnicity, or culture.
However, the paragraph also points out a potential dilemma that arises from this universalistic approach. While promoting global human rights, it argues that it is not possible to have separate charters of human rights based on specific religions or cultures, such as a Muslim, African, Jewish, Christian, or Asian charter. The reason behind this argument is that if we view different groups as having their own charter of human rights, it can perpetuate the idea of a second-class humanity, where some groups are seen as inferior. Instead, the paragraph suggests that we should consider all individuals as part of the same humanity, with equal rights and dignity.
Moreover, the paragraph mentions that Western universalism challenges the notion of respecting traditions that violate human rights. Western universalism sees the respect for such traditions as a form of disrespect towards the victims of those violations. This raises dilemmas because it questions the balance between respecting cultural diversity and upholding universally recognized human rights.
Ultimately, the paragraph suggests that raising questions of global responsibility and advocating for human rights can sometimes lead to accusations of colonialism, as Western ideas and principles may be viewed as imposing on other cultures. These complex issues require careful consideration and negotiation to strike a balance between universal principles and cultural differences.