In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Human Rights Quarterly 24.1 (2002) 312-315



[Access article in PDF]

In Our Own Best Interest:
How Defending Human Rights Benefits Us All


In Our Own Best Interest: How Defending Human Rights Benefits Us All, by William F. Schulz (Boston: Beacon Press, 2001) viii + 235 pp.

A few years ago William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA, was describing current human rights crises around the world for Knoxville's National Public Radio station. The talk show host asked him: "But what does all of this have to do with a person in East Tennessee?" 1 This was the first time this sort of question had ever been posed to Schulz, and it inspired his new book, In Our Own Best Interest: How Defending Human Rights Benefits Us All. Meant as a guide for those who ask--or are asked--"why should we care?" it marks the first time a human rights advocate has so publicly struggled with the lack of a U.S. domestic constituency for human rights. [End Page 312]

Scholars have described the human rights movement's detachment from the American public, but, for the most part, human rights "insiders" have not tackled this topic head-on as directly and with as much urgency as Schulz. 2 According to Schulz, the fault lies with the overly moral and legal rhetoric of human rights campaigners. He appeals to the movement to "make the human rights 'sale'": human rights activists should describe human rights promotion and protection in a more pragmatic light and use interest-based arguments on top of their usual moral appeals. 3 He dismisses any squeamishness human rights activists may feel about appealing to less-than-altruistic instincts: "Ultimately I do not care why we staunch another's suffering. Only that we do what we can to stop it." 4

A human rights activist can dig up plenty of material meant to bring international human rights problems home to the layperson--material that inspires shock (see for example AIUSA's faux ad on conflict diamonds that parodies De Beers' commercials) and sympathy (see Witness's ICC public service announcement that features moving images of victims of crimes against humanity). 5 Schulz shows us that activists also need old-fashioned cost-benefit analyses of human rights problems that demonstrate the great benefits of human rights work. 6 What might persuade the good people of East Tennessee that the horrible conditions of Russian prisons matter? Campaigners can report that such conditions amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, but they might also stress that these prisons are breeding grounds for multi-drug resistant strains of tuberculosis that are just a plane ride away. Promoting this type of utilitarian argument is at the core of Schulz's book, and, if they take it on, campaigners will have to do their homework to be able to cite logical short and long-term consequences of inaction.

Schulz portrays the human rights movement as stagnant, suffering the consequences of its reliance on elite advocacy over grassroots organizing. He contrasts the human rights movement's constituency-building efforts unfavorably with the U.S. environmental movement, although, to be fair to human rights campaigners, it will always be easier to muster grassroots activity around toxic waste in the local pond than human rights abuses in distant lands. Scholars of the environmental movement call certain types of environmental grassroots activism NIMBY ("not in my backyard") protests. Essentially Schulz encourages human rights campaigners to use the rhetoric of NIMBY on an international scale: infectious disease, environmental [End Page 313] disasters, terrorism--all of these and more could (and do) creep into the American backyard, and human rights abuses cause and magnify them. By supporting global human rights, Americans will protect themselves from a host of problems. Beyond NIMBY, he argues that prevention is good for the pocket book. He provides chapters on why good human rights practice is good for business and how it cuts foreign aid costs as well.

Related to his portrayal of human rights as a social movement in need of members...

pdf

Share