The Evolution of International Human Rights: Visions Seen (review)

In this remarkable and inspiring book, Paul Gordon Lauren traces the history of the struggle for international human rights norms from ancient religious and philosophical thinkers to the recent creation of the International Criminal Court. Remarkably, the book offers a coherent analytical narrative covering hundreds of years of history yet consistently focusing on the common threads of human rights visionaries, reactionary forces, the human revulsion to violence, and technological change. The inspiring part comes from Lauren's consideration of the historical landscape, pointing out how far humanity has come and suggesting that progress is the result of "visions," or fervently held and actively pursued views on the inherent dignity and worth of individuals.

All of these claims are of course open to contestation, but the last is particularly likely to raise pointed responses from skeptics and "realists." Critics would certainly ask the right question: Can we really say that international human rights norms are the result of activists who articulate beautiful visions of the human condition and agitate for improvement? Lauren does a fine job marshaling evidence on behalf of this proposition. He traces human rights ideas articulated not only by visionaries like Mahatma Gandhi but also by powerful individuals like Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, providing marvelous detail about their views. Readers prone to thinking that human rights rhetoric is a recent addition to state discourse will be surprised at the consistency with which it has surfaced historically. Lauren does stretch the argument a bit far, but not beyond the breaking point. Rare is the book that can find common ground between Karl Marx, Confucius, and King Hammurabi, yet Lauren succeeds in identifying common threads of concern for the disempowered.

As Lauren realizes, describing commonalities among visions of a just society are not sufficient to demonstrate the influence of those visions. As a result, Lauren also shows how disempowered individuals and states have latched on to that rhetoric to demand rights. His case is strongest when he discusses colonized peoples and their use of the rhetoric of powerful states to gain independence. Additionally, Lauren makes a convincing case that most advances in human rights norms have occurred in response to appalling episodes of violence that, once uncovered, shock the conscience of most observers.

Of course, skeptics will not be persuaded so easily. One problem is the book's tendency to portray the struggle for human rights in black-and-white terms. Too often here, actors are presented as either pure humanitarian visionaries or unrepentant, violent reactionaries. Thus, Lauren's framework does not fit well with complex, flesh-and-blood individuals like Woodrow Wilson, torn asunder by conflicting ideas and political realities. The book notes these contradictions, as when Wilson untiringly promoted democracy yet single-handedly quashed efforts to promote minority rights in the League of Nations charter. Yet the analytical frame does not accommodate these contradictions well. As a result, some puzzles arise along the way. For example, why would states like South Africa, which was manifestly repressive in the 1940s, nevertheless argue that human rights should be included in the United Nations Charter? It seems unlikely that South Africa was motivated by moralistic visions, and Lauren later notes how South Africa really did not seem to mean anything it said. How then should we understand the progress of human rights at the hands of such states?

Much of the time, no doubt, the motives of states and other actors are mixed. Even powerful humanitarian visions and human revulsion to violence are insufficient. States sometimes require baser motives to act on behalf of human rights, perhaps in protecting their nationals elsewhere, perhaps in shaming others or in avoiding shame themselves. Lauren does not ignore these elements and should be commended for sticking to his themes so well. Yet like many of the best books, this one offers opportunities for further research. Even if skeptics are not satisfied, they should feel sufficiently challenged to identify some of these mixed motives and demonstrate...