Ana içeriğe atla

Poverty as a Violation of Human Rights

 


With the rising of the industrial revolution, capitalism became the embodiment of the competitive and cruel structure of industrial society. Developed countries made up the fundamental pillars of the modern world where capitalism inevitably and arbitrarily spread its roots to every corner. While the world was infected by capitalism’s efficient quality that allegedly bestowed every individual the chance to climb the stairs of the economic pyramid, the developing countries were doomed to an impasse. To elaborate, the rapid advancement in technology pave the way for better infrastructure and it gave birth to a competitive habitat for the economy. However, developing countries couldn’t keep up with the pace and gradually became more and more dependent and vulnerable not external sources. So, developing countries’ dreadful portrait against ferocious capitalism begets the first signs of extreme poverty in developing countries. When developing countries compared with the others, it became clear that poverty deprives individuals of their human rights. It restricts or worse takes away the very essential elements of human rights such as nourishment, sheltering, and clothing. In other words, poverty is a restricting chain on human rights and because it obstructs the individual from his obligatory needs. In this essay, I will attempt to investigate what kind of impact poverty has on developing countries and what will happen to the human rights of the individuals provided that such poverty is alleviated. Lastly, I shall argue that poverty is the arch-enemy of human rights, and undertaking to eliminate it is obligatory and will provide the individual his fundamental human rights.  

               Poverty restricts the individual from their most vital needs and thereby elimination of poverty will unseal the ways in which individuals can satisfy their needs. In extreme cases, poverty obstructs the individual from any modern method of nourishment leading them to seek desperate solutions. Such solutions may present themselves with a variety of sickness without remedies and it will beget the initiation of big epidemics. Arguably one of the prominent examples of such depiction of poverty demonstrated itself as Black Death in 1346. Although it is not certain that Black Death’s initiator is poverty, it is a well-known fact that the unprivileged were harmed the most in those unfortunate times. To be precise, poverty imprisoned the individual within a certain location and obstructed their way to find food ultimately dooming them to inevitable death. In an article from UNDP, the author points out the devastating impact of poverty on individual’s freedom and asserts that “poverty is an infringement on freedom, and that the elimination of poverty should be addressed as a basic entitlement and a human right – not merely as an act of charity”(“Poverty Reduction and Human Rights” 2003). The author’s contemplation on poverty and why it should be eliminated unveils that though poverty is not the only obstruction towards human rights, it is a solid obstacle in the way to provide individuals their most basic needs. Hence eliminating poverty should not be regarded “as an act of charity” and should be viewed as a “basic entitlement”. Accordingly, alleviating poverty can set the first steps for people to acquire their most basic needs which also will be the first steps to vouchsafe them their human rights.

               Poverty imprisons the individual to an unescapable fate in which the individual is deprived of his fundamental needs. In developing countries where financial problems occur due to the highly contested world economy, the unprivileged suffer the most because they do not have the resources to satisfy their needs. What is worse, poverty presents itself with the most atrocious quality; the fact that without any help, it is practically impossible to escape from such a pit hole. To put it another way, poverty restricts the individual to satisfy his needs and it also restricts the individual from seeking his needs elsewhere. It subtly takes away the right to travel and to eat, shelter, or get some clothes. In an article from UNDP it is stated that “Poverty is a denial of human rights”(“ Poverty Reduction and Human Rights” 2003). The author’s ambitious comment on poverty amplifies its cruel impact on human rights and individuals. Therefore, the attempt to alleviate it becomes an attempt to support human rights or even reinforce human rights. Precisely, in developing countries where poverty strikes the most reinforcing human rights is a must and a basic entitlement for individuals.  

In conclusion, alleviating poverty in a highly contested world economy is a hard mission to undertake. Nevertheless, the attempt to do so is not an act of charity, it is an obligatory act to which every country should pay heed. The prominent reason for such obligation stems from poverty’s restricting nature on individuals. It cunningly takes away the individual’s right to eat, travel, shelter, or even wear clothes. It begets epidemics, famines, and droughts. Watching all this happen is a direct violation of human rights.  

 

Poverty reduction and human rights - UNDP. (2003). Retrieved March 23, 2021, from http://content-ext.undp.org/aplaws_publications/1873321/povertyreduction-humanrights0603%5B1%5D.pdf

Yorumlar

Bu blogdaki popüler yayınlar

Rhetoric in Hobbes' Leviathan

  Hobbes’ Word Play Hobbes argues in favor of a monarch or an oligarch. To be more precise, he is in favor of the idea that multiplicity comes with complexity, harming the integrity of the state. In his opinion, men are mostly power-driven, greedy beings who must surrender themselves to a sovereign power that can spread the terror of punishment. According to Hobbes, this fear of punishment is the only effective motivating force that can keep people from brutally murdering each other. While this Hobbesian idea of the state portrays the sovereign’s subjects almost as though they are slaves, this essay will argue that Hobbes is not fundamentally against liberty and allows it within the constraints of laws. Hobbes's description of liberty suggests that only external impediments are against freedom. He states that liberty is “the absence of external impediments” (189) and, although these impediments may take away man’s power to do what he would, they do not prevent men from using th...

Rousseau on Legitimacy of State

Hobbes'dan sonra Rousseau okumayı Proust'tan sonra Daphnes ve Chloe okumaya benzetiyorum. Proust aşkı öyle yapay, çıkarcı ve öyle çirkin yansıtıyor ki, ondan sonra okuduğun her romana ister istemez Proust'un realist bakış açısından bakıyorsun. Belki de realizm sevdamı bırakmalıyımdır. Hobbes'un determinist bakış açısı da birçok argümanını epey ikna edici kılıyor. Bazen bu bakış açısından kaçmak istiyor insan. Hobbes kimmiş lan, ben ölümlü tanrıya irademi falan teslim edemem, gayet özgürüm demek istiyor. Yine de gel gör ki Hobbes haklı. Nasıl, Kant ödev ahlakında nasıl ki herkes davranışlarının topluma yansıdığını varsayarak hareket etmeli diyorsa, Hobbes da yapılmak istemediğini yapma diyor. Buna karşı çıkmak da biraz zor. Rousseau abi Social Contract'ında denese de Emile kitabındaki ikna ediciliğini devam ettiremiyor gibi hissediyorum. Birazdan okuyacak olduğun yazıda da oldukça soyut fikirler göreceksin ve yer yer kendine e ama niye diye soracaksın. Bil ki ben de ...

Hobbes’ Paradox

Hobbes’ Paradox Resolved According to Hobbes, people are born with passions that ultimately lead them into a never-ending war. They require artificial power to stop killing each other. Unless such a power is erected, Hobbes suggests, leaving the state of nature is impossible since people are not inclined to cooperate and trust each other. The core reason why it is impossible to leave the state of nature is because of the innate passions people have that drive them to be constantly in conflict. Hobbes states that in the condition of nature, “any reasonable suspicion” renders any covenant or promise invalid since “bonds of words are too weak to bridle men’s ambition, avarice, anger, and other passions…” (196). Here, Hobbes highlights the importance of punishments, suggesting that without the motivating fear of punishments, covenants are practically invalid. It is also important to understand what Hobbes means by the condition of nature. He argues that because men are born equal, they...