IndexCultural Relativism and International Human RightsThe Persecution of People with AlbinismThe Tolerance Argument of Cultural RelativismThe Limits of TolerancePossible Approaches to a SolutionConclusion"We should respect the fact that other cultures have different values , even if that means they reject human rights.” Say No to Plagiarism. Get a Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay In the first section of this essay, I will touch on the age-old controversy between the universality of human rights and cultural relativism by discussing the issue of persecution of albinos in the United Republic of Tanzania. I will then describe how the Tanzanian government has attempted to resolve the dilemma between cultural relativism and human rights, as in the case mentioned above cultural relativism with respect to mandatory rights, in particular the right to life. Although international human rights law allows limitations, derogations and reservations of second generation rights, non-derogable rights are not exempted and are applicable even in times of public emergencies that threaten national security, and henceforth these rights do not they can be violated in the name of culture, since even the public emergency situation receives no such leniency. I will conclude that the justification of cultural differences for violating human rights is implausible and must not be respected or tolerated. I will conclude that the international human rights system must ensure that states establish robust preventive measures to protect vulnerable people and prosecute those responsible for abuses related to cultural beliefs, namely the role of witchcraft in the persecution of albinos. Another role that falls to the international system is to propose a moral code that guides behavior in all societies, such as the value of protecting from beatings those who are less able in society, in particular people with disabilities, as in the case of people with albinism, expulsion from society, fatal mutilations, torture and murder. If and when these values ​​are rooted and accepted within the relevant cultures, these new ideas will be able to shift fixed attitudes in societies without imposing external norms. Cultural Relativism and International Human Rights Over the past three decades, and mainly at the dawn of the 21st century, relativism has taken a prominent place in the creation of various theories, moral judgments, and ideological appeals. Relativism encompasses a number of different disciplines, through which cultural relativism is extracted and subsequently incorporated into today's international human rights. The two extreme perspectives on cultural relativism are radical universalism and radical cultural relativism. Radical cultural relativism believes that rights exist only when a culture actively perceives them as rights. Radical universalism holds that culture is essentially irrelevant to the legitimacy of a right. However, other views exist among these evidently conflicting views: strong cultural relativism accepts some international rights but allows for large variations, while weak cultural relativist perspectives accept a variety of universally applicable human rights. They argue that culture cannot prevail over absolute rights such as the right to life and freedom from torture. Regardless, I agree that some variations should be left to cultural disparity. When considering the case of reservations on articles of treaties, the reservations made should aim not to deviate from thedisturb the object and purpose of the agreement. By variations I mean differences and not violations. Malta, for example, has submitted a reservation to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) on universal education, with the justification that the population is predominantly Roman Catholic and, due to fiscal limitations, providing online education with a particular religious belief, particularly with regards to rare minorities in Malta, will essentially become a challenge. Reservations on such minor matters can and should be tolerated as no serious, harmful or harmful violations of human rights are committed. This will further enhance the convention and its purpose, as well as serve the purpose of bringing more parties to the treaty. However, advanced reservations on fundamental rights, which will cause violence, distress, riots and controversial debates based on religious or cultural beliefs, must not be tolerated. That said, I am certainly not advocating or advocating the idea that second-generation rights or derogable rights should be ignored. I am in fact fully aware of the inevitability of the possibility that the violation of a specific right may lead to the violation of another, as will be ascertained in the following case. For example, some relativists accept that culture cannot nullify mandatory rights but can prevail over other rights such as the right to physical integrity, the right to a fair trial or the prohibition of discrimination. Integrity is the right of every human being. It is extremely important for a person to have the ability to have complete autonomy over their own body, this includes ensuring protection from medical experimentation, social sterilization, and cruel or degrading treatment or punishment. Although relativists view the right to physical integrity as a violation of what they perceive as derogable rights, this may actually lead to the violation of an absolute fundamental right such as the right to life itself. An alarming, but related, case was that of depriving albinos of autonomy over their bodies by decapitation to profit from the sale of their limbs, ultimately resulting in the deaths of many. The persecution of people with albinism The practice is generally labeled as albino hunting. However, using the verb “hunt” connotes that they are prey and therefore contributes to their dehumanization, so I will refrain from using dehumanizing terms and refer to this practice as the persecution of albinos. It is imperative to note that ancient ideologies, and certain aspects of witchcraft, were eminent where the paranormal was used to explain human phenomena such as the condition of albinism. The belief system arising from superstitions and witchcraft violates the basic human rights of albinos, which can be clearly deduced in various forms as presented below: The most imminent threat to albinos are witch doctors, as they exploit the fear they inflame in their followers creating superstitions. They infiltrate the minds of their followers and profit through the belief system they themselves have created. They continue to claim that albinos' organs and limbs enhance the power of their spells. One such example occurred when senior police officials in Dar es Salaam reported that an entire albino corpse – including all four limbs, genitals and facial parts – is being sold for the equivalent of US$75,000 . This startling figure confirms that the dismemberment of albinos is ultimately guaranteed to survive, as approximately 12 million Tanzanians continue to live below poverty levels. As mentioned above, the deprivation of albinosof the right to physical integrity or self-determination over their body parts by exchanging their organs for monetary gain, ultimately leads to their death and thus violates their right to life. Additionally, there have been widespread bizarre beliefs developed in response to the rise of HIV and AIDS in the African region. One of the most alarming facts is that sexual interaction with people with albinism cures sexually transmitted diseases, which in turn affect more albino women than men. The sexually transmitted diseases are then passed on to their husbands and children. In 2016, 33,000 people died from an AIDS-related illness in Tanzania. Although albino women are not predominantly involved in sex work, they are affected by the disease due to the belief that their condition has medicinal qualities, thus further fueling this form of violence. While AIDS will not directly and instantly kill these women, their chances of having a long life expectancy are low, due to limited access to antiretroviral treatment. In turn, the rape culture associated with albino women may not directly deprive them of the right to life, however, deducting the years they have to live due to contracting AIDS indirectly violates this basic human right. In any case, forced sexual conduct itself becomes, directly or indirectly, a means of physical violation. Furthermore, the persecution of albinos has a prominent gender dimension. As well as being more vulnerable to rape, women who give birth to albino children are believed to have brought shame on their families and are consequently shunned by society. These women are suspected of adulteresses and accused of committing infidelity with "white men", resulting in abandonment or divorce. Because of the stigma associated with albinism, the heavy burden placed on these single women pushes them to abandon their children, abort them, or kill them. This practice obviously has a prominent social and gender dimension in which women are predominantly discriminated against. As a result, discrimination against women can lead to infanticide, which in turn impacts broader violations such as violation of the fundamental right to life; particularly, that of an innocent child. The Tolerance Argument of Cultural Relativism The title of this article in itself appeals to tolerance and the need to respect the fact that other cultures have different values, even if this means that they reject human rights. My thesis is that we can tolerate the indifferences of cultures, but not necessarily respect them. Therefore, I will use the tolerance argument of cultural relativism. The tolerance argument states that by accepting the differences of other cultures, we are tolerant of them. Relativism infers that we cannot impose our morality on different cultures. By refraining from doing so, we are being tolerant. Therefore, if we accept relativism, we commit ourselves to pursuing a policy of tolerance. I believe the tolerance argument works to the extent that no fundamental rights are directly violated. However, in some cases, it is difficult to achieve this as violations of what are perceived as minor rights ultimately violate core fundamental rights that are directly linked to the chain of violations that occur and ultimately lead to the violation of one or more fundamental rights. as presented in the case of the persecution of albinos. It is important to note that the definitions of the terms “tolerance” and “respect” cannot be used interchangeably. Tolerance is “the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviors thatyou don't like or agree with." Whereas respect is “a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something aroused by their abilities, qualities or achievements”. To further verify my position; Imagine yourself coming from a culture that believes in the existence of witchcraft. It would be imperative for me, as a human being, to tolerate your belief, even though I may believe it to be ridiculous. However, this does not imply that I respect you, or the idea, or essentially admire it. Ultimately, problems arise when you expect and sometimes demand respect from those who hold a specific belief. I can tolerate that cultures have their differences, but respect or admiration for such differences would border on imposition and would further violate various other human rights. In this sense, tolerance also has definitive limits. Therefore, it is more plausible and accurate to say that we should only tolerate cultural differences, but not when these practices are irrational or harmful to others. The Limits of Tolerance Relativists believe that issues that are morally acceptable for some cultures need not be morally correct for another. By being tolerant, we cannot impose our beliefs and perceptions of what we believe is "right" on other cultures. However, the principle of tolerance is not guaranteed by relativism. If you are a relativist, you do not have to be tolerant of other people. To expand further, if a culture does not recognize the principle of tolerance, its members have no obligation to be tolerant. Consequently, if I choose to negatively impose or refrain from imposing my morality on other cultures, I cannot guarantee that members of the other culture will be tolerant of my beliefs. I perceive the act of tolerance towards others as a virtue, but not when differences cause harm. The argument emerges when applying the case of albinos to the premises constructed by Tilley: If relativism is true, we cannot impose our morality on different cultures by claiming that the persecution of albinos is immoral. Therefore, we must refrain from imposing this belief that the persecution of albinos is immoral compared to other cultures. To refrain from imposing our morality or, conversely, allowing the persecution of albinos, we are tolerant towards others. Therefore, relativism ultimately forces us to be tolerant of other cultures or accept the persecution of albinos. The above premises reiterate that we cannot fulfill our human rights obligations, nor be completely tolerant of other cultures. This is especially true if crimes are committed against victims due to cultural bias. This, in turn, allows rights to be subject to cultural interpretations, threats, and moral absolutism as a whole. Furthermore, if the categorization of actions as right or wrong depends on cultural interpretations, it is consequently implied that no universal morality, with which actions can be criticized, actually exists. Henceforth, tolerance essentially prevents relativists from disapproving of any heinous act, since that would imply intolerance. Even if condemnation of a harmful practice is based on reasonable grounds, it would be discriminatory to criticize acts that occur outside one's culture. In essence, what is being said is that as long as the persecution of albinos is normal in sub-Saharan Africa, the practice will be as morally valid as its opposite; killing an albino is as morally acceptable as protecting people with disabilities elsewhere. Possible approaches to a solution Attempt to influence the.