Framing The Issues: The UDHR, Economic Inequality, and the Digital Age
An Interview with Professor Mathias Risse
On March 23-25, 2022, the Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative hosted a Deep Dive on “Human Rights and Inequality in the Digital Century.” Professor Mathias Risse chaired the three-day event. In the opening session, Framing the Issues, Professor Risse offered an introduction to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the human rights movement that emerged from it, presented some major insights about economic inequality under capitalism, argued that increasing inequality is a challenge to the human rights movement, and set the stage for sessions exploring the ways in which the digital revolution that is unfolding all around us could be a threat to human rights, either directly or through the ways in which it exacerbates inequality.
Professor Risse is the Director of the Harvard Kennedy School Carr Center for Human Rights Policy and the Berthold Beitz Professor in Human Rights, Global Affairs, and Philosophy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work primarily addresses questions of global justice ranging from human rights, inequality, taxation, trade and immigration to climate change, obligations to future generations, and the future of technology. In addition to the Harvard Kennedy School, he teaches in Harvard College and the Harvard Extension School, and he is affiliated with the Harvard philosophy department.
Risse is the author of On Global Justice (Princeton University Press) and Global Political Philosophy (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as On Trade Justice: A Philosophical Plea for a New Global Deal (Oxford University Press, with Gabriel Wollner) and On Justice: Philosophy, History, Foundations (Cambridge University Press).
Julie Allen: Thank you Professor Risse for sharing your framing of the 2022 Human Rights Deep Dive with our readers. Would you start with a brief overview of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the United Nations in 1948 – what many mark as the launch of the human rights movement – and the global and national events and movements that led to that extraordinary moment of global alignment?
Mathias Risse: The United Nations arose from a war alliance, the alliance that defeated Germany, Italy, and Japan in WWII. It was meant to be an improvement over the League of Nations that had been founded after WWI, but which had accomplished far less than many had hoped. Administrative capacities in Western democracies had grown enormously, especially in the United States under Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal. So the UN can also be seen as a global projection of the administrative capacities and ideals developed during the 1930s.
But while, in these ways, the UN was a response to specific events that occurred in the 1930s and 40s, the idea to have a universal declaration of human rights also connects back to a range of issue-specific movements that came about since the late 18th century, beginning with the anti-slavery movement and then also including the labor movement and the women’s liberation movement of the 19th century. In each case, we have transnational advocacy groups initially below the level of the state that deployed rights-based language and operated internationally. The Red Cross and earlier versions of humanitarian law should also be mentioned here.
The human rights movement of the 20th century – while also sensibly understood in the tradition of many earlier rights-based declarations – can very much be understood as providing an umbrella over these various issue-specific movements whose importance and influence can be traced to various parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Once the UN was founded, the major victorious powers of WWII tried very hard to avoid having a moral blueprint for the future of humanity put into place – but an alliance of civil society organizations and quite a number of mid-size and smaller powers pushed through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted on December 10, 1948.
Eleanor Roosevelt holding poster of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Lake Success, New York. November 1949. © FDR Presidential Library & Museum
Allen: What are the central themes of the UDHR and what is missing from this Declaration?
Risse: The UDHR covers a broad range of individual entitlements, ranging from protection against any kind of discrimination and other civil and political rights to a set of social, economic, and cultural rights. It formulates a floor below which nobody should fall. But it is not concerned with relative economic standing, so it does not speak to questions of economic equality or inequality. The notion of equality that underpins the UDHR is a kind of moral equality among persons.
Allen: Although the UDHR is not itself legally binding and has its limitations, as you noted, it has fueled the international human rights movement. What are some of the movement’s major achievements?
Risse: In due course, the UDHR gave rise to a large set of legally binding covenants. It has led to the creation of new institutions like the International Criminal Court. It has generated a broad civil-society movement that operates internationally and is concerned with the protection of human rights and with holding the powerful accountable. It has helped create a world that, while in so many ways needs to be much better, probably would be much worse were it not for so many people who care about human rights.
Allen: Turning for a moment to economic justice, which is not expressly addressed in the UDHR, how has capitalism affected wealth and income inequality both prior to the adoption of the UDHR and in the post-WWII period?
Risse: We’ve learned from Thomas Piketty that the 20th century has taught us faulty lessons about the nature of capitalism. Capitalism inherently tends to increase economic inequality over generations, and there need to be active policy measures to make sure that does not happen. In the 20th century, this normal functioning of capitalism was not clearly visible. Following the destruction of the two world wars and the Great Depression, capitalist economies around the world grew enormously, and many policies were put into place to encourage social mobility. In hindsight, we now understand that inequality did not grow much in the post-WWII decades in the United States and many other countries, in part because there had been a lot of destruction, which in absolute terms affects the wealthy more, and in part because crises can lead to legislation that helps the disadvantaged because crises mobilize large numbers of people politically. But several decades after WWII, capitalism’s normal functioning reasserted itself. Roughly since the 1970s, we have lived in the neoliberal age, which is one of increasing wealth and income inequality over the generations.
Allen: What is the impact of increasing economic inequality on human rights?
Risse: Increasing inequality has ways of undermining solidarity, and thus the political motivation to work for the realization of rights for everyone. Societies with large economic inequality typically do not see much mixing and mingling between the haves and the have-nots. As a result, the haves tend to do things politically that suit them rather than the less privileged (even and especially in democracies). Too much inequality is corrosive for the fabric of society. How much is “too much”? That is hard to say, but the point is that increasing inequality tends to push societies in this direction.
Allen: So how do social justice movements interact with and/or influence the human rights movement nationally and internationally?
Risse: Fortunately, in recent times, the human rights movement has increasingly taken up causes around inequality. So social justice and human rights have increasingly been thought of together. And that is really crucial to advancing both human rights and economic and social justice.
Allen: Turning to the digital century, how might digital innovation undermine human rights, both directly and indirectly, and what strategies can be used so that technology enhances rather than undermines the human rights movement?
Risse: Let me be clear that I do not think that digital innovation is per se bad for human rights. Obviously, it comes with many opportunities. But we need to be really vigilant, for it also comes with opportunities for people in privileged positions to enhance their causes and interests ever more. One of the key themes here is surveillance, a critical issue for the present age that Shoshana Zuboff has drawn attention to and lifted up. Much more clear-minded thinking is needed about the threats that come from surveillance. And then we need pretty hefty regulation to make sure the digital age works out for people equitably, and not just for the privileged. The European Union is doing a much better job protecting privacy and personal data than the United States.
Allen: And one final question – as we grapple with the war in the Ukraine, and other human rights abuses around the globe, what do you see as the key priorities for the human rights movement in the coming years and what will it take for all relevant players to tackle these significant challenges?
Risse: There is much at stake in the Ukraine conflict. Ukraine must not lose this war. I think it is no exaggeration to say that what is being tested in this war is what kind of era the world will live in from here on. If Russia wins this war in any recognizable way, the message that invasions pay off will be clear, and we will see more of them. And I think we have to be realistic here. If Trump comes back into power in the United States, we will have a known Putin-sympathizer in an office that was once known for being charged with leading, protecting, and defending the free world. It is not impossible that Trump could just turn a blind eye to an invasion of the Baltic states in exchange for a spectacular Trump Tower in St. Petersburg. Unfortunately, one impediment to simply joining forces in support of Ukraine is that Putin has nuclear weapons. So the dangers here are very real. In the world that Putin is currently trying to create, the single worst thing that could happen is a reelection of Donald Trump or anyone who shares his political temperament. This is a sad thing to have to say about a party that once stood for good reason and became known as the Grand Old Party. But the increasing flirtation of the conservative right with autocrats (and not just Putin) is the biggest threat to the human rights movement. So it’s actually quite simple: we must work together to make sure that they do not destroy the free world.
About the Author:
Julie Allen is a Senior Advisor at the EdRedesign Lab at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Ms. Allen was a Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative Fellow in 2020 and a Senior Fellow in 2021. Ms. Allen had a distinguished career in corporate law, focusing on capital markets, public company M&A transactions, and boardroom governance and counsel. Most recently, she was a senior partner at Proskauer Rose. She currently serves as Chair of the Board of Directors of Read Ahead, a reading-based mentoring organization serving NYC public elementary school children, and as a member of the Advisory Board of the Harvard Kennedy School Carr Center for Human Rights Policy.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.