edited by Benjamin
Gregg
The nation state operates on a logic of exclusion:
no state can offer citizenship and legal rights to all comers. From the logic
of exclusion a state derives its sovereign power. Yet this exclusivity
undermines the project of advancing human rights globally. That project
operates on a logic of inclusion: all people, regardless of citizenship status
or territorial location, would everywhere be recognized as bearers of human
rights. In practice, human rights are afforded, if at all, then only to
citizens of those few states that sometimes regard human rights as moral
necessities of domestic commitments—or for states that find that stance
politically expedient for the moment.
This discouraging reality in the first decades of
the twenty-first century prompts the question: What political arrangement might
better conduce the local embrace and enduring practice of human rights? In The
Human Rights State, Benjamin Gregg challenges the conviction that the nation
state can only have a zero-sum relationship with human rights: national
sovereignty is possible or human rights are possible, but not both, not in the
same place, at the same time. He argues that the human rights project would be
more effective if established and enforced at local levels as locally valid
norms, and from there encouraged to expand outward toward overlaps with other
locally established and enforced conceptions of human rights grown in their own
local soils.
Proposing a metaphorical human rights state that
operates within or alongside a nation state, Gregg describes networks of
activists that encourage local political and legal systems to generate domestic
obligations to enforce human rights. Geographic boundaries and national
sovereignties would remain intact but diminished to the extent necessary to
extend human rights to all persons, without reservation, across national
borders, by rendering human rights an integral aspect of the nation state's
constitution.