Who Has The Right To Advocate About Darfur?

My genocide co-blogger Michelle recently weighed in on last week's debate about who has the right to advocate about Darfur, and in particular the argument that "human rights discourse is an essentially individualistic framework, whereas most cultures of the global South (or third world) are formed on a communitarian value system."

According to Michelle:

"This is an oft-expressed criticism of 'human rights,' which certainly has validity. However, I fail to see, when looking at the specifics of a situation like Darfur, how the distinction between individual and communitarian value systems actually plays out - or how drawing the distinction, writ large, is a legitimate criticism of human rights advocacy in the specific context of Darfur.

Among the first rights articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are the rights over one's own existence and physical well-being. How are the rights to 'life, liberty and security of person,' to be free from slavery or servitude, and not to be subjected to torture any different in a communitarian value system, than in one that focuses on the individual? What are the implications, in practice, of this supposed distinction?"

The rest of her excellent post is here.  (And by excellent, I mean a) thought-provoking, and b) expressing what I wanted to say better than I could have done.)

[Photo from genocide.change.org]