Social Deprivation- The Fundamental Human Rights- Part 2

 What is social deprivation and its tests to Humanrights that the UN guarantees?

Canva Frame

"Social deprivation is a persisting lack of minimally adequate opportunities for decent human contact or supportive human contact including interpersonal interaction, associative inclusion and interdependent care. Such deprivation is not exclusive to nor universal amongst economically deprived."

What is social deprivation, in my understanding, is difficult to conceptualise in a single definition? It is a multi-faceted issue-various theory that stresses different aspects and concerns of it. 

One definition is "In instances of social deprivation, particularly for children, social experiences tend to be less varied, and development may be delayed or hindered."

An elaboration of their definitions leads to the conclusion that: "while the objective deprivation (poverty) in the world may change over time, relative deprivation will not, as long as social inequality persists and some humans are better off than others." 

In part 1 of this post, I cited the UN declaration of education as a human right. This premises that education is the prerequisite for poverty alleviation and economic developments that guarantees human right--equality, fraternity, individuality and freedom.  

Poverty alleviation programmes earn employment and developments that result in a consciousness evolving from the decadent and inhuman to progressive and liberal. And hence it resolves the social and racial inequalities to promote all-inclusive human societies and gender disparities. 

Does education and economic development the UN declares guarantee equal societies?  

They do not. The proof is there all over the world. A case in point is the Dalits and lower castes' discrimination by India's racially privileged classes in the US.  

An essay, When Caste Discrimination Comes to the United States, elaborates on the outcome of a new survey, Caste in the United States: "caste discrimination is playing out in the United States as well-- a finding that raises questions around how South Asian Americans understands themselves and their history"

"The report on the survey's results said that two-thirds of members of the lower-caste, called Dalits, said they have faced workplace discrimination due to their caste. Forty-one per cent have experienced discrimination in education because of it. And a quarter of Dalits say they have faced physical assault--in the United States."

Those who have responded to the survey are "people who work for Google, FaceBook and the other big tech companies."

They are people who have earned better education and salaries but suffer discrimination at the hands of India's upper castes, who have benefited from the nation's caste privileges seemingly for more than three thousand years. This pokes at the argument that education and poverty alleviation steps resolve social deprivation. 

It agrees with the argument in the introduction that relative deprivation will not change as long as social inequality persists.

There should be a better understanding of Social Deprivation.

Kimberly Brownlee, a Canadian philosopher, in her essay, A Human Right Against Social Deprivation, details the need for Social Human Rights. "This right in question is the human right against social deprivation. In this context, 'social deprivation' refers not to poverty and its associated social ills, but instead to genuine interpersonal social deprivation irrespective of economic conditions. Social deprivation is a persisting lack of minimally adequate opportunities for decent human contact or supportive human contact including interpersonal interaction, associative inclusion and interdependent care. Such deprivation is not exclusive to nor universal amongst economically deprived."

She argues that human rights guaranteeing poverty alleviation, education, and income cannot ensure the minimally adequate opportunities for decent human contact or supportive human contact including 1. interpersonal interaction 2. associative inclusion and 3. interdependent care.  

And this right against social deprivation is a fundamental human right to many other human rights that depends on it. The achievements of human rights in education and economic developments alone cannot guarantee the minimum opportunities for a decent human life is what the Dalit's experience in the US highlights. 

The scope of my post does not allow me to go into the details of the arguments Brownlee presents in her essay. I shall try that in another post. 

Conclusion:

1. Objective deprivation (poverty) may change over time, but not relative deprivation as long as social inequality persists in communities, nations and the world.

2. Human rights that ensure education and economic development of humans alone cannot guarantee the minimum opportunities for a decent human life. The case in point is caste humiliation and discrimination the Dalits suffer from the so-called upper-class Indians in the US despite their educational achievements and economic advancement.

This post is part of Blog Chatter's Cause A Chatter.

***