Most critics of human-rights universalism come from the Right. Conservatives oppose human-rights universalism because they believe it slights important local traditions, is anti-historical, and pretends to a global agreement on the nature and definition of rights that does not exist. A book released this year by Palgrave Macmillan, Human Rights and Relative Universalism, suggests that some Progressives also have their doubts about the globalizing project. The author is Marie-Luisa Frick (University of Innsbruck). Here’s the description from the publisher’s website:

This book argues that human rights cannot go global without going local. This important lesson from the winding debates on universalism and particularism raises intricate questions: what are human rights after all, given the dissent surrounding their foundations, content, and scope? What are legitimate deviances from classical human rights (law) and where should we draw “red lines”?

Making a case for balancing conceptual openness and distinctness, this book addresses the key human rights issues of our time and opens up novel spaces for deliberation. It engages philosophical reasoning with law, politics, and religion and demonstrates that a meaningful relativist account of human rights is not only possible, but a sorely needed antidote to dogmatism and polarization.