Democracy and the Protection of Human Rights

The essential concern of a democracy must be the protection of human rights. Describe a specific situation in which the concern of a democracy might be something other than the protection of human rights. Discuss what you think determines when the concern of a democracy should be the protection of human rights. In his Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln famously extolled government "of the people, for the people and by the people." This phrase has been commonly interpreted as a definition of democracy in a nutshell. Ideally, a democratic government must be accountable to its people--usually in the form of popular representation. The protection of human rights, thus, is an essential concern of a democracy and such governments must see that its citizens are not deprived of their basic freedoms. Democracies, like the United States, do a relatively good job of ensuring human rights within its borders. However, such governments often turn a blind eye to human rights issues in other countries--oftentimes in the interest of preserving power in the global stage. Indeed, the government must do everything in its power to ensure its people have a right to basic freedoms to which all humans are entitled, including right to life and liberty, freedom of expression and religion, etc. When people are deprived of basic rights, they are unable to participate in government and have their needs addressed. For example, a government that limits freedom of expression creates fear of reprisal in its citizenry; therefore, the will of the people cannot be realized. Only those in the upper segments of society and cronies the rulers will be represented. Indeed, no nation can achieve an ideal democracy where human rights are fully realized and the popular will of the people are taken into account. However, governments that identify as democracies will take serious measures to reach such ideals. The US government, as the most recognized form of democracy, regularly advocates human rights issues within its borders and in the international arena. It has meddled in the affairs of other nations, such as Bosnia/Kosovo and Afghanistan, in the name of protecting human rights. While "humanitarian" interventions often serve as a guise for pursuing other motives, the US often helps shine light on the plight of second-class citizens around the world--thus, attracting NGOs and donors who attempt to rectify the situation. In other cases, the US government has downplayed or even completely ignored human rights abuses in "partner" nations. More recently, the US had supported the Libyan government despite the authoritarian rule and absence of human rights. When the US has the interest of maintaining "balance" in a strategic region, it will not be so vocal on human rights issues and instead, continue supporting offending leaders. Indeed, the overwhelming need to maintain its strength in the global arena will most often outweigh concern about human rights abuses in partner nations. Undoubtedly, recognition of human rights plays such a paramount role in democracies, such as the US. Its government needs to be accountable to the people and therefore, must see that citizens feel free and open to participate in the political arena---whether it be by voting, running for office or taking part in direct democracy campaigns. Democracies, in the global stage, also advocate about the importance of human rights; however, abuses will often be downplayed or ignored in the interest of maintaining its power in the world.