Translating Human Rights into Muslim Vernaculars

Abstract

Using Islam as an example, I show how interpreters can develop human rights within their own culture even as they draw on extra-local ideas and practices. Th ey can do so despite points of significant conflict between the local culture and that of human rights, in ways that need to resonate with the local culture yet also challenge it. Translators can do the work they do because they have the "dual consciousness" of outside intermediaries and local participants.Keywords human rights, cultural change, democratized access to local interpretation, outside challenges to normative systems, Islam From a sociological standpoint as distinct from a theological one, worldreligions show themselves to be dynamic repertoires rather than fixed templates. Changes in aspects of religious belief have often entailed certain changes in political organization and commitment. How might religion's dynamic potential relate to the surrounding community's capacity for internal change? Specifically, does the spread of human rights in some cases depend on changes in the repertoires of some religions?Consider Islam, a faith of enduring geo-political moment. From a sociological perspective focused on cultural changes that are human-rights friendly, how might the following goal be pursued: A political context in which all ordinary Muslims enjoyed a culturally recognized, legally protected right to interpret Islam -to interpret with respect to its meanings and to the behavior that Islam promotes? In what kind of political context

Deploying Cognitive Sociology to Advance Human Rights

“…For a typology, see Strydom (2007). 7) Th is article extends the theory I fi rst developed in Gregg (2003a). 8) Th eoretical work that would result in proposals for action must at some point generate actionable propositions.…”

The Adaptation of Human Rights Norms in Local Settings: Intersections of Local and Bureaucratic Knowledge in an Israeli NGO

“…While some scholars indicate that transnational notions of human rights that were translated in certain domestic settings were not significantly transformed (Stern 2005;Gregg 2008), others demonstrate how, in other contexts, the localization resulted in rather hybrid discourses and practices (Goldstein 2007;Speed 2007).…”

“…It is commonly argued (or assumed) that the "real" or "core" commitments and interests of human rights activists are universal rather than particular (Kennedy 2004), even though there are pragmatic considerations as well. Thus, the adaptations of global human rights norms, as well as the use of domestic legal system and instruments, are prevalently perceived as more efficient and pragmatic in our world of sovereignty (Acharya 2004;Gregg, 2008;Levitt and Merry 2009;Ş erban Rosen and Yoon 2009;Merry et al 2010). Moreover, according to scholars like Levitt and Merry (2009), it is more difficult to gain local support and legitimacy for highly challenging ideologies.…”

“…These processes were often referred to as localization (Acharya 2004), vernacularization (Merry 2006a), domestication (Ş erban Rosen and Yoon 2009), indigenization (Gregg 2008), or glocalization (Robertson 1995). Localization was defined by Acharya as "the active construction .…”

“…of foreign ideas by local actors, which results in the former developing significant congruence with local beliefs and practices " (2004: 245). The processes of localization or vernacularization were studied particularly in the context of transnational human rights norms (e.g., Gregg 2008;Levitt and Merry 2009;Merry and Stern 2005;Merry et al 2010;Riles 2000;Stern 2005). Within these processes, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) play a central role and are commonly perceived as "translators" of global human rights norms in local settings.…”