Download PDFConclusion
As political and social awareness spreads throughout the globe, it is important to challenge and question the meaning of rhetoric implored by the UDHR, allowing entry for new levels of testimony and witnessing to take shape. Outside perspectives that do not conform to the current Westernized emphasis are necessary to come close to “universalizing” any set of rights. According to Lyon and Lester, “witnessing and testifying have a particular place in speaking back to power, in creating counter-discourses, which denormalize dominant discourses and offer alternative worldviews” (209). Speaking about experienced violations elicits important ethos responses that vary from outrage to indifference, the latter becoming problematic when widespread. Credibility is necessary in order to invoke that pathos appeal needed to activate an audience into action against oppressive regimes. Wendy Hesford adds in “Human Rights Rhetoric of Recognition” that “single-cause movements may have contributed to the creation of a culture of public engagement, but . . . it was only when single-cause movements began to articulate interconnections among causes that the idea of universal human rights took hold” (288). It is important to observe how rhetorical strategies are used on a small scale and learn how to make them work on an appropriate geopolitical scale, using language to guide the process. Integrating inclusive language that recognizes the universal in the particular can take a grass-roots movement and escalate it into progress for more than one oppressed group. In order to find mass appeal, testimony needs to come from marginalized groups at an increased rate and with higher acceptance. Minority stories are often forgotten or lost because of their perceived inferiority, but it is imperative to integrate differing perspectives into a universalized document. As the world continues to deal with issues of race and equality, human rights definitions and protections are coming more into the foreground of world thought, and every effort should be put towards contextualizing and opening rhetorical discourse that can serve as an effective, useful, rights-endowing document.