Human rights

This dissertation comparatively analyzes the works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, a nineteenth century American, and Jorge Luis Borges, a twentieth-century Argentinian, within the context of human rights. Through their writings, both Emerson and Borges provided a voice to the voiceless by addressing the most egregious violations of human rights during their respective days: For Emerson, the most virulent social ill was slavery; for Borges, it was fascism. While Emerson and Borges differ in several ways, they are remarkably similar in their emphasis of natural laws and natural rights, notably egalitarianism and liberty, which underpin humanity and comprise an integral aspect of civilization. By counteracting the antithesis of civilization, barbarism, the works of Emerson and Borges ultimately embody the tenets that would ultimately constitute The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Thus, Emerson and Borges are indelibly linked through serving as harbingers of human rights.

This item is part of the Political & Rights Issues & Social Movements (PRISM) digital collection, a collaborative initiative between Florida Atlantic University and University of Central Florida in the Publication of Archival, Library & Museum Materials (PALMM).

Explanations of human rights compliance have been historically philosophical. Using timeliness of reporting as a measure of minimal compliance, there is an opportunity to examine compliance on a statistical level. This study introduces a theory asserting that compliance to specialized international human rights conventions depends on the representation of the protected group in a state's parliament. While examining the Convention to End All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the study attempts to find a relationship between timely reporting to CEDAW and the level of female participation in parliament. The data fails to provide a statistically significant relationship due in part to the reality that women are far from achieving political equality. To achieve human rights for women, there must remain a push for political equality in national governments. When such equality is attained by one or more states, then doors open for those states to set standards for others.

This thesis was prepared under the direction of the candidate's thesis advisor, Dr. Timothy Steigenga, and has been approved by the members of her supervisory committee. It was submitted to the faculty of The Honors College and was accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts and Sciences. Using the United States and Spain as case studies, this thesis argues that increasingly restrictive immigration policies instituted by receiving countries have little to no effect on the net inflow of immigration, nor do they promote a higher rate of assimilation for those immigrants already present within the host country. An analysis of the net inflow of immigrants, their social and economic status, and their rate of assimilation in the U.S. and Spain suggests that restrictive policies only further the social and economic exclusion of immigrants from the host society. Restrictive immigration policies are more effective at keeping immigrants outside of the host country's society than its borders.