The politics of universalism. Strategic uses of human rights discourses in early modernity

This article investigates the political function of human rights in 16th-century Spain just after the conquest of America. It claims that the study of this period of early globalization is relevant for an understanding of the function of human rights discourses today, at the “end” of globalization. Historically speaking, human rights are closely connected with globalization, but at the same time, they raise the question about the foundation of globalization: is there a universal community or only economic and political power-relations? This article argues that the political use of human rights discourses is split down the middle: it serves both as a critique of power and as an extension of power, and the disclosure of this split helps us understand the inner politics of human rights. The article discusses the trial in Valladolid in 1550 when the rights of the barbarian Indians of America were put on trial. It focuses mainly on the arguments made by Bartolomé de las Casas and on the reasons why the King allowed las Casas’ fierce critique of the conquest to be published in a period of otherwise severe censorship. This article is inspired by Etienne Balibar's idea of “politics of universalism,” “political autonomy,” and “equaliberty.”