Current Research

“The Reverse Savages-Victims-Saviors Metaphor of Human Rights”

This paper argues anti-imperialist state victim branding and imperialist and power-laden human rights politics epitomized by traditional long-standing savage-victim-savior constructions often give rise to a reactionary emancipatory politics I call the “reverse savages, victims, saviors metaphor of human rights” which serves to eclipse local populations’ agency and experiences of subjugation at the hands of their own states. In the reverse metaphor, anti-imperialist victim branding states and their constructions of indigenous culture are cast as victims and the victim state is treated as synonymous with the population it rules, their suffering viewed almost exclusively through the lens of geopolitics. Western imperialism, along with human rights and those deploying human rights discourses understood to be extensions of Western imperialism, are then cast as the savages. Finally, leftist thinkers, anti-imperialist thought, and secondarily the victim state and its constructions of indigenous culture all take on the role of savior. The politics encapsulated in the reverse savages, victims, saviors metaphor in turn (1) diminishes the moral weight accorded to both the human rights claims made by local and diaspora voices, and the underlying acts of state violence and subjugation they endure, (2) interrupts any sustained focus on the anti-imperialist branding state’s violence, (3) defines non-Western populations through essentializing and valorized notions of its culture just as traditional saviorism does, and (4) contributes to the creation of moral ambiguity around the subjugation of local populations at the hands of anti-imperialist branding states through excessive or misplaced calls for moral complexity.

The case of postrevolutionary Iran and three examples of reactionary human rights politics stemming from center left media, far-left anti-war activism, and postcolonial scholarship addressing Iran are put forth to demonstrate the operation of the reverse savages, victims and saviors metaphor of human rights and the ways its manifestations across socio-political realms can serve to muddle, marginalize and impart moral ambiguity on local populations’ lived experiences of suffering and emancipatory aspirations. A final section undertakes a brief discussion of how Iran’s dramatic fall 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests spurred by the state killing of Jina Mahsa Amini produced a temporary departure from reverse savages-victims-saviors metaphor of human rights. It concludes by arguing for a reformulated human rights politics that takes a more complex and varied approach to the sources of non-Western populations’ suffering, not just in the “easy” cases like those of the initial stages of Iran’s “Women, Life, Freedom” protests, but in the far more prevalent instances in which popular suffering and aspirations for rights are considerably more entangled with imperialist politics.

To hear an early articulation of the core argument in this work, listen to my University of Wisconsin Human Rights Program talk from October 17, 2022 here.

“The Moral Clarity of the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ Challenge to State Violence in Iran and the Moral Maze of Ensuing Human Rights Contestation”

The killing of Jina Mahsa Amini while in custody for a minor infringement of Iran’s mandatory hijab law epitomized the endemic state violence to which Iranians and particularly Iranian women, had long been subjected, sparking a wave of stunning protests and other mobilizations against gender-based discrimination, state violence, and the repressive state, with “Woman, Life, Freedom” as their animating slogan. The moral clarity displayed in iconic images of women’s defiant stances, slogans, and poignant artistic productions produced a powerful indictment of the state and its violence. Soon however, the rights claims at the fore of the protests became entangled with a whirlwind of counterclaims, polarizing political discourses co-opting rights, and challenges to the allegiances of activists, producing a terrain in which human rights was ubiquitous, yet endlessly contested. Driven by political forces waging ideological battles and Iranian state disinformation campaigns designed to sow division and doubt, the moral clarity of the initial protests was often overtaken by moral ambiguity and fragmentation.  

The proposed research examines these mobilizations with three objectives. First, it aims to provide a rich composite of the many manifestations, and facets of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” human rights politics that unfolded in the wake of the killing of Jina Mahsa Amini. Second it aims to place the case into the mockery of morality, manifesting morality, and moral maze categories of a Marginalized Popular Experiences of Human Rights Typology in order to identify ways the case corresponds to, diverges from, and expands the insights of the typology. Finally, the proposed research will identify insights, key lessons, and enduring dilemmas in global human and women’s rights practice brought to lights by the “Woman, Life, Freedom” mobilizations.

“Iranian and Israeli ‘State Victim Branding’ and Human Rights”

In addition to the various other forms of state branding identified by scholars in recent years, some regimes engage in what I call “state victim branding,” claiming victim status derived from past and/or present suffering of their populations as a way to legitimate, justify or muddle moral clarity around their acts of violence and repression. This paper considers how “state victim branding” operates in the cases of Iran’s Islamic Republic and Israel’s Jewish State, charting notable convergences and divergences.

“Seeing Both Moral Clarity and Moral Complexity in Human Rights/ Social Justice Campaigns”

Human rights and social justice activists often encounter a tension between embracing moral clarity and embracing moral complexity. Moral clarity is usually accompanied by the drive to resist, decry, condemn, and denounce injustice- to call out, shame and speak truth to power. Moral complexity typically involves extending empathy, engaging in dialogue and persuasion, and recognizing multiple moral wrongs and truths. In this paper, I argue that in most human rights or social justice pursuits, elements of both moral clarity and moral complexity exist. Human rights and social justice campaigns are thus strengthened when activists embarking on a process of locating where each disposition is most fitting within their respective campaigns.