Human Rights Not So Pure Anymore Analysis

The way individuals define human rights differs from the way the government does. Samuel Moyn published Human Rights, Not So Pure Anymore, to prove to the readers of the New York Times that their definition of human rights does not align with the governments of the Western world’s. Moyn attempts to persuade the liberal adults in the United States, among other readers of the New York Times, that corruption changes the definition of human rights from being about personal welfare to political gains in the governmental mindset. Although he introduces several observations regarding the unfair treatment of human rights by governments, his emotional bias and lack of solid evidence prevent him from thoroughly proving his argument.
Moyn opens his argument with examples of human rights activists and the elements of their work, including who backs them and what they are standing up against, but his lack of a deeper explanation does his article injustice. For a secondary reader, the brief amount of information he supplies regarding Chen Guangcheng is not enough to prove his point because he expects for readers to recognize the reference instantly. However, for his primary audience, the name Chen Guangcheng would be instantly recognizable in New York in 2012 (Gladstone). Moyn’s article was published at the opportune moment for his information to be …show more content…
The possibility that human rights could be stripped away slowly as the government profits off our losses causes fear to the readers, which Moyn skillfully shows to invoke a need to fight back and take control of our human rights. Although his paper is mainly opinions, he did cause the readers to think about where the government is leading them and what drives them to make the decisions they