ABSTRACT
The conflict identified by Boutros-Ghali has divided the human rights community into two, usually opposing, camps. On the one hand are foundationalists-most notably governments, some academics, and activists from the First World-who continue to justify universal human rights on the basis of objective reason and morality. On the other hand are the antifoundati onalists2-including many Third World governments and Third and First World academics and activists-who emphasize “contingency, construction, and relativity.” For the foundationalists it is possible, and indeed necessary, to have universal values and rights shared by all
humankind. To the anti-foundationalists, also called particularists or cultural relativists, values and rights should reflect local, cultural norms and practices and not monolithic, western values claiming to be universal.3
