The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and State Socialism

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted as a resolution by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1948. It is based on the “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”, and it declares that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations”.

The first meeting of the United Nations took place in April 1945, and the member states signed the jointly drafted charter in June 1945. Both the charter and the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are strongly influenced by the consequences of World War II. The latter text even refers to the fact that “disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts”.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a legally non-binding resolution (cf. Dürig/Herzog/Scholz, German Basic Law, Art. 10, para. 33). This has significance in that Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court has maintained (Art. 88) that the “general principles of international law, under Article 25 of the Basic Law, are part of German law, with a priority higher than that of federal nonconstitutional law”. Important in this context is the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESR), which was adopted on 16 December 1966 and came into force under international law on 23 March 1976. The Federal Republic of Germany, or West Germany, ratified it on 17 December 1973, and the German Democratic Republic (GDR), or East Germany, also ratified it in 1973 — albeit with reservations.

Characterizing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as the “common standard of achievement” suggests that the state described in the Declaration had not yet been attained in 1948 — this is particularly clear in the German version of the document, which replaces “common standard of achievement” with the word “ideal”. In fact, it has not been attained to this day — despite the addition of the UN’s ICESCR — and now such a declaration would certainly have to include the protection of natural resources (i.e., issues regarding the climate).

That the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has not been adequately implemented is not merely a consequence of capitalism — the purportedly socialist states also actively contributed to the failure of its implementation.

Much has been written about the Federal Republic’s relationship to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Every year, the German Institute for Human Rights presents its report to the Bundestag regarding the development of the human rights situation in Germany. The report on the period between June 2021 and July 2022, for instance, draws attention to the fact that school children with disabilities are de-facto barred from non-discriminatory access to an inclusive school system. The Federal Republic of Germany is far from being able to be considered a model example for complying with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But to return to the purportedly socialist states and the GDR in particular: the GDR blatantly violated the freedoms outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and rightfully collapsed as a result. This is common knowledge by now. Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for example, includes the right “to leave any country, including [one’s] own”. The GDR shot at people if they wanted to exercise this right. This speaks volumes about the value placed on the freedoms outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the GDR.

The GDR not only violated so-called civil rights and liberties, but it also only superficially implemented the economic, social, and cultural human rights (ESC Rights).

Implementing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights requires a human rights policy that prioritizes humans and does not instrumentally base an individual’s position on real or perceived allies and adversaries.

One example of this would be the treatment of foreign contract labourers. Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that no one shall be held in servitude. Generally, servitude is understood as a state of personal and economic dependence. But were contract labourers not essentially in a state of servitude to the GDR? The Vietnamese contract labourers, who were “deployed” as part of an agreement between the GDR and Vietnam, only received temporary work contracts and no efforts were made for them to be integrated there. The workers were not allowed to freely choose their place of work and were mostly housed in dormitories. Before commencing with their work, their “degree of fitness” was assessed. Whoever became seriously ill was sent back to Vietnam. Pregnant women had to decide between terminating their pregnancy or returning home. None of this has anything to do with the “inherent dignity” or the “equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”.

Both Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the UN’s ICESCR affirm the right to work. The GDR’s 1949 constitution also enshrined the right to work in Article 15. This was also enshrined in the GDR’s 1968 constitution in Article 24, paragraph 1, but the following formulation came in paragraph 2: “the right to work and the duty to work form a unity”. This is nothing less than a compulsion to work, and this is enshrined in the constitution. This obligation was also reflected in § 249 of the GDR’s Criminal Code, which regulated that “anyone who, despite being capable of working, evades regular work out of work-shyness, thereby impairing the social coexistence of citizens or public order and safety, will be punished with probation, imprisonment, or a custodial sentence for up to two years”.

This regulation was not repealed until 18 May 1990. Carla Geib and Nora Tuchelt write in a piece for the SQ Blog: Geschlecht und Recht that “such an offense had already been committed” whenever work had not been performed over a long period of time, although “the reasons for doing such were never thoroughly examined. Often, a mental illness, such as alcoholism, was the reason”. Imposing prison sentences on individuals who rejected their “duty” to work is a blatant disregard for the inherent dignity of humans.

It is not uncommon for the GDR to be cited as a model example of progressive politics regarding women’s employment. But the achievements in this realm have less to do with efforts to attain “equality” than with economic necessities. It is apparent even in this “showcase project” that Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 7 of the ICESCR were not fulfilled. Both proscribe equal pay for work of equal value. An analysis of wage data in 1988 revealed, however, that women were in the lower wage and salary brackets and even “when they were in the same wage brackets, they received on average seven percent less pay” (cf. p. 557).

Here is one final example of how the disregard of the ESC Rights of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is in violation of Article 26 and Article 13 of the UN ICESCR. The latter guarantees every individual’s right to education. While it is true that access to education did not depend on the financial status of parents in the GDR, access to higher education, such as obtaining the Abitur [equivalent to a high school diploma], remained rather selective. I myself witnessed this in 1989, where the best student in our class was a Catholic who was not a member of the Free German Youth (FDJ). She was not allowed to take the Abitur exams, even though she had wanted to pursue professions that were “economically significant” for the country. In the graduating class of 1990, there were numerous students who had previously been denied access to the Abitur exams due to, for instance, their religious affiliation.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is still awaiting its implementation. Neither capitalism nor the purportedly socialist states have effectively put them into practice. This might not be expected from a capitalist state, since capitalist profit interests are incompatible with a social order that prioritizes human beings. But the fact that even those purported socialist states failed to deliver the ESC Rights is one of the bitter truths of recent history. Implementing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights requires a human rights policy that prioritizes humans and does not instrumentally base an individual’s position on real or perceived allies and adversaries. It necessitates a human rights policy that emphasizes that civil rights and liberties and the ESC Rights cannot be separated from each other.

Translated by Shane Anderson and Bradley Schmidt for Gegensatz Translation Collective.