If so, to what extent? The main focus of human rights writers and activists is in concern to the extent of unlawful treatment such as conquering of land from indigenous people in most if not all third world countries. We have learned that most problems in the world are blamed on one word, globalization, but it takes several words to fix the ongoing problem of globalization and its affects. The capital and injustice in Latin America has shown to be one of the reasons for such concern of the extent globalization has taken with the lack of correspondence of human rights. Urbanization has expanded to this extent at the exploitation of the indigenous peoples human rights.
The affect of modernizing countries (globalization) is thought to be a main contributor to the lack of human rights in most third world countries. Richard L. Harris in his article on Capital, inequality and injustice in Latin America, believes that “ The ‘globalization’ or increasing integration of the region into the global capitalist system has not propelled the Latin American peoples into a new era of post-modernity”(3). In his essay Harris attempts to provide a global perspective on the major structures that have shaped and are currently shaping the political, economic and culture in Latin America. He feels that the “ The contemporary effects of globalizing have aggravated the most chronic problems of the Latin American region”(1). Harris then explains that these problems are also included in economic exploitation, social and economic inequality, and social and political injustice that has taken place since the indigenous people were forced to adapt the culture of the “west” in the sixteenth century.
The origination of westernization began from Columbus’s voyage to the Americas. With the settling of slaves, animals and western ideas, Latin America would soon become a fulfilled dream of Europe, but now it has affected indigenous groups such as the Zapatistas of southern Mexico. Their land, culture and society has been practically erased by the settlers. The affects of the settling provided Mexico and other southern countries with close to nothing in royalties and little to nothing in cultural awareness.
Considered as one of Harris’s most “disturbing realities”, inequality in Latin America is thought to be best revealed as the “inequality of income between the upper and lower income-earners”(5). While only 20 percent of people own that large amount of land, the rest of the population is considered the lower class that receives low wages, little to no health care affordability and the lack of basic fundamentals such as sewage systems or running water. The rates of illiteracy and infant mortality are unacceptably high (particularly in rural areas). In a general study, it was found that the rural population exhibits rates of illiteracy that was found 50-75 percent greater than that in urban areas. Harris then explains the reasons for the extent of poverty that has increased in the largest cities “ as a result of recent wage declines, downsizing in the private sector, the reduction of the public sector work force, and the decline of public services and subsides”(8).
The inaccuracy in the global market has placed a downfall on the working class’ economic standing and the introduction of the extinction of human rights in these countries. Due to Latin America’s strong involvement in the global arena, the 80 percent of the lower class people must be the punishing end of the deal. Clearly, Globalization has expanded as a negative influence to the working class.Another example of the effect of industrializing on human rights is the .