Browsing by Subject "http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p18676"

The thesis examines how human rights were understood in Finnish politics from 1960 to 2023. It explores how the discussion about human rights has changed over time, which issues have been framed as human rights questions and the differences between political parties. The topic is analyzed through a conceptual historical approach, focusing on the controversies and historical development surrounding the concept of human rights. Party programs are used as the primary source material. Sentences containing the term human rights were extracted and then analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The thesis also compares the human rights issues highlighted by political parties with the themes raised by Amnesty International's Finland section. The thesis argues that the history of the concept of human rights can be divided into three periods named after Reinhart Koselleck's analytical concepts of historical processes. The concept was slowly politicized between 1960 and 1995. The Cold War and it’s ending significantly influenced the Finnish discourse on human rights. From 1996 to 2009, the concept was democratized, meaning it was used frequently and broadly by various parties. From 2010 to 2023, the concept was ideologized, allowing for discussion of increasingly diverse ideological issues under its umbrella. Initially, human rights were mostly discussed in the context of foreign policy, but over time the discussion expanded to issues concerning domestic and even municipal politics. Human rights also came to encompass corporate responsibility, healthcare, and the rights of various minorities. The demands presented by the parties regarding human rights policies also became more concrete over time. As a research result, it is clear that each party emphasized certain aspects of human rights that are core issues to their policies. Through the concept of human rights, they also sought to legitimize politically controversial goals. The parties were categorized based on the number of mentions and the political issues they framed as human rights questions. Clear groupings emerged: right-wing parties (National Coalition, Centre, and the Swedish People's Party), which often spoke of human rights from a values-based perspective, and the red-green parties (Social Democrats, Greens, and Left Alliance), which used the concept most extensively and diversely in various themes. The Christian Democrats also frequently used the concept, linking it to conservative values. The Finns Party used the concept the least and often associated it with anti-immigration sentiments, also uniquely questioning the concept of human rights by making it a target and a tool of political disputes. The concept of human rights became a Koselleckian basic concept in the early 2000s, when its use became widespread. A basic concept refers to the idea that it is difficult to imagine political discourse without the concept of human rights. This change was underpinned by international developments that Finland joined somewhat belatedly. So far, there is no indication that the discourse on human rights is subsiding or that the political significance of the concept is diminishing.