Order Justic

In the challenges of universal conception of human rights. Cultural relativism is the basic and most important element. Cultural relativists are arguing in the opposition of universal theory. They argue that fundamental values are culturally specified and mutual group whatever that are in the tribe, village are not the individual. It’s the basic concept of social identity. An individual or person identity relied on the affiliation to one group or in his community. Intercultural relations are grounded by mutually of unequal rights and obligations. They are diverse and primary behaviour expectation. Basic common structure is complex and attached with various philosophic and cultural values, which provides authority to social order.
Cultural relativism sharpens a long standing dilemma. Cultural relativism can be described as a positive statement or declaration. Human rights are existed in culturally diverse world. It is a great deal too different cultural perspective. Some of them put this relativism to the advancement, security, analysis and its application. It may be illustrated differently with different cultural, ethnic and religious traditions. In short human rights are culturally relative rather than universal.   This advancement, security, analysis and its implication of human rights observed as culturally relative. They would only be subjected to state consideration rather than International law. By rejecting or ignoring their legal responsibility to evaluate and protect universal human rights. States support cultural revivalism may rise own their cultural values and particularities above international law and standards.
Under the cultural values and tradition, Asian values Singapore, china, among other have gave the clear example of cultural relativism. They argued that they have a distinctive historical and cultural heritage. Western notion of democracy and human rights may diverse their values and traditions.