Context

Contesting the premise that a country’s economy must always ‘grow or die’, de-growth propositions come to debunk the centrality of growth measured by increase in Gross domestic product (GDP).

Definition

A de-growth model proposes a shift towards a lower and sustainable level of production and consumption. In essence, shrinking the economic system to leave more space for human cooperation and ecosystems.

The proposal includes

• Downsizing resource-, energy- and emission-intensive superfluous production, particularly in the North (e.g. the automotive and military industries)
• Directing investments instead into the care sector, social infrastructure and environmental restoration

Feminist perspective

Feminist perspectives within de-growth theory and practice argue that it also needs to redefine and revalidate unpaid and paid, care and market labour to overcome traditional gender stereotypes as well as the prevailing wage gaps and income inequalities that devalue care work.

Learn more about this proposition

• In “The Future WE Want: Occupy development” Christa Wichterich argues that in order to break up the hegemonic logic of unfettered growth and quick returns on investment, three cornerstones of another development paradigm must combine: care, commons and sufficiency in production and consumption.
• Equitable, Ecological Degrowth: Feminist Contributions by Patricia Perkins suggests developing effective alternative indicators of well-being, including social and economic equity and work-time data, to demonstrate the importance of unpaid work and services for the economy and provide a mechanism for giving credit to those responsible.

Existem várias razões pelas quais a sua resposta ao inquérito WITM é importante. Por exemplo, tem a oportunidade de partilhar a sua experiência vivida com a mobilização de financiamento para apoiar a sua organização; de reivindicar o seu poder como especialista sobre como o dinheiro circula e os bolsos em que entra; e de contribuir para a defesa coletiva e consistente junto de financiadores para mover mais recursos de maior qualidade. Ao longo das últimas duas décadas, o inquérito WITM da AWID tem-se revelado um recurso fundamental para ativistas e financiadores. Convidamo-lo a juntar-se a nós na sua terceira edição para destacar o estado efetivo do financiamento, desafiar soluções falsas e apontar a forma como o financiamento precisa de mudar para que os movimentos prosperem e enfrentem os desafios complexos do nosso tempo.

Ultra conservative actors have developed a number of discourses at the international human rights level that call on arguments manipulating religion, culture, tradition, and national sovereignty in order to undermine rights related to gender and sexuality.

Anti-rights actors have increasingly moved away from explicitly religious language. Increasingly, we see regressive actors - who may previously have derided human rights concepts - instead manipulating and co-opting these very concepts to further their objectives.

Protection of the family

This emerging and successful discourse appears innocuous, but it functions as a useful umbrella theme to house multiple patriarchal and anti-rights positions. The ‘protection of the family’ theme is thus a key example of regressive actors’ move towards holistic and integrated advocacy.

The language of ‘protection of the family’ works to shift the subject of human rights from the individual and onto already powerful institutions.

It also affirms a unitary, hierarchical, and patriarchal conception of the family that discriminates against family forms outside of these rigid boundaries. It also attempts to change the focus from recognition and protection of the rights of vulnerable family members to non-discrimination, autonomy, and freedom from violence in the context of family relations.

The Right to Life

The Holy See and a number of Christian Right groups seek to appropriate the right to life in service of an anti-abortion mission.  Infusing human rights language with conservative religious doctrine, they argue that the right to life, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, applies at the moment of conception.

The discourse has no support in any universal human rights instrument. Yet this is an appealing tactic for anti-rights actors, because the right to life cannot be violated under any circumstances and is a binding legal standard.

Sexual rights

Anti-rights actors use a number of rhetorical devices in their campaign to undermine sexual rights: they argue that sexual rights do not exist or are ‘new rights,’ that they cause harm to children and society, and/or that these rights stand in opposition to culture, tradition or national laws.

Conservative actors engaged in advocacy at the UN attack the right to comprehensive sexuality education from several directions. They claim that CSE violates ‘parental rights’, harms children, and that it is not education but ideological indoctrination. They also claim that comprehensive sexuality education is pushed on children, parents, and the United Nations by powerful lobbyists seeking to profit from services they provide to children and youth.

Attempts to invalidate rights related to sexual orientation and gender identity have proliferated. Ultra conservative actors argue that application of long-standing human rights principles and law on this issue constitutes the creation of ‘new rights’; and that the meaning of rights should vary radically because they should be interpreted through the lens of ‘culture’ or ‘national particularities.’

Reproductive Rights

Christian Right organizations have been mobilizing against reproductive rights alongside the Holy See and other anti-rights allies for several years. They often argue that reproductive rights are at heart a form of Western-imposed population control over countries in the global South. Ironically, this claim often originates from U.S. and Western Europe-affiliated actors, many of whom actively work to export their fundamentalist discourses and policies.

Regressive actors also cite to ‘scientific’ arguments from ultra-conservative think tanks, and from sources that rely on unsound research methodologies, to suggest that abortion causes an array of psychological, sexual, physical, and relational side effects.

Protection of children and parental rights

Just as anti-rights actors aim to construct a new category of ‘protection of the family,’ they are attempting to construct a new category of ‘parental rights,’ which has no support in existing human rights standards.

This discourse paradoxically endeavours to use the rights protections with which children are endowed, as articulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to support the rights of parents to control their children and limit their rights.

Violence against women

Increasingly, anti-rights actors are attempting to infiltrate and subvert standards and discourses developed by women human rights defenders, such as violence against women (VAW).

At the Commission on the Status of Women and other spaces, one rhetorical move is to treat VAW as a concept in which to embed anti-reproductive rights and patriarchal arguments. Ultra conservative actors, for example, have argued that non-heteronormative or traditional intimate partner relationships are a risk factor for violence, and emphasize that fathers are necessary to protect families from violence.

Gender and ‘gender ideology’

The Holy See has set off a sustained critique of gender, ‘gender ideology’, ‘gender radicals,’ and gender theory, and anti-rights actors often read the term as code for LGBTQ rights. Gender is used by the religious right as a cross-cutting concept that links together many of their discourses. Increasingly, the hysteria on this subject fixates on gender identity and trans rights.

Complementarity and human dignity

Complementarity of the sexes is a discourse employed by a number of ultra-conservative actors today. Its rhetoric is structured around an assumption of difference: men and women are meant to have differing but complementary roles in marriage and family life, and with respect to their engagement in the community and political and economic life.

Reference to ‘natural’ roles is meant to fundamentally reject universal human rights to equality and non-discrimination.

It is also used to justify State and non-State violations of these rights, and non-compliance with respect to State obligations to eliminate prejudices and practices based on stereotyped roles for men or women.

National sovereignty and anti-imperialism

This discourse suggests that national governments are being unjustly targeted by UN bodies, or by other States acting through the UN. This is an attempt to shift the subject of human rights from the individual or marginalized community suffering a rights violation to a powerful and/or regressive institution - i.e. the state, in order to justify national exceptions from universal rights or to support state impunity. 

Religious freedom

Anti-rights actors have taken up the discourse of freedom of religion in order to justify violations of human rights. Yet, ultra-conservative actors refer to religious freedom in a way that directly contradicts the purpose of this human right and fundamentally conflicts with the principle of the universality of rights. The inference is that religious liberty is threatened and undermined by the protection of human rights, particularly those related to gender and sexuality.

The central move is to suggest that the right to freedom of religion is intended to protect a religion rather than those who are free to hold or not hold different religious beliefs.

Yet under international human rights law, the right protects believers rather than beliefs, and the right to freedom of religion, thought and conscience includes the right not to profess any religion or belief or to change one’s religion or belief.

Cultural rights and traditional values

The deployment of references to culture and tradition to undermine human rights, including the right to equality, is a common tactic amongst anti-rights actors. Culture is presented as monolithic, static, and immutable, and it is is often presented in opposition to ‘Western norms.’

Allusions to culture by anti-rights actors in international policy debates aim to undermine the universality of rights, arguing for cultural relativism that trumps or limits rights claims. Regressive actors’ use of cultural rights is founded on a purposeful misrepresentation of the human right. States must ensure that traditional or cultural attitudes are not used to justify violations of equality, and human rights law calls for equal access, participation and contribution in all aspects of cultural life for all, including women, religious, and racial minorities, and those with non-conforming genders and sexualities.

Subverting ‘universal’

Anti-rights actors in international policy spaces increasingly manipulate references to universal or fundamental human rights to reverse the meaning of the universality of rights.

Rather than using the term universal to describe the full set of indivisible and interrelated human rights, ultra conservative actors employ this term to instead delineate and describe a subset of human rights as ‘truly fundamental.’ Other rights would thus be subject to State discretion, ‘new’ rights or optional. This discourse is especially powerful as their category of the truly universal remains unarticulated and hence open to shifting interpretation.

Other Chapters

• Key opposition strategies and tactics
• Key impacts on the international human rights system
• Key opposition actors

Read the full report

Other Chapters

• Key opposition strategies and tactics
• Key impacts on the international human rights system
• Key opposition actors

Read the full report

كلا. نطلب فقط تعبئة استطلاع واحد لكل مجموعة.

La creciente dominación de los mercados y las instituciones financieras internacionales en la definición de las políticas económicas globales ha tenido como resultado la captura del poder popular en aras del interés de las élites y las grandes corporaciones globales.

Este informe «Flujos financieros ilícitos» analiza su desproporcionado impacto de género y los marcos legales y políticos actuales que permiten a las corporaciones multinacionales beneficiarse del fraude fiscal en detrimento de las personas y el planeta.

El informe concluye con siete recomendaciones feministas de políticas para exigir transparencia y rendición de cuentas por parte del poder corporativo para frenar los flujos financieros ilícitos.

Recomendaciones de políticas para la incidencia

Los flujos financieros ilícitos están llamando la atención como nunca antes: ya sea en negociaciones para el desarrollo, como los que condujeron a la Agenda 2030 y a la Conferencia sobre Financiamiento para el
Desarrollo de Addis Abeba en 2015, u ocupando los titulares de los medios hegemónicos con la publicación de documentos filtrados sobre finanzas offshore conocidos como los «Panama Papers». En otro ejemplo, en un
referendum de febrero de 2017, el pueblo ecuatoriano votó para prohibir que políticxs y funcionarixs públicxs posean acciones, compañías o capital en paraísos fiscales. El Gobierno de Ecuador es ahora, dentro del grupo
G-77, una de las voces principales que reclaman en las Naciones Unidas la creación de un organismo tributario global para poner fin a los paraísos fiscales.

Esta atención pública potencialmente da impulso para que lxs feministas, los movimientos sociales y lxs defensores de la justicia tributaria presionen por la transformación del sistema financiero internacional, donde
se arraigan desigualdades globales, incluidas las desigualdades de género.

Ofrecemos aquí siete pedidos de políticas como contribución a los crecientes esfuerzos de incidencia de actores por la justicia social, feministas, por los derechos de las mujeres y por la igualdad de género.

1. Abordar los flujos financieros ilícitos como una violación de los derechos humanos y los derechos de las mujeres:

• Los FFI impiden el cumplimiento de la obligación de los Estados de movilizar los máximos recursos disponibles para la realización de los derechos humanos, incluidos los compromisos de larga data sobre los derechos de las mujeres y la igualdad de género.
• El aumento de la de la rendición de cuentas de las corporaciones es una posibilidad que está sobre la mesa del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas (ONU). Ya se ha establecido un grupo de trabajo abierto intergubernamental para elaborar un instrumento vinculante internacional que regule, según las normativas internacionales de derechos humanos, las actividades de las corporaciones transnacionales y otras empresas comerciales. Este proceso tiene el potencial de abordar la evasión fiscal corporativa como una violación de los derechos humanos, incluidos los derechos de las mujeres, y debería recibir más apoyo de los países del Norte y del Sur globales.

2. Garantizar que las corporaciones multinacionales paguen su parte:

• • Desarrollar mecanismos internacionales para detener las prácticas fiscales fraudulentas y evitar las exenciones fiscales a las corporaciones. Los Estados miembros de las Naciones Unidas deberían iniciar negociaciones para redactar el borrador de una convención de la ONU para combatir las prácticas fiscales fraudulentas. La convención debería adoptar un sistema de consolidación y prorrateo para gravar las ganancias corporativas globales.
• Revisar específicamente las regulaciones nacionales de los países ricos que requieren que las CMN paguen impuestos solo en el país de residencia y no en los países de actividad económica. Esta práctica daña sobre todo a los países en desarrollo, ya que cada vez pierden más base tributaria que se desplaza a jurisdicciones de baja o nula tributación. Al respecto deberían considerarse propuestas tales como el enfoque de tributación unitaria.

3. Apoyar el establecimiento de un organismo tributario internacional de las naciones Unidas:

• Un organismo tributario de las Naciones Unidas, con iguales derechos de voto y membresía universal, debería tener la facultad de revisar la política tributaria nacional, regional y global y de garantizar que los Estados cumplan con los compromisos de larga data sobre derechos humanos, incluidos los derechos de las mujeres y la igualdad de género.

4. Promover la transparencia y la recolección de datos con perspectiva de género:

• Deben realizarse mayores esfuerzos globales para pulir los datos comparables sobre fraude fiscal, por ejemplo, con datos desglosados por género que ponen al desnudo los prejuicios de género de ciertos sistemas tributarios.
• Los países deben garantizar un esquema para el intercambio automático de información que garantice el acceso público y global a datos clave que afectan los recursos disponibles para la realización de los derechos humanos.
• Implementar obligaciones informativas país por país para que las corporaciones multinacionales publiquen, como parte de sus informes anuales, las ganancias obtenidas y los impuestos pagados en cada país donde operan.
• Debe haber más cooperación de los gobiernos para compartir sus registros públicos nacionales que dan a conocer los verdaderos beneficiarios de compañías, fideicomisos, fundaciones y estructuras legales similares, además de otra información financiera.

5. Promover la justicia tributaria a través de políticas fiscales nacionales progresivas:

• Promover la justicia tributaria a través de políticas fiscales progresivas. Esto implica aumentar el peso de los impuestos directos sobre los ingresos de capital y los sectores sociales de alta rentabilidad y, al mismo tiempo, reducir y eliminar el peso tributario que recae en las mujeres y las personas pobres. Los segmentos precarizados de la sociedad, donde las mujeres están sobrerrepresentadas, no deberían terminar pagando más impuestos, en relación con sus ingresos, que los segmentos más adinerados, que a menudo se benefician de subsidios impositivos, moratorias y reducciones fiscales.
• Los gobiernos deben revisar desde una perspectiva crítica los dañinos acuerdos comerciales y de inversión que otorgan incentivos y exenciones fiscales, que perpetúan la desigualdad y los prejuicios de género.

6. Garantizar la participación de las organizaciones por los derechos de las mujeres, los movimientos sociales y la sociedad civil progresista en sentido amplio:

• Las decisiones sobre política económica y fiscal carecen a menudo de perspectiva de género. La interacción de los ministerios de género y de finanzas, y de estos con la sociedad civil y las defensoras de derechos humanos, es fundamental para entender mejor el impacto que tienen las decisiones sobre los ingresos públicos en los derechos de las mujeres y la igualdad de género.
• Debe establecerse un ambiente propicio que proteja a las defensoras de derechos humanos y otrxs activistas (incluidxs lxs denunciantes y activistas para la justicia tributaria) que expongan el fraude fiscal e informen sobre la corrupción.

7. Poner fin a la impunidad de las actividades delictivas asociadas con los flujos financieros ilícitos y garantizar la rendición de cuentas:

• Establecer un mecanismo coordinado global entre autoridades fiscales nacionales, mecanismos de derechos humanos e igualdad de género y unidades de inteligencia, para garantizar que las actividades delictivas asociadas con los FFI no continúen impunes.
• Fortalecer los sistemas de justicia nacionales y globales para lograr la rendición de cuentas de individuos y entidades por la financiación de actividades delictivas a través de los FFI.

Leer el informe completo

Partagez vos histoires et écoutez celles des les autres. En reliant nos expériences, nos récits et nos propositions, nous aidons à co-créer et à amplifier les Réalités Féministes.

Да, доступ к опросу можно получить с помощью смартфона.

Pour toute question administrative, vous pouvez contacter notre bureau :

• +1 416 594 3773
• 192 Spadina Avenue, Suite 300 | Toronto, ON, M5T 2C2 | Canada