What about Human Rights? 
Professor Geoff Dancy discusses human rights, UTM’s response to activism, and shares the importance of original thought.

Listen to the audio version of this article here!*

Dr. Geoff Dancy was completing his undergraduate studies at the University of North Texas when he saw a flyer around his campus. A group of professors was taking students to the Netherlands to study at the United Nations’ (UN) International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Dancy had never heard of the international court before. “We were from Louisiana, from a very conservative place, and my dad was a bill collector,” he said. “This isn’t the forefront of the human rights movement.” 

It wasn’t, but Dancy knew it was his chance to have fun in the Netherlands. So, after a visit to the library, reading some books, writing a research proposal, and bringing it to his professors the following week, he got offered a spot on the trip. Dancy’s proposal was exactly what they were studying.

“I did the work, but I backdoored my way into going to the Netherlands,” Dancy said. Whether it was through the window, front or back, he flew all the way to the Netherlands and watched the trial of the former Serbian president, Slobodan Milošević. 

The trial was put together to prosecute the war crimes that had been committed during the Yugoslav Wars, which cost more than 130,000 lives. Milošević’s trial was considered a critical moment for international justice. However, Milošević was never convicted due to his death in a UN cell in 2006.

“I was part of the crowd that saw the first video evidence of the genocidal acts […] of the massacres at Srebrenica, which were terrible.” Dr. Dancy accompanied the trials for two months and had access to the evidence that was shown during the sessions. “I was part of all this, just a fly on the wall. And I became fascinated by it.” 

Professor Dancy’s story with human rights began with this trial, but these ideas are much older. The UN was created in 1945 following World War II, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted in 1948. 

This document states that every human being, regardless of their race, gender, or ethnicity, is born with a right to “life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more.” The UDHR was a significant milestone, because it was the first time that human rights were protected by international law.

However, these rights keep being ignored and abused. Institutions like the UN and the International Criminal Court (ICC) constantly endeavour to protect and enforce these rights. 

We have seen many atrocious war crimes happen since 1948, including the genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, the Russo-Ukrainian war, and the genocide in Gaza. These events raised criticisms towards the UN and the ICC, and many question whether these institutions hold any value.

Dancy responded to these criticisms. “What I would say to those people is, ‘You think that they’re useless, then get rid of them, and see what happens.’” He expressed that these institutions are crucial and have real-life impact.

“State leaders and rebels or whoever is fighting and killing people… they start to get worried that they’re being monitored by the international community, and they curtail some of the violence,” Dancy explained.

Dancy said that these institutions create a space in which countries and state leaders can get together and discuss issues. These platforms become forums where international figures meet and negotiate. Without the UN, these exchanges would only happen through the media. 

The UN has regularly been troubled. From the impasse between the U.S. and Soviet Union at the Security Council during the Cold War, to the current tension between the U.S., China, and Russia. 

“But what would it be replaced with, if we were to try to do better?” Dancy questioned. “Probably not a much better institution, you know?”

But human rights are not a topic discussed only in international conferences. They are also relevant in the local sphere. When it comes to UTM, there is a belief that students are apathetic and disinterested in activism. But is that true? 

Dancy believes this sentiment stems from UTM being a commuter school. Most students don’t live on campus and people are more prone to engage in activism near where they live.

“I don’t know if I’d be willing to generalize […] When the war in Gaza started, people were protesting here, so it’s not devoid of protests and activism,” he said. 

But to Dancy, the university does have many students who care, who are interested in his work and human rights. “People are searching here. Maybe they haven’t found the exact cause they’re behind, or it’s not easy to organize on this campus, but I don’t think it’s for the lack of interest or apathy.”

However, Dancy thinks Artificial Intelligence (AI) is affecting students. “People say it’s a way to spread information to everybody, that it makes things simpler and is a democratizing influence. What it’s actually doing is curating information.” 

He stated that comparing AI and large language models to the development of the printing press in the fifteenth century is inaccurate. Dancy explained that the latter was a technology that allowed people to access information, while the former is an algorithm that transforms said information into “bite-size” products. 

The user becomes dependent on how the algorithm decides to filter the data. What defines how the algorithm does this is who programmed it. “People at companies who are consolidating power and resources are curating information for us […] I don’t want to give power to them,” Dancy said.

Beyond abdicating our autonomy, Dancy warned about another trait AI takes from us — self-discovery. “That’s what the university is about, period. In self-discovery, you find out what your capabilities are, and then you’re able to produce knowledge.” 

Dancy explained that students are no longer exercising their ability to think and pursue knowledge—they use AI and become a “middleman” that stays between the ideas and the computer. There is no agency or thinking for oneself anymore, therefore, no new ideas. 

“That’s boring!” Dancy exclaimed. “Disagree with each other. That’s more fascinating to me than plugging things into some program and watching it spit out text. I’m befuddled by this!”

But after reading this feature, should you feel desperate or hopeful? Dancy rejects this binary view. This line of thinking has been useful for both defenders and critics of human rights over the years. 

There were several books, like “The End of Human Rights” or “The Last Utopia” about how the era for human rights had reached its end. Those books were written 15 years ago. 

“As long as people care about stopping cruelty and atrocity—and a lot of people do—there’s space in the world for thinking about and pursuing the politics of rights,” Dancy said.

The new cohort of people who are going to create ideas and care about stopping cruelty are university students. It’s us, the “apathetic” students who “don’t care” about activism.

If you do happen to believe UTM does not care about politics, I encourage you to think about what Dancy said: “I don’t think the students are apathetic. Do you think students are apathetic?”

*AI-Generated Audio Transcription Disclaimer

The audio transcription included in this article was generated using artificial intelligence (AI) technology with the purpose of improving accessibility for our readers and providing an alternative opportunity to engage with The Medium‘s content. Please note that AI-generated transcriptions may contain errors or inaccuracies in pronunciation, wording, or interpretation.

The original written article remains the authoritative version of the content. If you notice an error in the audio transcription, please contact social@themedium.ca so we can conduct further reviews and corrections.