The point of this essay is that the arguments advanced by thinkers like John Rawls e
Michael Ignatieff in favour of a core rights to life and liberty are not consistent with their
positions in favour of human rights minimalism. Just the fact that human rights
minimalism implies the right to physical security and to basic freedom of movement should
lead these philosophers not only to recognize both the importance and the value of other
rights, but also to include certain aspects of the sphere of private life and of cultural
practice in the field of international law. Human rights, that are going to become popular
through international debates, compell us first to reconsider the dichotomy between public
and private sphere; second, the dichotomy between social and political interests; third, the
necessity of subordinating politics of human right, with no exception, either to prudential
and historical convenience (see Ignatieff), or to the observance of pluralism (see Rawls).
