Are human rights politically neutral? Does proliferation of human rights water down the very concept?

Expressions of political scepticism about human rights may involve an assessment both of how human rights claims feed into and affect political processes and, conversely, the role of politics in facilitating the realisation of human rights. Political sceptics contend that human rights claims are politics in disguise, have a disruptive influence on political processes, or divert attention from urgently needed political action.

A distinct but related form of political scepticism is linked with the idea of a proliferation of human rights, which acknowledges that certain ‘fundamental’ rights constitute valid universal standards, but contends that the notion of universal human rights is being extended much too far in contemporary discourse, thus watering down and potentially compromising the underlying concept.

Should human rights maintain a presumption of political neutrality or should they rather make common cause with particular political agendas, for example related to the redistribution of wealth and affirmative action in relation to public goods and access?