Poll Reveals U.S. Public Opinion on Human and Civil Rights

A leader in the field of public policy and human rights, Prof. James Ron has conducted research and taught courses at the University of Minnesota since 2011. Over the course of a 30-year career, Prof. Ron has collaborated with entities such as Human Rights Watch and the Center for Victims of Torture, which provided funding and in-kind contributions for a 2018 poll he conducted regarding the U.S. public’s opinion on human and civil rights. The bulk of the survey costs were funded by the University of Minnesota.

The nationally representative poll, which collected data from 3,000 adults residing in America (1,000 of whom reported voting for Donald Trump in the 2016 Republic primaries), revealed that respondents support human and civil rights across a range of domestic and foreign issues. poll. One major factor associated with anti-human/civil rights sentiments was support for the Republican Party. In other words, self-proclaimed Republicans tended to be more skeptical of human and civil rights in general, with particular emphasis on the rights of immigrants and refugees.

The poll also discovered that while respondents generally oppose US aid to foreign dictators, Trump supporters are more tolerant of such aid. Survey experiments within the poll indicate that if humankind civil rights advocates could enlist the help of religious figures in condemning foreign aid to dictators, Trump voters would be likely to shift their positions.

Dr. Ron and his colleagues further discussed the poll in editorials published in several publications, including the New York Times (www.nytimes.com/2019/09/24/opinion/anti-semitism-republicans.html), the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/06/no-americans-dont-support-airstrikes-that-kill-civilians-even-when-they-target-terrorists/), and Foreign Policy (https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/21/to-protect-human-rights-abroad-preach-to-trump-voters-dictators-authoritarianism-ethnocentrism/).

Most People Trust the Motives of International Human Rights Groups

Serving as a professor in the public affairs department of the University of Minnesota at Minneapolis, James Ron has studied the image of international organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. The views of James Ron and co-author David Crow appeared on November 29, 2016, in The Washington Post.

The rise of Donald Trump to the American presidency changed the government’s perspective on human rights - the president has supported the torture of suspected terrorists and restrictions on the news media, and declared American-born children of illegal immigrants to be non-citizens. However, this new view has an upside for human rights advocates.

Trump’s less than progressive human rights agenda provides political cover against the charge that human rights organizations promote the global dominance of the United States, a view held by many politicians and academics since the Carter era.

Opponents believed that human rights groups endorsed American empire-building in exchange for Washington's support of their agenda. Others maintained that the justification for interventionism shifted from anti-communism to protecting human rights. Finally, it was argued that human rights ideals were not universal (as claimed by the rights groups) but expressions of American political values.

Oppressive regimes justified their actions by saying they were part of American intentions to dominate the world. However, several surveys in these nations demonstrated that average citizens supported rights organizations and indeed trusted them more than their governments. Professors James Ron and David Crow believe that Trump’s authoritarian views will de-couple perceptions of American policy from popular opinion of rights groups.