I agree with you. My main reason for not bringing up the internal complications of the UDHR was to not add confusion, but you are completely right about how so

I agree with you. My main reason for not bringing up the internal complications of the UDHR was to not add confusion, but you are completely right about how some of these rights can conflict. You are equally right about the "arbitrary" part. However, when it comes to today's trade in personal profiles and governments scooping up everything they can get their hands on (legalized or not), I very strongly believe that all of it rather clearly fits the classification of "arbitrary". I will even agree with that I picked an (extreme) side. But maybe not because I can't see nuance or because I ignore (at least not in private) what conflicts with my position. It's more about being sick and tired of listening for decades to blatant privacy abusers arrogantly (and incorrectly) claiming that what they do is legal .. and how we just all should accept this new reality. It sure didn't help to see governments either buying that bullshit or simply not deal with it because of how it could harm their own (surveillance) interests. Considering the now obvious rampant abuse and how far I believe we have veered off from how all this probably should have developed (in an ideal world), I'm convinced that the time for being nice and nuanced about all this has long passed. “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” ― Benito Mussolini Note: such a merger does not have to be overtly voluntary. It can also be a government seemingly dictating corporations or corporations covertly running a government. It's all about the two somehow joining forces (even if only because of shared interests and possibly still for different reasons), especially when against the interests of most citizens.