I dunno that such a large majority of the world would agree with such a statement. I'm all for human rights, individual rights. I agree that there is a basic f

I dunno that such a large majority of the world would agree with such a statement. I'm all for human rights, individual rights. I agree that there is a basic floor of those rights which should be respected on either side of the partition, and everywhere else. But rights of a group of people to act as "a people" with a state, and control over a contiguous block of territory, seems way less credible. Does every civilian have a right not to be bombed or shot at or have power and water cut? Yes. Also rights to be treated equally before the law, not be subject to arbitrary detainment, fair and public trials, etc. But "a people" as a group having rights? Would Catalonia, Veneto, Wallonia etc have a "right" to be separate states if their populations desire it? Unclear. What if Afrikaners tried to assert such a right? Seems sus. Did people inside the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone have rights to create it? Probably not, even if they had organized a plebiscite first. So where's the line?