4 ms·
> Democracy is, more or less, the only way to get human rights for citizens (a little simplified, but not by much). I'll just correct your line a little, it is
by Volpe 14y ago
> Democracy is, more or less, the only way to get human rights for citizens (a little simplified, but not by much).
I'll just correct your line a little, it is one of the most efficient ways to get individual rights.
> So you're saying that rule of law, women's right, etc (see e.g. the UN declarations) are just Western propaganda -- other people don't want it?
No, I wasn't saying that, those were your words. The UN declaration of human rights, is not incompatible with the notion of collective rights. That is, you don't need to have individual rights, to still provide human rights.
> Afaik, everyone and their dogs try to emigrate to where they can get these rights and the good economy that comes in an open, democratic society... (and/or bleed in the streets for them.)
This is simply untrue, who is 'everyone'? The majority of the world's population don't live in the west, and aren't trying to migrate to it.
Those that do migrate, are motivated by security and economy. Though these things can be related to democracy, the motivation is not related.
> Thanks for a good laugh. I'll still assume you're a troll or from the 50 cent army.
Unnecessary to degrade the discussion like that. I am merely providing an alternate point of view. I know that can be confronting, but it's the point of view that is confronting, not the person providing it.
- berntb 14y agoFirst you wrote: "[Democracy] is a biproduct of individualism, and individual rights... These are not universally agreed concepts and a lot of people don't agree with them." For individual rights I brought up human rights from UN etc. You answered: "No, I wasn't saying that, those were your words." That is wrong. You did say "individual rights" yourself -- I just answered with the general rights which are (more or less) supported in democracies. But you knew that. I wonder a bit what you mean with "collective rights"? (Clans? The communist party? Your church/mosque?) Not enough to really care. Your position seem too much like an abstract (sophistic?) defense for oppressing people by claiming rights for groups. Not new in history. A fun read, anyway.
- Volpe 14y agoHmm, a dishonest response, that ignores what I said. There is little point in this discussion continuing. Collective Rights is a popular concept that a quick google would reveal to you. It is not about Clans, Communism or Relgion. Democracy is not a cure to oppression.
- berntb 14y agoI called you dishonest -- and showed how. I saw no reason to touch your comment after that. You lack references. If this is what you talk about, I don't see the problem with democracy (or relevance to what I originally wrote): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_and_group_rights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_and_group_rights
- Volpe 14y agoCollective Rights: - http://library.thinkquest.org/C0126065/isscollective.html http://library.thinkquest.org/C0126065/isscollective.html - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism You'll see the the above is not incompatible with Human Rights[1] As per my original comment, democracy and the spread of it at the hand of the US is entrenched in its history[2] and serves its religious and economical agenda. You may want to look up the following for your own benefit (in future discussions): - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies In particular: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man [1] http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Hu... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Liberty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Liberty
- berntb 14y ago>>You'll see the the above is not incompatible with Human Rights[1] From your original comment: >> [Democracy] is a biproduct of individualism, and individual rights... These are not universally agreed concepts and a lot of people don't agree with them. You claimed there that many people disagreed with individual rights, which I questioned -- using the Human rights from UN as an example. Again -- you seem to be arguing something else now. Or your point of claiming a contrast is too trivial. Thanks for the links to "collective rights", they were clearer than Wikipedia. >>As per my original comment, democracy and the spread of it at the hand of the US is entrenched in its history American exceptionalism is afaik something you find on the quite extreme US right? Also, the definitions of democracy in western Europe etc is quite accepted in the US so it isn't that extreme even there... (Re child labour -- we had that in the West, until we could afford not to. It is a stage in economic evolution, which is best left as quickly as possible. Re alternative economic models -- please show me some that work and are tested, there should be better ways of doing economy.)