reply to post by Threegirls
This does not describe the majority of the population of the planet so quit trying to defend your right to have something to the exclusion of most
others. I live in Britain, the west, I am not willing to defend my right to something I have no chance of attaining
It is a profound indictment of government that the majority of the population of the planet does not live in a state of freedom. I can see no better
reason to oppose a one world government than this right here. It is astounding to me that some of the best arguments made in this thread against
global domination are coming from the people actually advocating it. The fact that these people seem incapable of recognizing this is only more
reason to oppose a one world government. People get the government they deserve, and if people are insistent on maintaining a culture of
thoughtlessness and lack of discernment, that insistence will only be amplified by the government they ordain.
Let's make no mistake about this, governments exist by consent of the governed. Hitler existed by consent of the governed. Hussein existed by
consent of the governed. The Soviet Union, and China's government today exist by the consent of the governed...and of course, the shameful and
unlawful imperialism thrust upon the world by the United States today is happening by consent of the governed.
Before there was government, there were people. People do not exist because governments allow it. Governments exist because people allow it. All
people, everywhere, regardless of what some Constitution might say, or what a body of legislation might say, hold the inherent political power.
Sovereignty begins with the individual, not with land, and certainly not by some divine right doctrine, or social contract or military thuggery that
would deign that sovereignty belongs to the privileged.
Pointing to the fact that most people on the planet are continually having their natural and unalienable rights denied and disparaged does not
undermine their rights, it undermines the value of the governments that are demonstrably failing to protect these rights, and failing that ensuring
every individual has a method by which to seek a redress of grievances.
All people, everywhere, are endowed with certain unalienable rights. Why these rights tend to be trampled upon by the very governments that should be
tasked with protecting them is because far too many people believe that law is arbitrary and capricious and that it is legislated and enforced based
This idea that one persons rights can exist at the exclusion of other peoples rights is not true, and misunderstands what rights are. Rights are not
privileges, regardless of the artful use of priest class lawyers who love to utter their mystical incantations and equate privileges with rights.
Privileges are favors granted by some other person to another. A privilege can be granted or denied. Rights, on the other hand, can be neither
granted nor denied. They can be trampled on, spat on, pissed on, defecated on, but when they are this is not lawful. When it becomes legal to
trample, spit, piss, and defecate on rights, it does so by consent of the governed.
What then, are rights? They are far too numerous to list, and are better understood in what they are not. Shakespeare wrote, in All's Well That
Ends Well, "Love all, trust few, and do wrong to none". Do no harm. If you are not harming anyone else, then what you do, you do by right. The
only exception to this is in the matter of defense.
All people have the right to life, and to property. It follows then that they have the right to defend this life, and their property. They have the
right to equal the force being used against them to accomplish this defense.
These are what rights are, and they are not in any way rights that exist to the exclusion of others.