2 Responses to “International joint Urgent Appeal: Egypt National and International Human Rights Organizations are Under Attack”

  1. badar uddin says:

    sir,
    hi everybody I am very happy to be part of this site.

    i hope to joint me with working .

    thank you.

    • Rudo says:

      It seems to me this is one more argument for State’s Rights. The prsimee is this: If you reach further and further to the Left, to my definition, you get more and more government control. If one government deciding for all is bad, then more governments deciding for themselves would be better, and the maximum number of governments would be best. Hence, as I have defined left and right before, further left is for total government control, further right is for a total lack of government control. This is the reason why my blog, if I ever get it off the ground, will be called One Small Step to the Left of All the Way Right. I believe that each individual family must be the final arbiter of their future, and should hold responsibility. Dad can’t run the family like a democracy, but he can be the smallest cog in a democratic government. America is, after all, a Republic, not a Democracy. The same seems to be the best form of governming for all. Small groups, the smallest possible, deciding for themselves what is best. Certainly, the one small step to the left would have to be a strict set of basic laws, such as, you can’t vote out the right to vote, and to restrict freedom requires the decision from a higher body that you are a danger to society. Even with these small groups, though, someone will come along and say, if we just had a little more power, or, if we just combined these two things, they would be more able to do something they can’t do now (more power, still, as it always is). This is where we start giving up freedom for power. When one group decides for the whole, this is bad. Basic right and wrong, maybe, but again, you have to allow the public as a whole to vote on things, and yes, as their attitude shifts, the nation-state should adjust. But the reason why Russia should not become Islamic is because it is not Russians who are deciding, but immigrants who should not have been allowed to immigrate who are changing things, ergo, by invasion, not by democracy. Each small unit should be able to protect itself against invasion. So should each state, and each country. Things like the EU were a bad idea from the beginning, the sacrificing of sovereignty for a little economic power. There is no way those governments should have been able to sign away the sovereignty of any nation, much less free nations. Sorry if this doesn’t make sense, it’s too big a subject to nail in a post, and I’m afraid too big for my limited intellect.

Leave a Reply

*

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Egypt License.