John2.0
Banned
- Joined
- May 24, 2010
- Messages
- 84
- Reaction score
- 4
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Basically, ever since the last hundred years or so, the World has been concerned with Human rights on the battle field, but I'm going to take the road less traveled, an say that this is a fallacy. I will prove that this new trend is a fallacy by presenting two points. One, "human rights" do not exist, and two a belief in human rights has lea to more suffering than without them.
The first point I think is key, Human rights do not exist. There is no proof that any supposed "human rights" exist. Remember, for something to be a "right", it needs to be something that you are born with, and that can't be rightfully taken away from you. Also, a "right" needs to be universally recognized by all men in some way. Since a "right", by definition, comes from nature. So, if we are following nature, every group of people on the planet needs to recognize these rights. however, this is the exact opposite of what we see in real life. Every society has different interpretations of rights, and no two societies can seem to agree on exactly what constitutes a "right". Second, a right needs to be "unalienable", meaning that it can't be taken away. But we see in every society that believes in rights, these rights are rarely followed. Take world war 2 for example. The US and Brittain believed in rights, but had no problem abusing them in order to further their goals. Nor did they care about siding with one of the most human rights abusing nations in the world: the soviet union.
The next point is that following human rights in war leads to more suffering. The USA and UK in WW2 ignored human rights, and deafeted nazism. However, in many recent wars we have followed human rights, leading to quagmires. If the US would ignore these imaginary rights, we would see wars become much easier to win, and we would see less oppressive regimes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should indescriminately kill people, but I believe we should follow the wise word of Thucydides who said: "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.". So, in other word, we should follow what is best for our own civilization, no matter the cost.
So, for responses. Please write some messages that either prove that "human rights" actualy exist. Or show me that my analysis is somehow wrong.
The first point I think is key, Human rights do not exist. There is no proof that any supposed "human rights" exist. Remember, for something to be a "right", it needs to be something that you are born with, and that can't be rightfully taken away from you. Also, a "right" needs to be universally recognized by all men in some way. Since a "right", by definition, comes from nature. So, if we are following nature, every group of people on the planet needs to recognize these rights. however, this is the exact opposite of what we see in real life. Every society has different interpretations of rights, and no two societies can seem to agree on exactly what constitutes a "right". Second, a right needs to be "unalienable", meaning that it can't be taken away. But we see in every society that believes in rights, these rights are rarely followed. Take world war 2 for example. The US and Brittain believed in rights, but had no problem abusing them in order to further their goals. Nor did they care about siding with one of the most human rights abusing nations in the world: the soviet union.
The next point is that following human rights in war leads to more suffering. The USA and UK in WW2 ignored human rights, and deafeted nazism. However, in many recent wars we have followed human rights, leading to quagmires. If the US would ignore these imaginary rights, we would see wars become much easier to win, and we would see less oppressive regimes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should indescriminately kill people, but I believe we should follow the wise word of Thucydides who said: "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.". So, in other word, we should follow what is best for our own civilization, no matter the cost.
So, for responses. Please write some messages that either prove that "human rights" actualy exist. Or show me that my analysis is somehow wrong.
Last edited: