In theory I agree, but consider what it would take to do this (oppressing the majority) in practice. For one, democracy is no longer an option for you. I don't think the ends justify the means there.fightinfrenchman wrote:I'm saying it's good to force it on peoplen0el wrote:fightinfrenchman wrote:Promoting human rights is good whether it's agreed upon by a majority or not.
Okay I agree with you. How does that have anything to do with what I said? But thereās a big difference in promoting human rights through democracy and subverting it to implement your own ideas.
Cultures change, and I do think we can try to nudge them towards democracy and better human rights. Not through military action, but through diplomacy and by setting an example. We should try because I do think, at the risk of sounding arrogant, Western culture "knows better" in many ways. For example our focus on individual rights is important, because without that you will invariably end up with one group oppressing another. Democracy is an important check on power. Imposing our views on these things is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the method.Dolan wrote:I don't really care about what they do in their countries. It's their country, their culture, their people. They are free to decide things and do whatever they want in whatever way they want. But I'm not the one proposing a global government tasked with implementing our view on morality and human rights.
Which, btw, this moralistic view on human rights is nothing more than Eurocentrism/Anglocentrism. We are imposing our view on human rights onto their own views, underpinned by their own cultures. Which is a bit abusive on our part and offensive to the Muslim world and to China who do not share our ideas on universal human rights. They see such attempts at putting pressure on them in the name of "universal human rights" as acts of intrusion in their politics and cultures.
It's also in our own interest. Human civilization needs to come together to take care of the planet.