Further comment on the Association for Sovereignz: Anthony Ravlich Nick Sturges Again you are quite right- the UN has a one world government agenda and is promoting totalitarian and repressive States including political Islam which suit the extreme top-down control (a form of totalitarianism) they have determined for us. They have also determined the decline in global freedom, including western civilization which stands in the way of their OWG agenda. My problem is that I am before my time. There are things that have happened and been decided upon which are being deliberately withheld from humanity. This is only a guess (and I could well be wrong) but I think they may be waiting for the right time to inform people. I only hope it is not too late because enormous damage is being done in the meantime. Also the rise of totalitarianism occurred prior to the 2nd world war which ended with nuclear explosions in Japan.
My post on the Association for Sovereignz: Anthony Ravlich What I am saying is not rocket science. Anyone of reasonable intellect should understand it. Human rights are meant to be universal i.e. for everyone. However, the UN has left out a number of human rights (and virtual all States dutifully follow) to strongly favor the Corporations i.e. the global free market is strongly preferred to the domestic free market which means that capitalism has been grossly distorted. In the past entrepreneurship was able to forge new paths into the future but because of the omissions of the creative rights e.g. individual self-determination such as the seeking of truth, hopes, and dreams (sometimes depicted by the iconic American superhero) it has resulted in low GDP growth while the global free market has meant Corporations have relocated to countries where they can exploit cheap labor. While I am not a great proponent of capitalism it is not been judged fairly when it has been deliberately distorted. Suffice to say if it was not for the manipulation of human rights there seems little evidence to suggest that capitalism is broken – so apart from including the omitted human rights it does not seem to need fixing or eliminating. The ethical human right I promote emphasizes small/medium business rather than the Corporations so may be a considerable benefit to climate change as well as protecting the habitat of the wildlife. I certainly think it is enormously arrogant of humanity to think that we are justified in destroying so much of the animal kingdom. I believe both humans and animals have a divine right to be here.
My comment on the Association for Sovereignz: Anthony Ravlich I agree with you, in fact, there is no country in the world which will accept the ethical human rights I promote. Because I have been based on universal human rights truth and have been an outsider I have answers to many of the problems people face. But I have to wait for the rare exception because the establishment is ideologically controlled and ordinary people have been severely dumbed down so much so they are even very afraid to ask me questions. In my view, the human rights truth has been found and just taking Muslims as an example they are very largely blaming the wrong people – it is their governments, as well as considerable others, who have decided to exclude the creative rights which I consider led to the dominance of western civilization. If Muslims were sufficiently enlightened they would demand that their leadership includes the creative rights e.g. individual self-determination, so they do not end up with backward societies which they have to flee. Governments exclude the creative rights to keep their populations backward and unable to hold leaders to account. If you want to know more just ask me.
My comment on the Association of Sovereignz: Anthony Ravlich Nick Sturges I think my position is similar to Voltaire’s. In my vew, people have a right to what they believe in even if I consider it to be evil. As far as religion is concerned it is not my expertise and prefer to leave it to the experts to debate. However, [I believe] spirituality/God has played a part in the ethical human rights I promote so I think I have something to offer there. I have no wish to read the Koran and I have read little of the Bible. For example, in my view the neoliberal absolutism created by the UN on 10 Dec 2008 is evil however the considerable majority of States who created it has a right to their belief however they have no right to claim the UDHR as their authority when they have left out so many human rights.
Jihad can be seen as the exercise of duty and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there are also duties to the community but has, in my view, been wrongfully excluded in international human rights law. The ethical human rights I promote is firmly based on the UDHR and, unlike ideology e.g. neoliberalism and globalization, has no human rights omissions so would replace both neoliberalism and globalization. I consider and it is described in full in my chapter on Bangladesh in my suppressed book, that it would permit a peaceful rather than a violent jihad particularly in democracies. What is to stop religions setting up a political party based on ethical human rights and exercise a peaceful jihad by gaining a greater voice in the mainstream? Because ethical human rights are firmly based on universal human rights truth the latter can be seen as reflective of God’s/Allah’s absolute universal truth. Supporting the latter, universal human rights truth, in my view, equates with the Golden Rule i.e. do unto others as you would have them do unto you, which all the major religions agree with.The refusal of the global establishment to discuss ethical human rights, in my view, is because it would replace neoliberalism and globalization which strongly favors the establishment over the rest of the population. I consider ethical human rights would be fair on the whole population and remove the divisions including the huge gap between rich and poor.
Outsider, Ethical Human Rights 