Re: human rights and national sovereignty/ is an oxymoron

Mark Douglas Whitaker wrote:

> >Pat Gunning writes:
> >
> >Tom, have you considered federalism? This is a world government in which
> >the world police force and perhaps military, restricted by a world
> >constitutional court and public sentiment, assures basic rights such as
> >freedom of speech, press, exchange, ownership of legitimately-acquired
> >property against confiscation by member states, and migration. The
> >federated states retain the right to tax and spend so long as they abide
> >by democratic principles and uphold the basic rights.

>         Point two, well, someone ought to theoretically explain why the
> formal structure that so many people are willing to put their faith in has
> failed to marionette informal power relationships as it is ascribed to
> perform this function It seems to be other other way around, informal
> structures of power marionetting formal structures of power, and certain
> informal structures of power getting set up by the 'checks' of formal
> structures.

Agreed. In thinking about a federalist world government, one ought to
expect that what you call informal structures of power would emerge.
Informal structures appear to be endemic to all rule-governed and
therefore formally structured interaction. Human beings adapt to formal
rules by developing informal networks of communication and group action.
The problem is to devise a set of rules for federalism that will harness
brute force and fraud and that will maximize the net benefit from its
use. As Andrew Austin seems to recognize in his most recent post, the
choice requires some criterion for judging what is beneficial and what
is harmful.

-- 
Pat Gunning, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman
Web pages on Subjectivism, Democracy, Taiwan, Ludwig von Mises,
Austrian Economics, and my University Classes
http://www2.cybercities.com/g/gunning/welcome.htm
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/barclay/212/welcome.htm