Re: human rights and national sovereignty/ is an oxymoron

In a message dated 5/3/99 9:41:23 AM, upf@upf.org writes:

<<I agree, as long as communism truly means communism not fascism.
Democracy is not the be-all and end-all in terms of how to run things.
I believe the answer will be a combination of whatever works for the
appropriate communities involved.

--
                                                 Your Friend in Peace,
                                                        Glen Nuttall
                                                            UPF
                                                   http://www.upf.org
                                                        upf@upf.org
>>

If you ever read Karl Marx, you will know that democracy was supposed to 
exist in communism. However, communism is just another system, subject to 
corruption, especially when there is the need to protect its sovereignty. 
This is what happened in the very beginning of the Communist Revolution of 
1917. China is another example and Cuba too. Therefore, it seems to me, to 
devise a non-system where there is no sovereignty to protect other than for 
the individual. That is why, I would hope that our future world would be 180 
degrees the opposite of today: mutually co-operative, self-sustainable small 
communities. Where relationship supercedes materialism in the human hierarchy 
of values. As well as co-operation vs. competition.. Where consensus is used 
as the basis for group decisions. This is the most democratic form that  I 
know of.
										
						Regards,
										
						Tom O (bagelhole1)
										
			<A 
HREF="http://bagelhole.hypermart.net/">http://bagelhole.hypermart.net/
</A>