🚀 go-pugleaf

John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message news:<3B1DA3AB.686F24F8@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>...
> >>> John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote
> >>>> The "right of self determination" is a concept that applies ONLY to
> >>>> individuals.
>  
>  mike wills wrote:
> >>> That is simply not true. Several Eastern European countries were founded on the
> >>>  principle of national self determination-
>  
>  John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote
> >> So what?  The Nazi and Communist governments were founded on concepts that
> >> we all know are total bullshit.  National or community "self determination"
> >> is total bullshit, too.
> 
> mike wills wrote:
> > i don't understand your reasoning here. if i understand you correctly, then
> > you're saying that because the Nazi regime was founded on concepts that are total
> > bullshit, therefore any regime founded on 'nationalist' principles of self-
> > determination is total 'bullshit'.
> 
> My reasoning is simply to knock down your so-called reasoning.  The fact
> that a nation was founded on a principle doesn't make that principle right
> or even rational.
In that case you failed. An example is not the same thing as a proof.

> 
> (And you're wrong about the US, it was founded on INDIVIDUAL rights; read
> the Declaration of Independence.)
The men who wrote the Declaration of Independence were writing on
behalf of people from 13 colonies. It is not even clear that they
believed what they wrote since several of the signers owned slaves. It
is also not clear that they represented a majority of male opinion in
the 13 colonies. Certainly they were not speaking for every one in the
colonies.
 In any case they also recognised that sometimes, the sum is greater
than the parts:
If I may quote Ben Franklin: "together we stand, divided we fall"
> 
> > whether you disagree with its consequences or not, the principle of self-
> > determination for the nation does exist.
> 
> Not in any ethics I consider valid.  Morally, group entities do not exist.
So the family means nothing to you then?

> 
> > moreover, it is applied reguarally in the usa's dealings with foreign powers.
> > by and large, we do not let other countries tell us what to do- we reserve that
> > right for ourselves. this is a decision made by politicans and diplomats, on
> > behalf of the american people i.e national self determination.
> 
> These things did happen, as a result of the very fallacy-of-composition
> that you espouse.  All the tyrannical parts of our own present regime are
> the results.
As long as government exists in any shape or form, national self
determination exists. Now even libertarians will argue that a
government is necessary for certain things e.g. defense, the rule of
law and perhaps education.
 A representative democracy  like ours a priori assumes that people
can and should be elected to speak for the populance.
 
 and it's not just government. in the vast majority of large
companies, the employees are not all equal; and moreover deicisions
are made for a company by a few people at the top on behalf
[presumably] of the whole company. again, this is group
self-determination.