How do you reconcile you complaint about complaining about the tourist ban with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which says people have the right to freedom of movement within the borders of each state?

▲

weikju 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Does that Declaration give you an inalienable right to do anything you please? I doubt it. As the old saying goes, your freedom stops where someone else’s freedom starts.

Or in Seinfeld speak, “we live in a society!!!”

Have to consider others not just oneself. That’s the price of freedom and being responsible about it.

The alternative is a nanny state or anarchy.

▲

doublerabbit 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nothing is stopping you from travelling within the borders. A village is nothing more than a province within the state.

If the law ruled: "you may not traverse through the state on Sundays"; then one could argue that is a breach of human rights.

However, the last time I checked, detours exist. Enabling you to bypass a village that may be closed on Sundays.

If you're a tourist and a village says no, why can't you obey that, why does that upset you?

	▲	foxglacier 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What do you think that human rights rule is supposed to mean then? By your definition, the (more older) Chinese way of restricting mobility between provinces according to hukou would be OK because you can just bypass the forbidden provinces.

▲

mothballed 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

India doesn't give a shit about that. They have restricted civil areas that require visitor clearance even for citizens.

▲

foxglacier 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm talking about doublerabbit, not India. Doublerabbit apparently doesn't like human rights, which is his right, but it's possible he actually holds contradictory opinions and doesn't realize it.

	▲	satvikpendem 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Or what you and others might believe are human rights are not believed by them to be human rights. Human rights are not, in fact, universal, otherwise there would be no disagreement; and either way, no human right is endless and unlimited especially when it impinges on another's rights.

▲

hulitu 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ask the US Army. /s