The United Nation's Declaration of Universal Human Rights

[liowkc]

The existence of the UN Declaration of Human Rights implicitly assume that human rights are universal and does not differ from culture to culture.

But some people notably dictators beg to differ? Do you think they may have a valid point of view too?

[Indiescribe]

Dictators? Wouldn't that mean, one man's opinion against the whole of the majority. Dictators validate their arguments because we are too weak ourselves to oppose them. The basic thing about the word 'Human Rights' is 'Human' and that goes without caste, creed, religion or color. What is true for me should be true for my brother too. And dictatorship often means the subjugation of human rights by force if necessary. So, I would strongly agree with the UN's interpretation of human rights.

[mollyL]

A dictator by definition is a leader not chosen by the people of a country in a free and fair election. In a dictatorship, the military and the upper class fare very well, while the lower classes suffer impoverishment, higher taxes, and further erosion of their god-given human rights. Sounds like a bad deal all round!

[Liberty Bell]

It would be interesting for me to hear exactly what U.N. human rights you might consider a dictators opposition to as valid. I can't think of one that I would say a dictator has a valid point in opposing it.

[GlobalWarrior]

I can't think of a single human right's violation that a dictator could consider as valid. Most of the reason that the UN doesn't intervene (in order to ensure the Geneva Convention is stuck to) is because of the possible political fallout and further deaths that can ensue from trying to topple a dictatorship.

[master]

"All human beings are born free & equal in dignity & rights".This is the universal declaration of Human Rights by UNO.

But dictators always threatens Human Rights.They openly violate this act.I don't think they've a valid point for it.