> I think the answer to that depends heavily of ones own philosophical point of view - we may not even agree on what makes people free.
I think that's a philosophical debate, but mostly nonsense in practicality. It's not a matter of belief or opinion, for the most part; it's not hard to understand. It's just trendy for authoritarians to attack human rights as some subjective matter of relativistic ideas - that would be convenient for them.
> societies should be allowed to self govern
People have a right to self-govern, and to protect that right and others, 'governments are instituted among humans'. The word 'society' is often a construct used by the powerful to justify their control of the weak - the powerful are 'society', they assert, kind of like old-fashioned divine appointment.
I think that's a philosophical debate, but mostly nonsense in practicality. It's not a matter of belief or opinion, for the most part; it's not hard to understand. It's just trendy for authoritarians to attack human rights as some subjective matter of relativistic ideas - that would be convenient for them.
> societies should be allowed to self govern
People have a right to self-govern, and to protect that right and others, 'governments are instituted among humans'. The word 'society' is often a construct used by the powerful to justify their control of the weak - the powerful are 'society', they assert, kind of like old-fashioned divine appointment.