Economics and human rights
Andrey Sokolov
Illustrator Tatiana Sokolova
© Andrey Sokolov, 2018
© Tatiana Sokolova, illustrations, 2018
Created with Ridero smart publishing system
Andrei Sokolov
Economics and human rights
Economics, politics, laws, sociology, human rights, psychology, futurology, philosophy, ethics
Short translation into English
(The abridged version, without most tables, graphs, illustrations, quotes, examples, statistics, evidence.)
In advance, I ask the reader to forgive me for my English and the quality of the authors translation
Full text version available in Russian
2017 in russian
2018 in English
From the author
The purpose of this book is to show the way of combining economic benefits for the state with observance of human rights.
Show that the state is getting richer when the rights of the inhabitants of this state are fully respected, the rights of all people on earth are fully respected.
Prove that respect for human rights makes people happier, and the country and their inhabitants are richer.
If this book brings the moment when economists and politicians will begin to consider the point of reference of human rights and human benefits, and not the blessings of states and peoples, then the author will be happy.
I hope this book will make the world better. At least a little better and more humane.
Declaration
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
United States Declaration of Independence
On December 10, 1948, the UN adopted the Declaration of Human Rights. It sets out the principles that all nations and countries must follow. In this document there are only 30 articles that describe the basic and immutable human rights. For example, the right to life, health, work, rest and so on. (156)
Since then more than 60 years have passed. Do you think how many countries in the world fully comply with the provisions of this Declaration? In which country in the world are human rights enunciated by the United Nations fully respected? Not in one!
No country in the world has implemented the provisions of the Declaration of Human Rights in full in its practice, in its laws, in the lives of its citizens.
In no country of the world human rights are fully observed.
In this book you will find evidence of this.
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Do citizens, residents of all these countries, benefit from this? Of course not.
Perhaps it is advantageous for the state economy not to respect human rights? Also no. And its easy to prove.
Can the budget benefit from the infringement of human rights? Can the budgets of countries where human rights are observed less richer than the budgets of countries where human rights are greater, where they are guaranteed and protected by the state? Also no. And this will also be proved.
Can the police, the army, officials, teachers, doctors, patients, pupils be better off from inferior respect for human rights? Can the infringement of rights promote the construction of good roads, improve the quality of education, medical care? No. And this is also quite simple to prove.
The purpose of this book is to prove that everyone is benefiting from respect for human rights: the state and citizens, hospitals and schools, business and tax services, doctors and patients, teachers and students, students, police officers and even officials.
The only one who benefits from violation of human rights bandits, criminals and associated statesmen and pseudo-businessmen.
In this book you will find evidence that the observance of human rights leads to an increase in citizens incomes, to citizens freedom, to the safety of residents, to an increase in budget revenues, and thus to better living conditions for all law-abiding citizens of the country.
The book examines the basic concepts of human rights and their relationship with the economy and state revenues. On specific examples, it examines whether states observe human rights and what benefits the state budget can receive if it fully respects human rights.
We will consider the question of observing human rights mainly on the example of the developed democracies of the First World, since we will not examine such obvious violations of rights as torture, but less noticeable, but no less fundamental.
Another reason for this sample is high-quality and reliable statistics.
And, of course, the main reason why the book talks about developed democracies is that it is necessary to understand where such democracies move further. After all, any stop is a step back.
Violations of human rights in the undemocratic states of the second and third world are obvious and do not require books, but specific actions.
In this book, we will examine less obvious violations that hamper the growth of the economies of countries.
The author does not pretend to know the answer what to do. The book is an invitation to a discussion, a philosophical question.
In 1946 Ludwig von Mises wrote that economic science should not be left to the training classes and offices of statisticians and should not remain in esoteric circles. It is the philosophy of human life and activity and concerns everyone, the energy of civilization and human existence. (146)
As arguments in this book, basically two approaches are used. The first is logical reasoning, accepted both in philosophical literature and in the writings of well-known economists, for example, Milton Friedman or Friedrich von Hayek, Nobel Prize winners in economics. Their works Capitalism and Freedom, Freedom to choose, Road to slavery are not only quoted in this book, but partly are the cause of its occurrence.
The second is the diagnosis of ex juvantibus. This method is common in medicine. Its essence is that when a certain disease is supposed that can not be laboratory confirmed, treatment is appointed blindly and if it helped, then the diagnosis is confirmed. To do this, this book provides examples of countries that have carried out certain experiments, allowed or prohibited drugs, weapons, immigration, prostitution, etc. And the results of these actions.
In addition to medicine, this method of proof is also used in physics, when a series of experiments confirms a certain theory.
All figures and data in this book can be verified using the references given at the end of the book.
In the case of Internet data, it is not possible to indicate the year of publication or the page, so the link in the form of a URL looks logical, especially since this book is not a thesis. Its task is for the reader to think about these issues. I looked at them from an unusual and unconventional point of view, becoming an arbitration judge between the arguments for and against, based on the Declaration of Human Rights.
All countries and all people are different. But if from time to time, from country to country, from state to state, a certain same action leads to the same result, then the original assumption is true. And since from the country to the country the result of the identical action causes identical consequences, it suggests that similar actions in another country will lead to similar results. In other words, if in several countries 2 +2 = 4, then most likely in all other countries 2 +2 will also be equal to four.
Those. if in Portugal the experiment with decriminalization of drugs led to a decrease in first-time users, a decrease in HIV-infected people, then the medicine of decriminalization is the right way. Similarly, with prostitution, for example, in Germany or the Netherlands. Or with weapons in Estonia, Lithuania, Switzerland, the Czech Republic or the United States.
Those. This is not a mathematical method of proof, but an experimental one. As already mentioned, this method is used both in physics and in medicine.
This way of evidence works well in the chapters on weapons, drugs, prostitution.
In the chapters on taxes or immigration, unfortunately, there is much less experimental data. But there is something. Including, opinion of authorities.
There are quite a lot of economic, mental, behavioral myths in the head of the state and in the head of an ordinary person, to understand with which the purpose of this book.
We will look at all questions from the point of view of the economic benefits of the budget and the states ensuring of human rights recorded in the World Declaration. After all, its your rights, dear reader. This is your freedom, your security, your education, your health, your pension, social benefits, your right to work and a good job, your right to rest, your right to self-defense. This is your life. And its quality.
From the last point and start.
Article 3. From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Weapons or The right to life and health
When you walk down the street in the evening and see a noisy or even aggressive company, and maybe a flashing shadow, or maybe hurried steps behind Do you feel safe?
Is there a knife, a can, a whistle in your purse or pocket? Is the mount or hatchet under the car seat? Did you attend training or self-defense courses? And maybe they were engaged in boxing or karate? Are you worried about your daughter or your wife when they go somewhere without you? Are you sure that you can repulse the criminal if he wants to rob you, kill, rape you?
How will you be able to protect your life and health, your property, if you come across a strong, and even more armed, criminal, bandit, hooligan? And your wife, daughter, mother?
Are their lives and health protected in your country?
Do you want your daughter to protect her life and health when she meets a robber, a murderer, a rapist?
How would she do it if she did not have a gun, and a meeting with the criminal took place?
Politicians say this we have police she will come, investigate, catch and punish the criminal
They forget to add maybe, they forget to insert if before the word catch. Thus, the police, perhaps, will catch the criminal if he can find him.
But to you, already robbed, raped or killed, it will be almost all the same. You have already suffered. You were no longer protected. Your rights to health, life, inviolability of property are already broken. And the state did not protect you. For your taxes.
Why does the perpetrator choose to sacrifice you, and not a policeman or a military man?
Its very simple they have weapons, and you do not. You are weaker, defenseless, it is much easier for you to take away everything a criminal wants.
In principle, the ban on weapons for civilians is nothing but discrimination. There is a group of people military they can. There is a group of people civil they can not. This is segregation in the spirit of a place only for whites. However, for whom is the risk higher for home robbery or in a dark lane? For a strong man from the police or for a girl or an old woman? Which of them, out of work, is really more important to have weapons in the house or in the purse?
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
What should the state do to ensure you the right to life, health, the right to preserve your property?
Only to legalize the human right to self-defense, and hence the right to purchase and carry weapons.
A law-abiding citizen needs a law to ensure his right to life and health. The law that will allow you to acquire and carry weapons of self-defense, including a gun.
A criminal does not need such a law. He is a criminal and he already walks with a gun. And it is advantageous for him that a law-abiding citizen does not have a pistol. And while there is no law on the right to purchase and carry weapons in the country, the state defends the interests of the bandit, and not the right to life and health of a law-abiding taxpayer.
We must also remember that historically, weapons were forbidden to slaves and people who were slaves Japanese and Chinese peasants.
Thus. The ban on carrying weapons equates citizens and residents to slaves.
And Article 4 of the Declaration of Human Rights prohibits slavery: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery are prohibited in all forms.
Another aspect of the citizens right to arms is whether the state is afraid of its citizens.
The US is not afraid of its armed citizens weapons are allowed and people even have the right to have an armed uprising authorized by law!
There is a beautiful story on this subject. Perhaps a true, perhaps anecdote, but it reflects well the essence of respect for the human right to life.
A story from a traffic policeman from Minnesota:
One day, I stopped an elderly lady for speeding on track 210, at 197 miles, just east of McGregor, Minnesota.
I asked to present the rights, registration and insurance. The lady gave me the documents.