The similarities and differences between the classical slave and the modern order taker 5.2. The abuse to property through the direct threats(continued)
This entry continues from here
Varianta in limba romana aici
These rights must be fundamental and non-negotiable in a society truly civilized. The very low wage for some community members, insufficient to ensure the basic needs, looks rather a beautifully thin civilization packaged society that still works under the typical slavery principles. These abuses are as dramatic and psychogenic as the right to life abuse used by the classical sequestration slavery. But the Article 25 from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/, stipulates quite clearly these rights:
”1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”
However, it is noticeable even here the faulty way in which these rights are declared. They should not be placed at the end but at the very beginning of this more or less important other rights. From my point of view, they should be placed immediately after the Article 3, which states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. Without this right stipulated by the Article 25, the Article 3 becomes void, inapplicable, abstract, only on paper.
Many civilized countries (except on the North European), have homeless people. These people get their food from garbage, so we can deduce that this right is not assured. Moreover, many European countries and the US put spikes are under bridges to send off the homeless. This practice was originally used in China. So not only those rights provided by Article 25 are not applied in most arrogant democracies in the world; on the contrary, these "civilized countries" acts by predilection against these fundamental human rights imagined by the French Revolution emulation and perfected after the and the Second World War. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted on 10 December 1948 by Resolution 217 A, in the third session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, as you can see here (originally here).
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an essential guide in contemporary human relationships. Precisely this was taken into account when it was initiated, namely a real classical slavery abolition. Unfortunately, when it came to be put these ideal principles into practice, things have stalled. The historical slavery profiteers realized that these slaves given rights will attempt to their wasteful lifestyle that were accustomed to for many generations before. On the other hand, according to the repetition compulsion that I will discuss in detail in a later section, the slaves on their turn did not know to ask for their freedom. The Plato's cave myth is nowadays more actual than ever. Those who did not know to ask for these rights have remained in the dark. Only those who have loudly requested them eventually received them and were thus convinced to keep a low profile on activism. So the laws second level, namely the countries constitutions, ignores in a first step these 25 and 13 Articles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For this reason all those who work in those institutions that supposedly defend human rights are either hypocritical or naive.
According to Wikipedia , there are nine countries where the right to food is clearly written in their constitutions. They are Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Guyana, Haiti, Kenya, South Africa and Nepal. Unfortunately these countries are pretty famous for their constitutions "decorative" role, as their governments ignore in decisions making. The reality is that there no country that offer any of these rights, but as an individual you have to fight your own to obtain them.
The US Constitution does not provide for any regulation on guarantee concerning this right. The French Constitution says that "Each person has the duty to work and the right to employment". The Romanian Constitution says at Article 47 that
"(1) The State is obliged to take measures of economic growth and social protection, likely to provide a decent standard of living for its citizens."
One can see how this "fundamental right" is strongly stated only when the contemporary "civilization" wants to affirm its equity. But when it comes to these principles applicability, their spirit is diluted and fades away just like in the fog. The state is no longer obliged to follow these fundamental rights, but only to take action. That looks like wanting to convince us that the state (or, rather said, those who have the decisions power want) tried hard to pursue these general principles, but eventually failed. Moreover, their degree of degradation is almost total at the ordinary laws level (the 3-rd), after the constitution already had altered them in a second-level of application.
A ferocious slavery system infiltrated into the free trade relations is the North American one. It uses the abuse against the employee’s health (life) right by creating jobs that do not cover the medical insurance. Although the US has the most advanced health care system in the world, though it does not work for all who make contributions to society. The fear for not having the health insurance to cure the illness closes very much the US wage work relationship to the classical slavery that this country is famous for. Nothing is more odious than a social service system that extracts enthusiasm and health of the individual and then throws people out in the street to die like a dog when they get sick. Among that, throughout all the contemporary "civilized" society the surplus food is consistently destroyed. So there are empty houses. Some US farmers are paid to not produce. Not giving these goods to community members who desperately need them is a crime. Those who offer food to homelessness risk of being fined by the police or even jailed by the justice (!! ??), as shown in the following video.
Here's how the authorities persecute and arrest some people who not only have done nothing immoral, but for the very morality hardcore gestures, that defines the humanity civilized spirit. Noticing how the authorities behave in this case we can better understand the relationship between law and morality. So I think we can get a complete picture about what actually the wage slavery means in the US and around the world.
In today society, every middle class person can suddenly become homeless. This social class has secured the right to housing as long as it pays its mortgage. If any economic fluctuations comes up then that person is no longer able to pay it and all its comfort will be turned out to be a huge soap bubble, a typical cave myth illusion. The economical fluctuations are designed by social engineers according to a well premeditated deceiving plan through the overall money supply manipulating, as I have shown here . So that is what happened with Western economy since 2007, as the money supply withdrawal and the followed bankruptcies led to what was later misleadingly named "the US housing crisis". This formula is misleading because its intention was to hide the true origin of the crisis, namely monetary ebb. It was meant to shift the blame on behalf of brokers (see propaganda film "The Big Short", nominated for an Oscar in 2015) or on loan clients who would have consumed more than they could afford.
Of course, the very competitive North American economy can not function without this ferocious wage slavery. The spines under the bridges that send away the homeless are practices that make us think about the spears that the runaway slaves were hunting or recruited from the beginning. But I do not know how proud we can be about the high quality standards products diversity that surrounds us knowing that some of them are created throughout the mental affliction caused to others to make them meet our orders.
These fundamental rights affirmed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have been called into question in the last century debates. After being settled by the humanists these rights have been almost in the same time withdrawn from those who had access to human society keys under several reasons. In a later section I will bring more counter reasons in the favor of these fundamental human rights fully recognition. For now, though, in the next section I will show how even these insufficient rights are further more impaired and attacked by the nowadays repressive social system.