Natural law ? The strongest wins, indeed the most suitable!
There is no doubt that in “nature” vince i
the stronger, Rather, the most suitable.
Here we are witnessing, even among primates, to mechanisms of community organization that serve to make order reign, to protect from the dangers etc.. The chimpanzees, in particular the Bonobo, they have many social mechanisms common to Homo Sapiens.
When an alpha male wants climb the hierarchy, He must challenge the boss in office, and there are rules to determine the winner.
Even among primates, the mechanisms change from community to community, are rules “social” we call laws, and that are consolidated by the sharing of the rest of the community itself which acts as a factual imposition. Here one also sees a useful role of “conservative”, to keep social rules stable and thus allow a self -preservation of society without transforming into an unpredictable agglomeration of individuals.
In fact, if the conflicts are settled, often it comes to victories “Pirro”, that is, to victories for which the winner actually lost more than he has gained from the victory.
Even among human, When a community understands that the strongest vinca is appropriate, But the social mechanisms for power must also limit the damage of disputes in order to prevent conflicts from leading to self -destruction and disappearance of the community itself, Normally the community is equipped with mechanisms that are imposed on everyone in the form of a law.
For example, what determined the different fate between the “common” the Po Valley and Venice, It was that generally in the municipalities the disputes for power ended up destroying the same municipal freedoms, mind in Venice at one point a class (Venetian nobles) if necessary “kidnapping” for itself all the vertex powers, but at the same time establishing the power management rules which created not only stable institutions, but also, for the time, the maximum possible benefit for citizens and also for elite, they could, working for the Republic, also increase their own personal power. They were the institutions mechanisms lasted centuries and in many ways still unsurpassed, certainly far more efficient than those of the Italian Republic today.
The heirs of the Jacobins who pulled down the Venetian Republic (or Venice) They say that his fall was “natural” because by now stale, now reduced to a parasitic wig capital of the body “social”, of the people, closed in a non-democratic system now out of time and meaningless.
Fu “natural” that the Venetian Republic was invaded by a horde of French criminals freed from prisons?
In fact, in nature and in human history it has happened many times that a horde of rapists and killers invaded and raped another population, Perhaps it still happens today. Usually they hide behind noble purposes, as a religion or a perfect. In the case of Venice, that horde called itself democratic but then made the Empire.
In short, we could also say that the invasion of the Venetian Republic was “natural”, although today such a case we define “crime against humanity”.
I speak of “Genocide” people of Veneto, Also in connection with what happened in the two centuries, hunger, emigration, the pellagra, the sinkholes etc. etc..
but, the system “popular” And today's democratic is even less “popular” and democratic than it was during the Venetian Republic, just look at the percentage of hungry poor, but not to recognize this fact are the descendants of winners, The cultural descendants of those who affirm that the Venetian Republic officially died “Naturally”. It is the same today, as then , rigs elections.
The elections today are nothing more than a printing organized farce and banks to determine who should govern to make their interests. The parties only serve to deceive the people, to make them believe they can decide something.
So we think the media to invent new savior, The New Angel, the new Genius…… the need to limit, a dictator.
The world is certainly not governed by natural law, But the international community has not yet found even a fair and balanced relationship of interest management between the various states. In fact, the UN has a fundamental tara that is the basis of any problem of the planet, And it is the “right of veto” who have the 5 winners of World War II, and founding countries.
In Ukraine the world went to the test of all speeches: Russia can protect Crimea Russofona ?
It can a regional community like Crimea, secede in a referendum as “people” different from that of the rest of the state subjected to a dictatorship?
The US and EU said NO, they said you had to preserve the '”as long as the state is legitimate and does not behave badly with colonized subjects”.
Curiously none of the many independence parties of Europe has noticed this.
Anyone in Italy noticed that Spain and other states see many believes they can do a “referendum” for independence. The history of Veneto and Catalan referendums have demonstrated that the regions are not of Peoples and local governments can not become a new State. The International Court of Justice for Kosovo had already said it, I also said the Italian Constitutional Court for the Veneto Region, but beware that in 2018 the same said that a people does not correspond to administrative boundaries of a region.
the independentisti, species in Veneto, now they no longer declare that they have a right “LEGAL”, but call on the “natural right”.
Yet in nature there is only the right of the strongest, and apparently (so they say US and EU) there is no natural right (nor legal) of a community to detach itself, even with referendum. The US denies themselves and their legitimate existence ?
Apparently there is a right to hold a referendum to annex, but not the right to detach from a community, except when it comes to former states as for Scotland and a few others. You can detach yourself through legal procedures that dates from the regime not to ever except in the case of Canada for Quebec.
Here only when a community is already legally sovereign because it was a state existed after the 1840 it can later decide to return independently.
Lombard-Veneto is a sovereign state invaded in 1866, and it can return independent. But there is no “natural right” of a regional community (Veneto region, Regione Lombardia etc.) to become sovereign, if not through war, and keep him in mind above all those who invoke the “natural right” which is stronger in those who govern it.
Rather, Speak about “natural right” of a community is a contradiction, because a community exists at the very moment when legal rules for coexistence is given. As I described at the beginning. We know that very difficult legal rules are perfectly consistent and corresponding to natural mechanisms, so much so that no one ever writes the obvious. It can be discussed if a law complies with natural law, But the natural law in turn is only the right of the strongest, indeed of the one who wins because he has the right mix of strength, cunning and luck in the given case.
Rather, Speak about “Right” natural is a falsification, If anything, we can speak of “principles” natural, because the right is another thing. Just to have an idea of the discretion of the conception of “natural right”, just click on the image.
Those who invoke the “natural right” to claim the right to secession, like a “law” , or did not understand, or it is in bad faith.
