Article 1
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

Quibble with human beings: does this include the retarded? There are those born without reason or conscience. This declaration has a simplistic view of humanity. A nice thing is "born free and equal" instead of "are ... equal in dignity and rights" which would be absurd, and is the Swedish dogma.

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."

Good safeguard against prosecution. If followed, this would reduce the risk of evil states.

Article 3
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."
Do not like this. Abortion is valuable and in my opinion the death penalty and eugenics, the right to life part should be cut. The right to liberty part is not pragmatically possible, too many countries use limited slavery such as prisons, conscription and compulsory school. If you are going to write down rights, make them (All of it forced labor/forced idleness) To have stuff like this in the rights make the entirety wish-washy. This is the kind of neglect of consistency that belongs in religion.

Article 4
"No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. "
Dito

Article 5
"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
This one is vague. Sure torture is bad. But what about degrading treatment? Is working with cleaning toilets degrading. Yes. Hell, to a high cast indian manual labor is degrading.

Article 6
"Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."
Should not apply to fetuses, and in my opinion not to the severely retarded or brain dead.

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."
Ok - once again excepting semi-humans.

Article 8
"Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals
for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law."
Marketing of UN institution?

Article 9
"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile."
Nice one. But would any state call its own acts arbitrary? You can always invent an excuse.

Article 10
"Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent
and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any
criminal charge against him."
This is good for major criminal charges, but would be to meddlesome in minor offenses. The equality part is sensible.

Article 11
"1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed
innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he
has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or
omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or
international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier
penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal
offence was committed."
This is a safeguard for protecting from evil states, or just sloppy states. Nice one.

Article 12
"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home
or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has
the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. "
Once again ... you can always find an excuse. According to the prosecutor nothing is arbitrary. Private attacks on the honour of an individual - that should be okay if it is a public person. We want heavy criticism to find truth.

Article 13
"1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the
borders of each State.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to
return to his country. "
Prisons and children are a practical exception. This declaration systematically neglects the issue of whom should be considered an adult or full human.

Article 14
"1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from
persecution.
2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely
arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and
principles of the United Nations. "
This may be a good idea. Say we have a country that allows child pornopgraphy, why not put all the child pornographists there, and let's see whether child pornography works out, or if it corrupts the people. Then - we could imagine a country that abused this rule, a country could become a heaven for institutors of genocides, granting all of them asylum, in exchange for money.

Article 15
"1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to
change his nationality."
Pragmatically this could be of great use. If e.g. the Jews could have cut their nationality they'd have gotten out of a lot of problems.

Article 16
"1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality
or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled
to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the
intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is
entitled to protection by society and the State."
This leaves it to the reader to decide what full age is. I like the right to divorce, and the consent part, however what is the point of the last point? The family as opposed to what? The state? The church? The tribe? Boarding school? I do not like point three. It is just fine if we have diversity in how children are brought up.

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."
Here they have chosen to be inexact about what property is included. An evil state could specify what kind of property is meant arbitrarily.

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. "

I like this.

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. "
According to this principle child pornography is ok. Maybe it should be, I do not know, but there are real risks of abuse in allowing it.

Article 20
"1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association."
Is citizenship an association? According to this I should be allowed to cut ties with the state. Right?

Article 21
"1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country,
directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country.
3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government;
this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall
be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by
equivalent free voting procedures."
The democracy-article. Democracy is a time tested way of running a country, and works well in plenty of countries - but making democracy a human right, that is not justified. We do not know that democracy is the best way of running a state, and even if it works well in advanced countries, we do not know that it works better in e.g. Burma, than Chinese/Singaporean style authoritarian bureaucracy. Another thing the track record of democracies suggest they easily turn fascist (as opposed to monarchies) all of the democracies created after WW1 in central and eastern Europe except for Czechoslovakia were fascist by the outbreak of WW2. And have a look at eastern Europe today. This article should be scrapped.

Article 22
"Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled
to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in
accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic,
social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development
of his personality."
So this means libertarian and anarchist states are illegal. Should be scrapped.

Article 23
"1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and
favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal
work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration
ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity,
and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of
his interests."
What does this mean? Right to work and free choice of employment? What if nobody wants to employ you? The part about discrimination and pay is problematic. Paying the skilled more than the unskilled is that discrimination? The one you think will work harder? The one you think will stay longer? The one you think will not get pregnant? The one you think will get along better with the colleagues? The one who has the same ethnicity as other employees? Chinese restaurants should be allowed to discriminate and only hire east Asian waiters, as it adds to the authenticity and aesthetics.

The part about just pay, what does that mean? What is just and what is dignified is a matter of fashion.

Trade unions ... they are cartels, and should maybe not be illegal, but at least seen as immoral. Employers should be allowed to fire strikers.

Article 24
"Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of
working hours and periodic holidays with pay. "
Periodic holidays with pay, that is awfully specific. Not the kind of thing I would like in a global law.

Article 25
"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.
2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All
children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social
protection."
The problem with this article is if it is used to motivate people staying in unproductive regions. People should be forced to move to economically productive regions before they get benefits. If you choose to live on the moon you should not expect your state to get you food, clothing et cetera, same thing should apply (in lesser state) if you live in a rural area without jobs.

Article 26
"1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the
elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be
compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made
generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all
on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human
personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and
friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further
the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be
given to their children."

Wahaha here we get a contradiction. Mandatory education contradicts the articles about freedom and slavery. Merit-based education probably is a good principle for advancing society. This article actually says humans shall be exposed to mandatory propaganda from early childhood. How sow? "Education shall be directed to ... strengthening of respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms ... and shall further the activities of the United Nations ... ." That is propaganda plain and simple.

Article 27
"1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the
community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and
its benefits.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests
resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the
author."
I do not understand this artivle. Does it mean you should be allowed to pay to experience copyrighted material, or to just be allowed to consume it? At least it means you shall not be banned from seeing it. Part two is strange "the moral ... interests"? What does that mean?

Article 28
"Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and
freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized."
This seems like a bad idea. To make these freedoms universal would take a lot, and seriously reduce the scope of state designs. To realize this would take wars. (Also, it is logically impossible due to contradictions, and people do not even want these rules!")

Article 29
"1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full
development of his personality is possible.
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only
to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of
securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others
and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the
general welfare in a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the
purposes and principles of the United Nations."
Okay, this article theoretically fixes a lot of the problems I mentioned for how evil states may abuse them, but the UN is built up by the member states. The purposes and principles of the United States were colored by Soviet and USA. If the UN gets corrupted this article looses its value. If it does not? It means that the organization the UN has authority.

Article 30
"Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or
person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the
destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein."

This article also can be used to fix lots of the bugs. But ... why do not real laws have clauses like this. Because they are subjective.


My general opinion:
I dislike it because it is treated as divine so often; but this could be a lot worse. This declaration very clearly is a work by fallible humans, but not evil ones.

I am honestly annoyed by that this contains so much unrealistic material. If you want a declaration that allows you to condemn obvious evil, it should not also condemn every conceivable society. This is more like utopia according to the authors.