What's new

Yep, the world has a new role model for political and economic development

US system works only if the elites agree on sharing power. Otherwise, it will fall into chaos and potential breakdown, as we have been witnessing early signs of it.

Elite consensus in the US has been successful so far as the resources to be shared appeared to satisfy all sides. Now, with resources becoming scarce, the US elite cannot agree on how to share power that is, resources.

The question is, will the elites in control be able to generate resources for interest maximization, or, will they simply struggle to hoard all what is left (from a broken health care system, corrupt military contractor model, dysfunctional and disunited media power). Donald Trump appears to be holding the key to most of the unknowns to the future.

If the fight among the power elite which decides the direction of US democracy intensifies, then, the US society will have to face the hard choice of subjugation or force. Yet, when the US state becomes so powerful with many strong apparatus for violence (even the police is militarized) what is the chance for a successful forceful correction?
 
.
What are China territories you want to defend? No offense but you have money but have mindset of a third world. Similar the people in Sudan or Venezuela. Look at this section: full of Chinese theads and threats, with 100 threads alone about China supreme leader Xi Jinping telling the world he is ready for war.

Ever considered to see a doc?
That is coz you VN is occupying our territory that is why you afraid! Go kiss your yankees dad will you.
We CHINA is always ready for war IF anyone dare to start it!
Do not play you VN is small.while.CHINA is big game,ok? you VN is.just like north Korea much hypocritical! AND lack ability to make nuclear bombs,worse than the poorest N.Korea.......LOL
That is all!
AND No one can.shake PLA and our PAKISTANI bros not by VN or yankees!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
US system works only if the elites agree on sharing power. Otherwise, it will fall into chaos and potential breakdown, as we have been witnessing early signs of it.

Elite consensus in the US has been successful so far as the resources to be shared appeared to satisfy all sides. Now, with resources becoming scarce, the US elite cannot agree on how to share power that is, resources.

The question is, will the elites in control be able to generate resources for interest maximization, or, will they simply struggle to hoard all what is left (from a broken health care system, corrupt military contractor model, dysfunctional and disunited media power). Donald Trump appears to be holding the key to most of the unknowns to the future.

If the fight among the power elite which decides the direction of US democracy intensifies, then, the US society will have to face the hard choice of subjugation or force. Yet, when the US state becomes so powerful with many strong apparatus for violence (even the police is militarized) what is the chance for a successful forceful correction?
democracy works only when you get rich enough and it takes time of decades to be stable in some case even hundred years(Great charter of 1215, UK honor revolution of 1688, slavery system abandoned and USA civil war of 1865 ,UK and USA industrialization of 1785 and 1850s to 1890s,.....massacres of French first republic after the 1789 ,Napoleon empire....napoleon III empire,4th republic of france,and fifth republic of france after WWII )
simple as that!!!


CHINA QING empire ended in 1912(if MAO counted emperor than it should be 1976)
UK 1688
USA 1865
FRANCE 1870
it is.natural.CHINA has inferior political achievement!
and if CHINA can enventually success,that would mean western system not.failed just not unique as.they thought,what i believe is good policies to.be put into service,how leader elected,can not care less!

I am CHINESE and am.telling you there is no CHINA model,CHINESE system works for CHINA solely!

The irony is your "idea" is that US model/exceptionalism is... what give and made China what she is today...
China model is not new neither created by China... it's an hybrid btw Communist ideology and Free MArket.. A model who made concessions in her ideology to be able to survive and expend in the world...

And for those seeing China with her expension inland and out has being something "made by great minds" it's just a BIg economical country... catching the train... so it's logical that the advance that we see is fast and strong...

But the Q, the most important one is..; What will China became/do when she catch up? Will she be able to innovate beyond every human knowledge or will follow... or fall.
that would be better judged by our grandsons!
innovation is starting to boom in CHINA of today....
i want to makes exemples but you may think not innovative enough...but here we are....
DJI advanced drones 70% market share globally including USA.....
first human made quantum communication satellite which is currently orbiting Earth.....
the most fast supercomputer human ever made CHINA Sunway Taihu Light.....
The most fast operational high speed railway currently running with a operational speed of 350km from beijing to shanghai.....(and the world test speed record keeper of 605 kmph made by CHINA CIT500 type supertrain)
.....
 
.
I agree that whatever that’s working here in China cannot be duplicated in other countries. I think it has a lot to do with our culture and our state of mind - We are a massive bunch, 1.4 billion to be exact, who are obsessed with the desire of getting rich:D We are tired of being poor, being humiliated. We want to be rich and strong by all means, at all costs. Corruption? Fine, as long as the people on top still manage to grow the economy. Lack political freedom? That’s not bad at all considering that type of “freedom” is 99.9999% symbolic. What 1 person can do with his vote or “voice” in a country of 1.4 billion? No access to western media? Well the fire wall mostly is for government officials. It’s an open secret that anyone here can get around the wall if necessary. Besides, we’re seeing the “benefits” of access those media everyday. So thanks but no thanks :victory1:

But we do show the world that any country can build prosperity if you think independently and work hard. We set our goals and never listened and get distracted by the bullshyt opinions from the west and our Indian friends. So there, that’s our “model” to the world :china:
 
.
Check my comment history.
I am pro China because of Pakistan
But I can never get on board with Communism.

I have friends in China right now, who I can't talk to on Facebook, or Skype because of the Great Firewall.

History has shown that, in the long run, any attempt to shield your people from information is bound to fail.
I heard Iran also has firewall(Not so sure though). If it's true, at least it proves that firewall doesn't just exist in Communism country. Iran and China have nothing in common except they are the main targets of US propaganda machines.

Hypothetically if someday China becomes the most powerful country and funds anti-America propaganda institutions. The only purpose of them is inciting hatred between different races and inspiriting separatists in the south states. Will America government set firewall to block the propaganda?

Of course it's an assumption. Conversely to say it's reality because that is what exactly America government is doing to China.
 
.
I agree that whatever that’s working here in China cannot be duplicated in other countries. I think it has a lot to do with our culture and our state of mind - We are a massive bunch, 1.4 billion to be exact, who are obsessed with the desire of getting rich:D We are tired of being poor, being humiliated. We want to be rich and strong by all means, at all costs. Corruption? Fine, as long as the people on top still manage to grow the economy. Lack political freedom? That’s not bad at all considering that type of “freedom” is 99.9999% symbolic. What 1 person can do with his vote or “voice” in a country of 1.4 billion? No access to western media? Well the fire wall mostly is for government officials. It’s an open secret that anyone here can get around the wall if necessary. Besides, we’re seeing the “benefits” of access those media everyday. So thanks but no thanks :victory1:

But we do show the world that any country can build prosperity if you think independently and work hard. We set our goals and never listened and get distracted by the bullshyt opinions from the west and our Indian friends. So there, that’s our “model” to the world :china:
+1 for the Honest opinion. at least not some BS "dreamy" " big brother" facts...

Thanks
 
.
Meaningless and racist discussion.

The only viable political system is caste based demoncrazy.
viable politcal sys--> caste base democracy... lol... PDF has some golden gems around here...
FYI caste and democracy are not friends... :)
Bth... it' s nice that you see Indian democracy (almost a caste dmos one) as being the only viable one...
 
. .
Democracy in China?

I remember listening to a western expert asking his Chinese friends if they wanted democracy (western interpretation) in China. They replied "no" and was surprised by the reasoning. They said they don't want to give the rural and uneducated/backward masses the right to overrule their rights and interests (brings memories of the cultural revolution). They think it would be very damaging to China and the world if an anti-progressive mass was in charge of Chinese development and foreign policy.
In other words, China supports strata -- classes -- of citizenry.

Informational asymmetry
A major drawback of a purely elected leadership is the inability of the public to fully understand the skills, accomplishments, and experience of a government official/body or what skills and experiences it takes to accomplish national goals, some may understand but vast majority will not. It can be due to lack of time, lack of interest, lack of education, lack of access to information, etc. This problem is exacerbated in a large country like China, informational overload leads to adverse selection. This is apparent in China's experiment with voting in villages across China.
In other words, China supports a ruling elite.
 
.
Nothing democracy can do about it. In the same vein, there are plenty of social problems in your China so what does Chinese meritocracy do to solve those issues ? Do we need to outline them ?


Really ? And is your Chinese meritocracy is free from corruption ?


Do not concern yourself with how our legal system work when your own is always stacked against the common people.

Funny, a Viet refugee pretending to be a white american and defend his master.

Get back to the point, unlike you we did not claim our system are the best, universal, the beacon of human civilization, so called the "end of history". and try to export it to the Middle East by bombing people into pieces.
 
.
In other words, China supports strata -- classes -- of citizenry.


In other words, China supports a ruling elite.
In the current context yes, a competent ruling elite is optimal for China. Understand how Chinese society is right now.

I don't know about your educational background but most people in the business and scientific world I have talked to understands society is stratified with good reason. Isn't the military stratified? Should a new recruit be telling a general what to do since he feels it's only fair. Should a low level employee dictate the activities of the executives since he she feels it's only fair? It's reasonable and productive to give advice and feed back to the executices but really silly if the employee dictated the entire company.

Finding a competent ruling elite is the desire of all political systems. For any society our time and expertise is limited so we must have an elite governing body that will manage the country better than specialized individuals doing other functions of society. My pension plan gets managed by a fund which can manage my money's risk and return better than I do and I don't oversee their activities, they only give me an quarterly/annual report with some metrics. Society is built upon trust and specialization since we can't have the ability to do everything well.

The end goal is not voting, although it can be the result, the end goal is developing a system that can accomplish national goals and best satisfy needs of its people. What China needs may be different from other countries.

The difference between China and the west right now is that China is still open to experimentation of different methods (scientific method) to determine what will work for China.
 
Last edited:
.
In the current context yes, a competent ruling elite is optimal for China. Understand how Chinese society is right now.
We will remember that.

I don't know about your educational background but most people in the business and scientific world I have talked to understands society is stratified with good reason. Isn't the military stratified? Should a new recruit be telling a general what to do since he feels it's only fair. Should a low level employee dictate the activities of the executives since he she feels it's only fair? It's reasonable and productive to give advice and feed back to the executices but really silly if the employee dictated the entire company.
The problem with this argument is that you opened the door to a modern version of feudalism.

I am USAF veteran, so you are using the wrong analogy. I may enter the military as the lowest ranking enlisted or commissioned officer, but unlike the feudal classes, I can move up the ranks based upon my own efforts, which includes intellectual and physical. Same with any corporation. If I do not like the military or honorably completed my contract, I can leave and enter another social class and move up its structure. If I do not like working for a company, I can leave that company and start my own and move up that social structure. Social strata is inevitable, but what make modern society different and better is the opportunities to move laterally and/or upward among the strata.

What you are advocating is nothing new. The communists said it before and so many people swallowed it.
 
.
The USA is Cracking Up Just Like the USSR Did - In Fact, They Are Related

"You see, ideology is a product of intellectuals, and intellectuals tend to be idiots, ... We are born equipped with MonkeyBrain 2.0 that can handle abstraction only too well but always fails when attempting to reconcile it with messy physical reality."

"And so it would be a grave error to think that, just because communist ideology is idiotic, capitalist ideology is any less so."

Dmitry Orlov




The caption reads: 'Death to World Imperialism"

The author's original title of this article was better than what we could come up with: 'The October Revolution and You'


Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area.

He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile, along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive). These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up.

He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects.

He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there, as Russia Insider does.

His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself.


Today is the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution of 1917. It caused a lot of death and destruction, which I won’t go into because you can read all about it elsewhere. It also caused a great outpouring of new art, literature, architecture and culture in general, putting the previously somewhat stodgy Russia securely in the world’s avant-garde.

It also resulted in a tremendous surge of industrialization, rapidly transforming a previously mostly agrarian, though gradually industrializing nation into a global industrial powerhouse (at great human cost). But perhaps most importantly, the revolution destroyed all of the previously dominant institutions of privilege based on heredity, class and wealth and replaced them with an egalitarian social model centered on the working class.

And it demonstrated (as much through propaganda as by actual example) how this new model was more competitive: while the West wallowed in the Great Depression, the USSR surged ahead both economically and socially.

For all of its many failings, the USSR did serve as a shining city on the hill to the downtrodden millions around the world, including in the USA, fermenting rebellion, so that even there the one-percent ownership class eventually had to stop and think.

Reluctantly, they decided to stop trying to destroy organized labor movements, introduced state old-age pensions (misnamed “Social Security”) and declared a euphemistic “war on poverty.” And with that a “middle class” was created—so called because it was literally in the middle, having risen out of poverty but still safely walled off from the one-percent ownership class. But as we shall see this effect was temporary.

Eventually the USSR evaporated, as artificial, synthetic political entities often do. The reasons for this disappearing act are too numerous to mention, but one of the main ones was that the Soviet political elite turned itself into a much-hated, privileged caste, and then failed to reproduce, turning into a moribund gerontocracy.

When the old cadres finally started dying out, the new generation that came in included plenty of traitors who did their best to destroy the system and grab a piece for themselves. This effect was plain to see, but was it the root cause? When a complex system collapses, every part of it is touched to one extent or another, and it becomes impossible to say which one played the key role in precipitating the collapse.

With the USSR gone, the owners of the USA had no one to compete against and were no longer under any sort of pressure to maintain the illusion of an equitable and egalitarian society. Instead, they concentrated on two projects, one ideological, the other economic.

The ideological project involved wrecking what was left of the USSR to the greatest extent possible in order to paint a convincing picture of the horrible consequences of communism or socialism and to herd everyone toward wholeheartedly embracing unfettered capitalism. The economic project involved eviscerating the American middle class—a process that by now has largely run its course.

Since the creation of the middle class was a multigenerational project, so is its destruction. But the effects of this process on society are already plain to see: there is an overhang of still relatively well-off retirees while their children and grandchildren have greatly diminished economic and social prospects.

Meanwhile, the hastily erected scaffolding that created the appearance of egalitarianism has been knocked out. Organized labor is all but finished. Borders have been thrown open to foreign labor and cheap imports.

Entry into the middle class has been blocked through a variety of measures including the relentless dumbing down of public education, the equally relentless overpricing of higher education, the health care extortion scheme, the rationing of justice based on wealth and privilege, wealth confiscation using a succession of artificial real estate market bubbles and so on.

Overall, the former middle class is being whittled down to nothing the same way that the Chinese “coolies” were dealt with once the railroads had been built: don’t feed them much but give them plenty of opium (now being grown in Afghanistan under the watchful eye of Western troops). To sum it up: if you aren’t happy with the way things are going in the US, you have a choice.

You can of course blame Russia—for getting rid of the USSR. Or you can blame your owners—your one percent—who have owned you ever since the King of England appointed the Lords Proprietors.

Within Russia itself the commemoration of the October Revolution is no longer a public holiday. But there was a sort of commemoration held on the vast Palace Square in St. Petersburg, which I attended with my five-year-old son on my shoulders. It was his first time in a crowd of 35,000, and he was duly impressed. It was a light-and-sound extravaganza consisting of two shows which played in alternation.

On the vast semicircular facade of the General Staff building was broadcast a multimedia retrospective of the October Revolution that included the reading of historical documents (such as the abdication of Nicholas II) and works of poetry. It ended on an upbeat note—yes, many horrible events took place, but Russia is now reborn—with the General Staff’s façade painted in the Russian tricolor.

revolution_0.jpg


A different show was presented on the façade of the Winter Palace across the square. Here, multimedia artists from across Europe (including France, Italy, Spain and Poland) used projected light to decorate and transform the palace to music that sung praises to the beauty of St. Petersburg. The audience was invited to use their phones to vote for the best one.

A Russian TV News Report from the Palace Square light show


winterpalace1.jpg


After the show, as we filtered out of the Palace Square and walked home along the Palace Embankment, my five-year-old son asked some good questions that he had formulated while watching the show. “Did a lot of people die?” (Yes.) “But Russia was then and is now?” (Yes, Russia has been around for a 1000 years and will probably be around for 1000 years more.) “Why do people have to die?” (Because otherwise we we would be full-up with useless old people and there wouldn’t be enough room for young people.) And then the obvious follow-up: “Why are we full-up with useless old people anyway?” (???) And finally: “Why do we bury dead people?” (Because they smell really bad.) “Ah…” A rather unsentimental youth, wouldn’t you say? But he was only one of the thousands of quite similar-minded ones who were in attendance that day, riding on their fathers’ shoulders or marching along. Welcome to Russia…

One of the reasons why the USSR failed was because the idiocy of the ideology of Soviet communism became too painful to tolerate. In a sense, this was inevitable. You see, ideology is a product of intellectuals, and intellectuals tend to be idiots, making “intellectual idiocy” something of an oxymoron. We are born equipped with MonkeyBrain 2.0 that can handle abstraction only too well but always fails when attempting to reconcile it with messy physical reality. And so it would be a grave error to think that, just because communist ideology is idiotic, capitalist ideology is any less so.

By now most thinking people realize that capitalism has failed just has communism had. We can only hope that one day the US will do with its capitalist legacy what Russia has done with its communist one: turn it into a festive art installation that both children and adults can enjoy.

Source: Club Orlov
 
.
there is nothing to debat about what human rights are....

Germany did the biggest war crime ever in human history.... the consequenz of this history guilt pushed the Germans to write a completely new German constitution after ww2.... with 2 goals protect the humans from the state and clearly claim what human rights are... to protect every human (not only German citizen) from executive, judicative and legeslative power.... they even ordered that the number one task of the executive judicative and legeslative power is to protect and serve the citizen.


Human Right
Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect
it shall be the duty of all state authority.

The people therefore acknowledge inviolable and
inalienable human rights as the basis of every community,
of peace and of justice in the world.
The following basic rights shall bind the legislature, the
executive and the judiciary as directly applicable law.

[Personal freedoms]
Every person shall have the right to free development of his
personality
insofar as he does not violate the rights
of others or offend against the constitutional order or the
moral law.
Every person shall have the right to life and physical integ-
rity
. Freedom of the person shall be inviolable. These rights
may be interfered with only pursuant to a law.

[Equality before the law]
All persons shall be equal before the law.
Men and women shall have equal rights. The state shall
promote the actual implementation of equal rights for
women and men and take steps to eliminate disadvantages
that now exist.
No person shall be favoured or disfavoured because of
sex, parentage, race, language, homeland and origin, faith,
or religious or political opinions. No person shall be
disfavoured because of disability.


[Freedom of faith and conscience]
Freedom of faith and of conscience, and freedom to profess
a religious or philosophical creed, shall be inviolable.
The undisturbed practice of religion shall be guaranteed.
No person shall be compelled against his conscience to
render military service involving the use of arms.


[School system]
The entire school system shall be under the supervision
of the state.
Parents and guardians shall have the right to decide
whether children shall receive religious instruction.

Religious instruction shall form part of the regular curricu-
lum in state schools, with the exception of non-denomina-
tional schools. Without prejudice to the state’s right of su-
pervision, religious instruction shall be given in accordance
with the tenets of the religious community concerned.
Teachers may not be obliged against their will to give
religious instruction.
The right to establish private schools shall be guaranteed.
Private schools that serve as alternatives to state schools
shall require the approval of the state and shall be subject
to the laws of the Länder. Such approval shall be given
when private schools are not inferior to the state schools in
terms of their educational aims, their facilities, or the pro-
fessional training of their teaching staff, and when segrega-
tion of pupils according to the means of their parents will
not be encouraged thereby. Approval shall be withheld if
the economic and legal position of the teaching staff is not
adequately assured.
A private elementary school shall be approved only if the
educational authority finds that it serves a special pedagogical
interest or if, on the application of parents or guardi-
ans, it is to be established as a denominational or interde-
nominational school or as a school based on a particular
philosophy and no state elementary school of that type
exists in the municipality.
Preparatory schools shall remain abolished.

[Freedom of assembly]
All Germans shall have the right to assemble peacefully
and unarmed without prior notification or permission
.
In the case of outdoor assemblies, this right may be restrict-
ed by or pursuant to a law.

[Freedom of association]
All Germans shall have the right to form corporations and
other associations
.
Associations whose aims or activities contravene the crimi-
nal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional or
der or the concept of international understanding, shall be
prohibited.
The right to form associations to safeguard and improve
working and economic conditions shall be guaranteed to
every individual and to every occupation or profession
.
Agreements that restrict or seek to impair this right shall
be null and void; measures directed to this end shall be
unlawful. Measures taken pursuant to Article 12a, to para-
graphs (2) and (3) of Article 35, to paragraph (4) of Article
87a, or to Article 91 may not be directed against industrial
disputes engaged in by associations within the meaning of
the first sentence of this paragraph in order to safeguard
and improve working and economic conditions.

[Privacy of correspondence, posts and
telecommunications]
The privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunica-
tions shall be inviolable
.
Restrictions may be ordered only pursuant to a law. If the
restriction serves to protect the free democratic basic order
or the existence or security of the Federation or of a Land,
the law may provide that the person affected shall not be
informed of the restriction and that recourse to the courts
shall be replaced by a review of the case by agencies and
auxiliary agencies appointed by the legislature.

[Freedom of movement]
All Germans shall have the right to move freely throughout
the federal territory
.
This right may be restricted only by or pursuant to a law,
and only in cases in which the absence of adequate means
of support would result in a particular burden for the com-
munity, or in which such restriction is necessary to avert
an imminent danger to the existence or the free democratic
basic order of the Federation or of a Land
, to combat the danger of an epidemic, to respond to a grave accident or
natural disaster, to protect young persons from serious ne-
glect, or to prevent crime.

[Occupational freedom]
All Germans shall have the right freely to choose their
occupation or profession, their place of work and their
place of training
. The practice of an occupation or profes-
sion may be regulated by or pursuant to a law.
No person may be required to perform work of a particular
kind except within the framework of a traditional duty of
community service that applies generally and equally to all.
Forced labour may be imposed only on persons deprived of
their liberty by the judgment of a court.

[Compulsory military and alternative civilian service]
Men who have attained the age of eighteen may be required
to serve in the Armed Forces, in the Federal Border Police,
or in a civil defence organisation.
Any person who, on grounds of conscience, refuses to render
military service involving the use of arms may be required
to perform alternative service. The duration of alternative
service shall not exceed that of military service. Details
shall be regulated by a law, which shall not interfere with
the freedom to make a decision in accordance with the
dictates of conscience, and which shall also provide for
the possibility of alternative service not connected with
units of the Armed Forces or of the Federal Border Police.
Persons liable to compulsory military service who are not
called upon to render service pursuant to paragraph (1) or
(2) of this Article may, when a state of defence is in effect,
be assigned by or pursuant to a law to employment involv-
ing civilian services for defence purposes, including the
protection of the civilian population; they may be assigned
to public employment only for the purpose of discharging
police functions or such other sovereign functions of public
administration as can be discharged only by persons em-
ployed in the public service. The employment contemplat-
ed by the first sentence of this paragraph may include ser
vices within the Armed Forces, in the provision of military
supplies, or with public administrative authorities; assign-
ments to employment connected with supplying and servicing
the civilian population shall be permissible only to
meet their basic requirements or to guarantee their safety.

If, during a state of defence, the need for civilian services in
the civilian health system or in stationary military hospitals
cannot be met on a voluntary basis, women between the age
of eighteen and fiftyfive may be called upon to render such
services by or pursuant to a law. Under no circumstances
may they be required to render service involving the use of
arms.

Prior to the existence of a state of defence, assignments un-
der paragraph (3) of this Article may be made only if the re-
quirements of paragraph (1) of Article 80a are met. In prep-
aration for the provision of services under paragraph (3) of
this Article that demand special knowledge or skills, partic-
ipation in training courses may be required by or pursuant
to a law. In this case the first sentence of this paragraph
shall not apply.

If, during a state of defence, the need for workers in the
areas specified in the second sentence of paragraph (3) of
this Article cannot be met on a voluntary basis, the right
of German citizens to abandon their occupation or place of
employment may be restricted by or pursuant to a law in
order to meet this need. Prior to the existence of a state of
defence, the first sentence of paragraph (5) of this Article
shall apply mutatis mutandis.

[Inviolability of the home]
The home is inviolable.
Searches may be authorised only by a judge or, when time is
of the essence, by other authorities designated by the laws,
and may be carried out only in the manner therein prescribed.
If particular facts justify the suspicion that any person has
committed an especially serious crime specifically defined
by a law, technical means of acoustical surveillance of any
home in which the suspect is supposedly staying may be
employed pursuant to judicial order for the purpose of pro-
secuting the offence, provided that alternative methods of
investigating the matter would be disproportionately dif-
ficult or unproductive. The authorisation shall be for a lim
ited time. The order shall be issued by a panel composed
of three judges. When time is of the essence, it may also be
issued by a single judge.
To avert acute dangers to public safety, especially dangers
to life or to the public, technical means of surveillance of
the home may be employed only pursuant to judicial order.
When time is of the essence, such measures may also be
ordered by other authorities designated by a law; a judicial
decision shall subsequently be obtained without delay.
If technical means are contemplated solely for the protec-
tion of persons officially deployed in a home, the measure
may be ordered by an authority designated by a law. The
information thereby obtained may be otherwise used only
for purposes of criminal prosecution or to avert danger and
only if the legality of the measure has been previously de-
termined by a judge; when time is of the essence, a judicial
decision shall subsequently be obtained without delay.
The Federal Government shall report to the Bundestag an-
nually as to the employment of technical means pursuant
to paragraph (3) and, within the jurisdiction of the Federa-
tion, pursuant to paragraph (4) and, insofar as judicial ap-
proval is required, pursuant to paragraph (5) of this Article.
A panel elected by the Bundestag shall exercise parliamen-
tary oversight on the basis of this report. A comparable par
liamentary oversight shall be afforded by the
Länder

[Property – Inheritance – Expropriation]
Property and the right of inheritance shall be guaranteed.
Their content and limits shall be defined by the laws.
Property entails obligations. Its use shall also serve the
public good.
Expropriation shall only be permissible for the public good.
It may only be ordered by or pursuant to a law that deter
mines the nature and extent of compensation. Such com-
pensation shall be determined by establishing an equitable
balance between the public interest and the interests of
those affected. In case of dispute concerning the amount of
compensation, recourse may be had to the ordinary courts.

[Socialisation]
Land, natural resources and means of production may for
the purpose of socialisation be transferred to public owner
ship or other forms of public enterprise by a law that deter
mines the nature and extent of compensation. With respect
to such compensation the third and fourth sentences of par
agraph (3) of Article 14 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

[Citizenship – Extradition]
No German may be deprived of his citizenship. Citizenship
may be lost only pursuant to a law, and against the will of
the person affected only if he does not become stateless as a
result.
No German may be extradited to a foreign country. The law
may provide otherwise for extraditions to a member state of
the European Union or to an international court, provided
that the rule of law is observed.

[Right of asylum]
Persons persecuted on political grounds shall have the right
of asylum.

Paragraph (1) of this Article may not be invoked by a per
son who enters the federal territory from a member state of
the European Communities or from another third state in
which application of the Convention Relating to the Status
of Refugees and of the Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is assured. The
states outside the European Communities to which the cri-
teria of the first sentence of this paragraph apply shall be
specified by a law requiring the consent of the Bundesrat.
In the cases specified in the first sentence of this paragraph,
measures to terminate an applicant’s stay may be imple-
mented without regard to any legal challenge that may have
been instituted against them.
By a law requiring the consent of the Bundesrat, states may
be specified in which, on the basis of their laws, enforce
sent practices and general political conditions, it can be
safely concluded that neither political persecution nor
inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment exists. It
shall be presumed that a foreigner from such a state is not
persecuted, unless he presents evidence justifying the con-
clusion that, contrary to this presumption, he is persecuted
on political grounds.
In the cases specified by paragraph (3) of this Article and
in other cases that are plainly unfounded or considered to
be plainly unfounded, the implementation of measures to
terminate an applicant’s stay may be suspended by a court
only if serious doubts exist as to their legality; the scope of
review may be limited, and tardy objections may be disre-
garded. Details shall be determined by a law.
(1) to (4) of this Article shall not preclude the
conclusion of international agreements of member states of
the European Communities with each other or with those
third states which, with due regard for the obligations aris-
ing from the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees
and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, whose enforcement must be as-
sured in the contracting states, adopt rules conferring juris-
diction to decide on applications for asylum, including the
reciprocal recognition of asylum decisions.

[Right of petition]
Every person shall have the right individually or jointly
with others to address written requests or complaints to
competent authorities and to the legislature
.

[Restriction of basic rights in specific instances]
Laws regarding military and alternative service may pro-
vide that the basic right of members of the Armed Forces
and of alternative service freely to express and disseminate
their opinions in speech, writing and pictures (first clause
of paragraph (1) of Article 5), the basic right of assembly
(Article 8), and the right of petition (Article 17) insofar as
it permits the submission of requests or complaints jointly
with others, be restricted during their period of military
or alternative service.
Laws regarding defence, including protection of the civilian
population, may provide for restriction of the basic rights of.
for a poor country,the most important thing to be a human is having enough food, shelter,clean water,medicines,job opportunities instead of so called humain rights!!!
Ask people live in Syria,Iraq,Libya,Afghanistan,Sudan,what does human right mean really?!
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom