Weekly News: Necessary humanitarianism and the denial of it



Op-Ed | Health and Society

Nancy K. Sikah, 8th September 2020



The ‘cold’ is deliberately cruel and spiteful. This cruelty is in response to the unpaid debt of developing countries. The conflict in many is caused by economic and racial geographic tensions. These tensions have made society unstable socially. Politics is no longer the governance and is now decided by dissenters who were formerly a minority. These were the previously disapproved minority who were nationalist, controversial and marginalised as the majority were in favour of equality and diversity for the population. Currently, the situation has changed dramatically and there is a conflict between governance and dissenters who were under the governance of regulators.

The majority who previously complied with ethical and legal values are now in favour of a less equal and diverse society. In this new society the dissenters make ‘the rules’. It controversially, the opposite of regulatory values. It has affected so many areas of politics and regulatory organisations that it has impaired regulatory effectiveness. Negligence is now so severe that it has reached most regulatory organisations. The outcome is a less efficient, negligent governance with many of the population injured and neglected. Cruelty and exploitation is on a measurable scale for many regions worsening every month.

The new protest is for new regulations and a denial of the law, ending many of the old laws which reinforce social stability. It has been criticised as imposing on our national choices and national values. International politics has been criticised as the cause of unemployment, recession and a breakdown in families and national communities for countries. The response to this has been an aggressive protest through the mistreatment and abuse of the person and their possessions. It affects an individual’s everyday life. The ethics of diversity and equality has been denied in favour of a society ruled by nationalist prosperity and wealth. It disregards, an individual and country’s welfare and a population’s choice to participate with others in different countries.

No national regulations unless approved by the military dissenters. This includes the obligation to save lives. There is less obligation towards people who are not nationals or a national ancestry. Most welfare requests will not be approved. The new Individualism for ‘the dissenters’ is to assume and acquire the lives, and from the lives of others. International politics is for reserved for trade only, and international policy is ruled by currency.


The Argument

There will be no international relations.

No budget for international purposes

No international code of ethics

No international budget which would also affect the economy.

There are there are less obligations:

Difficult to find information and no information given.

Possible negligence.

Possible injury.

A changing subjective definition depending on the result that is preferred. No standard definition, ‘treating it differently’.

Varying levels of exploitation ranging from mild to severe.

No provisions and no obligation of welfare to preserve life.

In a military soldier’s ideal we would live as diplomats.1

In a diplomat’s ideal, they would be international diplomat’s in governance.2

When a country uses the rules against its own population, there are many more problems. Severe political conflict is normally with a different country. When there is internal conflict in a country, it threatens the population, affecting the lives of its own population. The extent of neglect is currently so dominating that many regions are fighting an internal fight to preserve their own legal and regulatory values that preserved their country. The dissenter’s individualism and domination is a noticeable loud and sometimes quiet civil war with residents and visitors. The majority have become disapproved by dissenters.



1 Unamed, military soldier’s

2 Unamed diplomat

Leave a Reply