[dijit]

Everything you say is true.

But interventionism based on _your_ beliefs is a form of tyranny and usually stokes tensions which riles up support for your opponents ideology. It's not long lived.

All the things you say are things the EU struggles with Massively, and I'm not so naive to assume I have all the answers; but I have a hard time swallowing the idea that I know better than "Fundamentalist Muslims" or whatever else, because if that's the leadership they choose then unfortunately one way or the other I need to just let them get on with that.

Doesn't mean I agree.

You're right, though, that there are things like the human rights conventions, and the EU is quite good at not working with countries which do not ensure basic protections; but to some people (brexiteers, for a good example) this is also a form of tyranny.

You can't appeal to everyone, so you're basically imposing tyranny or allowing a tyranny of the majority in some form; as you so eloquently put it.

[mschuster91]

> But interventionism based on _your_ beliefs

They are not my beliefs, they are what the majority of the civilized world believed to be the core tenets of civilization after the horrors of the Nazi regime. That is the entire point on why I believe human rights interventions to not only be justified but morally necessary.

And for what it's worth I (as a German) would really love some sort of oversight committee to tell Viktor Orban or our own far-right to pound sand.

[dijit]

I guess the main difference I'm trying to get at here is: what we believe to be core tenets of civilisation are perhaps more hotly contested than we want to admit?

Or; to put it another way: you and I believe this (we're in the majority!), so should we force it on everyone?