Imagine a citizen of Greece, for example a primary school teacher, in 1995, suing the Greek government for irresponsibility and corruption. He has the evidence to prove his claim. Our teacher persuaded the judges if the elected politicians continue to barrow money, they will send Greece into an economic catastrophe.

He proved that inability to pay the national debt will push the country into deep crisis and will threaten society, include himself and his family.

The teacher said in court that he is not representative of all Greeks, but as an individual he has right to defend himself, because irresponsible politicians are threatening his rights. Then he listed his endangered rights according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
-The right to work, (Article 23)”;
-The right to social security, (Article 22)”;
-The protection against unemployment, (Article 22)”;
-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, (Article 25)”;
-The right to rest and leisure, (Article 24)”;

Our teacher demanded the court force the politicians to change the barrowing habits and co-ordinate the debt with Greece’s ability to repay it. He wanted to avoid the imminent debt crisis for the next generations of Greeks, including his children and grandchildren.

The court after hearing the defense of the politicians concluded that the actual course will threaten the teacher’s rights in future. Then the court forced the politicians to deal transparently with loans and inform people about the consequences.

This scenario could happen if immunity to prosecution for politicians did not exist, and the individual citizen could protect his rights against statesmen with taking his complaint to Judiciary branch directly.

Of course in practice this didn’t happen. The problem was not lack of a wise individual in Greece. There were enough wise people who could blame the political system and irresponsible politicians, but they couldn’t do anything.

“Might” is dominating human societies. It confiscates the rights of individual and does not permit an individual to sue the political system.

Don’t say in your democratic country and other democracies that people can sue political system. Try it. There are façade committees in parliaments for lawmakers; and offices for bureaucrats where people can complain, but they lead nowhere and change nothing.

The complaint against politicians and bureaucrats to their fellow politicians and bureaucrats cannot take place of complaining to the judiciary as an impartial branch of democratic system that can enforce Articles 8 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

A citizen should give his right of sovereignty in the form of the vote to Realpolitik as political branch of “Might”, then after the day of election run after justice because the henhouse and farmer relationship dominates our societies.

If the society of Greece allowed our teacher as a wise Greek, to sue the political system and its politics-players, the Greeks would have had a chance to avoid the economic catastrophe and its painful consequences.

But for the evolutionary flaw, our species is shortsighted and this attribute caused the Greeks to spend extravagantly on loans, without thinking about the consequences. The evolutionary flaw makes humans indifferent to warnings of wise persons about distant dangers. When shortsighted people are indifferent to their own rights, how can they provide justice for our presumed teacher as a wise person?

In practice, the people of Greece muffled the voices of their wise fellow citizens, like our assumed teacher. The Greeks did not listen to warnings of their wise fellow citizens because their media refused to treat the national debt and its consequences as an important issue. The media in Greece like many other countries was controlled by wealthy families or by the government. None of them, were not interest to echoing the voice of the wise Greeks, like our teacher, because the status quo provided the situation that in it they could increase their wealth.

The Greek judiciary couldn’t hear the teacher’s lawsuit against political system because politicians enjoy immunity to prosecution. The justice in Greece was not only blind, but also deaf. In atmosphere of “Might” justice is meaningless.

The Greeks considered national debt, when it appeared as a tangible crisis. In that time they felt the consequences, and cried in vain.




The Greeks demonstrates against economic catastrophe in their country. They with accepting henhouse and farmer relationship, as well muffling voice of their wise fellow citizens sealed their suffering as an inventible destiny.

The example of Greece is important because we are repeating the same mistake, worldwide.

If Greeks borrowed more money, more than they afford to pay back, we borrow from nature the same way.

Our worldwide mistake is more dangerous than the Greeks because they borrowed from other humans, and could negotiate with the lenders. But we cannot negotiate with the Earth. It will punish us relentlessly for ignoring its warnings.

As you see, in Greece and now worldwide there is no way for a wise individual to protect his rights against violation by others. A wise person cannot interfere in a catastrophic process that once happened in Greece, and now is occurring worldwide. A wise person cannot save himself and others with the help of the judiciary because in atmosphere of “Might” people who govern the world have immunity to prosecution.

We need to redefine the meaning of right, justice and law in atmosphere of “Right”. All relationships among humans would be established according to right, justice and law. The actual relationship is established on “Might” that imposes injustice on humans and lets powerful people avoid justice and stay above the law.

With abolition of immunity from prosecution, even a wise person can sue the political system to prevent catastrophe.

The question is:

Is it justice to interfere in a democratic system and change the course that a majority has chosen?

In this question is presumed the ballot-box, correct vote counting, and majority participation in an election makes that process democratic. This is wrong. The result of such process defines and determines its character as Democracy or Might-cracy. If in a country, the “right of sovereignty” of citizens leads their society to “Common Righteousness”, it is democracy. Otherwise, it is “Might-cracy”.

A democratic political system shouldn’t deprive others of their rights. If the majority of a society does, it is the tyranny of the majority, because they distort the meaning of law and define it in atmosphere of “Might” to confiscate the rights of others, whether they are a few or millions. For example choosing a sexual partner is a right. Can a heterosexual majority deprive gay men and lesbians the right to live with the sexual partners of their choice?

The decisions of a majority can be right and valid as long as they do not deprive even one person of her or his rights. Otherwise it is injustice.

Millions of shortsighted Greeks had the right to accept henhouse and farmer relationship, and let the politicians lead them to catastrophe, but did not have the right to deprive their few wise fellow citizens of their rights. But they did because their alleged democracy was a Might-cracy. They not only imposed their chosen catastrophe upon everyone else, but also on future generations of Greece. The next generations will have to pay the national debt that this irresponsible generation has incurred.

Now a majority of shortsighted people are repeating Greeks’ experiment, this time worldwide. They are threatening the life of their contemporary fellow humans and that of future generations.

If numbers confer legitimacy, we are a tiny minority compared to the hundreds of billions who will live on Earth after us.

However those generations have not yet been born, but their birth is assured and we as responsible people must preserve their rights to live; not destroy them. The next generations have a right to enjoy nature and its resources as much as our generation did.

Such reasoning in atmosphere of “Might” and its Might-cracy has no buyers. They distort concepts of right, justice and law, and with vague definitions of them, confiscate human rights. The buyers of their empty words are people who love self- deception and accept the henhouse and farmer relationship.

We cannot do anything to make all people wise, but we can allow wise people to request justice and save the “right of life” on the Earth.

All people who desire right, justice and law, especially Judiciaries worldwide can protect “Right” from violations by “Might”.

The abolition of immunity from prosecution can let wise people prevent catastrophe and provide situation to move from atmosphere of “Might” to atmosphere of “Right” where an efficient education system can overcome on our evolutionary flaw and make humans wiser.