3 ms·

> And whose to say? Some other country based on its own culture, and treating it as some some of universal laws of physics? The UN Convention of Human Rights.

by pimmen 7y ago

> And whose to say? Some other country based on its own culture, and treating it as some some of universal laws of physics? The UN Convention of Human Rights. Which China recognizes, that's why it got Taiwan's seat at the Security Council. I posit being in a position to judge and enforce human rights, and then violating the rights you recognize for your own gain, is immoral. > Preferred way of government, laws, ethical questions, etc, are cultural, and should be up to the people. That doesn't work, which is why we have the UN Convention. There were more non-Jews than Jews in Germany, a party only resonating with the majority population could then harness that to murder the minority. To make sure minorities are safe the International community is trying to make human rights universal in spite of what a local majority thinks.

coldtea 7y ago
>That doesn't work, which is why we have the UN Convention. We have the UN Convention because some top-dog nation states pushed for it, as a means to influence lesser states in a faux-democratic way [1]. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/linking-us-foreign-aid-un-votes-what-are-implications https://www.cgdev.org/publication/linking-us-foreign-aid-un-... When the UN doesn't vote or suggest something they like, they can simply veto it or ignore it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._ratification_of_the_Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._ratification_of_the_Conve... (not ratified by US) https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/23/politics/un-security-council-sexual-violence/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/23/politics/un-security-coun... https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/43-times-us-has-used-veto-power-against-un-resolutions-israel https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/43-times-us-has-used-veto... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty#US_withdrawal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty#... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Elimination_of_All_Forms_of_Discrimination_Against_Women#Controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Elimination_... (not ratified by US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Non-ratification_by_the_US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Non-ratificatio... (not ratified by US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat... (not ratified by US) So much for "making minorities safe" -- they also have to be the minorities (or majorities) certain top dogs care about. [1] And this is not a new Trump-era thing: the US has pushed UN votes its way through this and similar means since Kissinger times
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Long before that, it goes back a long way. First I'm aware of it was the approach taken by Harry Anslinger - he of the racist reefer madness and swathes of faked evidence to support his moral crusade. A crusade for outlawing hemp, not just cannabis, at the League of Nations and inserting it in international opium treaties. Then again after being appointed as US representative by Kennedy in 61, for the sustained pressure at the UN that eventually led to the global war on drugs. Took a while to achieve global compliance there - as other countries had different approaches that had worked very well.
- pimmen 7y ago
  I’m not going to argue against that the UN has been used by the permanent Security Council members to push their political agenda. But, you’re making the claim here that the convention on human rights was a tool to influence nations in a faux-democratic way. Could you tell me what in the human rights convention makes the world a less democratic place? And why is it bad to have some framework in place that for example covers the human rights abuses China is comitting against the uighurs? And what would be the alternative, just letting countries violate minorities who pray for other countries to do something? Because, again, we’re talking about China here, a permanent member of the Security Council. It’s supposed to uphold these values of human rights across the world, but it violates them instead because it wants to, is that not something other countries should condemn then?

by pimmen 7y ago

coldtea 7y ago

>That doesn't work, which is why we have the UN Convention. We have the UN Convention because some top-dog nation states pushed for it, as a means to influence lesser states in a faux-democratic way [1]. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/linking-us-foreign-aid-un-votes-what-are-implications https://www.cgdev.org/publication/linking-us-foreign-aid-un-... When the UN doesn't vote or suggest something they like, they can simply veto it or ignore it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._ratification_of_the_Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._ratification_of_the_Conve... (not ratified by US) https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/23/politics/un-security-council-sexual-violence/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/23/politics/un-security-coun... https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/43-times-us-has-used-veto-power-against-un-resolutions-israel https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/43-times-us-has-used-veto... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty#US_withdrawal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty#... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Elimination_of_All_Forms_of_Discrimination_Against_Women#Controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Elimination_... (not ratified by US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Non-ratification_by_the_US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Non-ratificatio... (not ratified by US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat... (not ratified by US) So much for "making minorities safe" -- they also have to be the minorities (or majorities) certain top dogs care about. [1] And this is not a new Trump-era thing: the US has pushed UN votes its way through this and similar means since Kissinger times

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Long before that, it goes back a long way. First I'm aware of it was the approach taken by Harry Anslinger - he of the racist reefer madness and swathes of faked evidence to support his moral crusade. A crusade for outlawing hemp, not just cannabis, at the League of Nations and inserting it in international opium treaties. Then again after being appointed as US representative by Kennedy in 61, for the sustained pressure at the UN that eventually led to the global war on drugs. Took a while to achieve global compliance there - as other countries had different approaches that had worked very well.
pimmen 7y ago
I’m not going to argue against that the UN has been used by the permanent Security Council members to push their political agenda. But, you’re making the claim here that the convention on human rights was a tool to influence nations in a faux-democratic way. Could you tell me what in the human rights convention makes the world a less democratic place? And why is it bad to have some framework in place that for example covers the human rights abuses China is comitting against the uighurs? And what would be the alternative, just letting countries violate minorities who pray for other countries to do something? Because, again, we’re talking about China here, a permanent member of the Security Council. It’s supposed to uphold these values of human rights across the world, but it violates them instead because it wants to, is that not something other countries should condemn then?