4 ms·
> Going forward, the U.S. government will continue its global health leadership through existing and new engagements directly with other countries, the private
by shubhamjain 9mo ago
> Going forward, the U.S. government will continue its global health leadership through existing and new engagements directly with other countries, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and faith-based entities. U.S.-led efforts will prioritize emergency response, biosecurity coordination, and health innovation to protect America first while delivering benefits to partners around the world.
The funny thing about this administration is that they label existing system as "bad" and "corrupt", use that as justification to abandon it, and then proceed to recreate the same thing different way.
- hackyhacky 9mo agoThe point is to enable corruption that benefits current office-holders and prevent any activity, corrupt or not, that benefits anyone else.
- 0928374082 9mo agoSee Goldstein, "The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism" (1949)
- jasomill 9mo ago“For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.”
- RajBhai 9mo agoNAFTA bad. USMCA good.
- xingped 9mo agoYou think they will actually replace it with something similar though. They won't. They have no desire to do that. Even in name. Just like all their other supposed plans - it's just smoke and mirrors and no one will actually do any such thing.
- roenxi 9mo agoI dunno, reading it in context of the whole statement, "...and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states" deserves a bit of focus. The UN is structurally designed to give China and Russia outsized influence. Coordinating technical matters like healthcare through the UN does seem a bit unwise given that everyone is posturing up for some sort of Cold-war or potential WWIII style scenario. I don't think we've seen much deescalation of tension in the last decade. Better to leave the bandwidth of the UN free to focus on diplomacy without distractions, the military situation is urgent.
- dc396 9mo ago> The UN is structurally designed to give China and Russia outsized influence. An interesting assertion. I presume you are implying outsized influence over the US (or do you mean every other country?). I'm honestly curious: can you describe this structural design?
- N19PEDL2 9mo agoPerhaps they mean that Russia, a corrupted warmonger weak country, has veto power, while more powerful, free and democratic countries have not.
- sparqlittlestar 9mo agoHonestly, ceteris paribus for the US
- niceguy1827 9mo agoThank you sir. Love learning new things every day in a tech forum, especially Latin.
- roenxi 9mo agoThe thing that jumps to mind is the Security Council, which they can parley into diplomatic favours from other people. And the whole point of the UN is that it was the victors of WWII explaining to the rest of the world how international affairs were going to work, so I'd be pleasantly surprised if the special privileges stopped there. And even without that, the UN isn't really set up to handle technical matters. It is a diplomatic club. The point is to give people a seat at the table without considering their competence.
- 0hw0t 9mo agoArt of the Deal
- jjav 9mo ago> proceed to recreate the same thing different way Not a same or similar thing in any way. Everything that is being torn down is being replaced by grifter schemes where all that money is funneled to personal pockets.