People who live in this country have the audacity to say negative things about other countries
Was Israel the other country?
Look up the vote for water as a right
The draft resolution on the human right to water and sanitation (document A/64/L.63/REV.1) was adopted by a recorded vote of 122 in favour to none against, with 41 abstentions, as follows:
[…]
Abstain: Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Ethiopia, Greece, Guyana, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Zambia
And also, guess what countries voted against condemning Nazism? Here’s a hint: everyone’s favorite eastern European country who everyone claims doesn’t have a Nazi issue and the Eagle country didn’t vote for it
From Voting records of the Third Committee:
Recorded vote on draft resolution A/C.3/77/L.5, as orally revised and as amended - Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
Recorded vote on draft amendment A/C.3/77/L.52 - Amendment to draft resolution A/C.3/77/L.5
US and Ukraine voted no, on L.5. And yes on the L.52 amendment.
For reference:
The Committee then took up draft amendment “L.52”, which inserts a new operative paragraph, reading: “Notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism, and underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism.”
the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism.”
You can only fight neo-Nazis if you leave it at talking about fighting neo-Nazis. If you actually go out and do any fighting then that’s just counterproductive.
CW hate crimes
I wonder what the Venn diagram is for people who argue for talking Nazis out of their views and people who support (or do the work of) planting hidden barrels wrapped in razor wire and barbed wire along the US border so that asylum seekers are forced into a deadly river.
As always the atomic unit of propaganda isn’t lies, it’s emphasis and indeed the amendment is correct that de-nazification is a transparent pretext and the invasion is counterproductive to denazification. What is demphasized here is why it’s counterproductive; that Russia is/was funding their own Nazi divisions in Wagner, which must be ignored so that they can continue to not acknowledge the Nazi problem in Ukraine.
That vote was one of the two times a day the Israeli broken clock was correct, iirc.
This is one of the greatest examples of virtue signaling I think I have ever seen. I’ll ask three questions. If you can answer all three, I think the problem with this is very obvious.
-
Who among these countries do you think would be responsible for footing the bill on this one?
-
Which of these countries is currently the greatest contributor of global humanitarian aid the world has ever known?
-
What is stopping any of these countries from banding together without the US and making their beautiful dream a reality without this pointless resolution?
Smear campaigns work better when they’re not completely transparent.
-
I refer to #3, why don’t they just do it then?
-
I didn’t say per capita. You love that oil money don’t you?
-
Yes, the US is purposely starving the world.
You’re lying to yourself and everyone else. Stop being a bad person.
The USA starves the world because desperate and hungry people are easier to exploit. Starving people and preventing people from getting accessible food serves their corporate interest because they can keep rising food prices.
Yes, the US is purposely starving the world.
Unironically yes. While the US is particularly fond of bombs and drones, another favourite weapon of theirs is starving the countries of people who have the audacity to disagree with them. See: Cuba*, DPRK. As a bonus, they even get to blame the countries they are starving for the lack of food.
Not even only other countries, the US is happy to do it to their own people because the hungry are easier to exploit. The US has an absolute staggering amount of food waste, it is the largest component of most US landfills. They’d sooner throw away food before giving it to the needy. In many cases, they will punish you for giving it to the needy (see the charitable organizations repeatedly fined in Texas for feeding the homeless).
*Incidentally this exact same map can be used for countries voting to end the US sanctions of Cuba.
Yes, the US is purposely starving the world.
Yep. I doubt you’ll care to read the following but I’m putting it here for others to see.
The United States is the world leader in imposing economic sanctions and supports sanctions regimes affecting nearly 200 million people. … Targeted countries experience economic contractions and, in many cases, are unable to import sufficient essential goods, including essential medicines, medical equipment, infrastructure necessary for clean water and for health care, and food. … While on paper most sanctions have some humanitarian exemptions for food, necessary medicines and medical supplies, in practice these exemptions are not sufficient to ensure access to these goods within the targeted country. (Center for Economic and Policy Research)
It’s well known that sanctions are ineffective for pressuring governments, but very effective at waging siege warfare by starving and killing ordinary citizens by disease and infrastructural failures. Continuing to use sanctions in this way and to this extent, when this is well known, is definitely “purposely starving the world”. An independent expert appointed by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said in 2019 that US sanctions violate human rights and international code of conduct and can lead to starvation. Why does the US continue to be the world leader in imposing sanctions, increasing its use of sanctions by 933% over the last 20 years, when this is well known? It’s because they know the effect, and they’re doing it on purpose.
We can also look at some US internal memorandums from before it was more politically incorrect to talk about starving people in other countries. In 1960, U.S. officials wrote that creating “disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship” through denying money and supplies to Cuba would be a method they should pursue in order to “bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government” in Cuba.
In other countries, we see a pattern of US officials and US-backed institutions purposely denying aid and loans to governments they don’t approve of, and then suddenly approving aid and opening up loans when a coup brings a leader they’re happy with into power. When Ghana was requesting aid under an administration that the West’s bourgeoisie didn’t like, U.S. officials said this: “We and other Western countries (including France) have been helping to set up the situation by ignoring Nkrumah’s pleas for economic aid. The new OCAM (Francophone) group’s refusal to attend any OAU meeting in Accra (because of Nkrumah’s plotting) will further isolate him. All in all, looks good.” The “situation” they were helping to set up was a coup they knew was going to happen. After a US-friendly coup took place, suddenly it was time to give the “almost pathetically pro-Western” government a gift of “few thousand tons of surplus wheat or rice”, knowing that giving little gifts like this “whets their appetites” for further collaboration with the US. You will find the same song and dance in numerous other countries, Chile being a well-documented example, if you simply look for it.
The US imposes starvation and depravation of other countries on purpose, using it as an economic wrecking ball, then pats itself on the back for giving “aid” to the countries which have been hollowed out by such tactics.
The loans which magically become available to countries that meet the US approval standards are not so pretty either, as a former IMF senior economist said, he may only hope “to wash my hands of what in my mind’s eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples”, there not being “enough soap in the world” to wash away what has been done to the global south through the calculated fraud of the IMF, whose tactics are designed to accomplish the same kind of goals as the sanctions are–to prevent the economic rise of any country but the US by wrecking its competitors economically, tearing apart their local manufacturing capacity and transforming them into mere resource extraction projects, redirecting their agricultural industries into exports to make sure they reach a level where they are more reliant on imports to feed themselves, and reliant on foreign aid which is ripped away whenever they do not do what the US approves of or make friends with who the US wants them to.
I refer to #3, why don’t they just do it then?
This is what secondary sanctions and the US’s various protection rackets have always been designed to prevent, which has definitely been a powerful tool for them, but it seems with the rise of the new non-aligned movement and de-dollarization its becoming a less successful one and we can see countries “just doing” what they want more and more while the US leadership waves around, as usual, more sanctions and military threats in response.
Stick your head in the sand just a little deeper and maybe you can shut out rational thought completely.
What bill needs to be footed? The vote was to make food a right, not force a single country to pay for the cost of food. Please learn to read and understand what you are reading. Worrying about a non-existent “bill” is purely ideological.
That is what right wingers do. They get too emotional to read and they argue to death based on their own created misinformation.
This is what children do, they look for a boogie man and demonize them without evidence.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
Then what’s the point? Why even have this vote? Could it be that they’re trying to signal how virtuous they are?
The point is to limit the ability of multinational corporations, and the countries that act as their muscle, to create famines though prioritizeing exports and price gouging. This makes food something that people have a right to, rather than a commodity that should be sold only to whom it can make the most profit from. Check out what happened to push bottled water over public water fountains.
Would you look at that: a brainless NPC wandered into the thread. You’re even more confidently wrong than the average redditor. That’s almost impressive.
Lucky for you, I think I’m done now. No one’s gonna make you use that paper weight you call your head.
That was such a weak comeback 😂. I think your circuits got fried from too much computation, you bot.
Only about 2.
US doesn’t have ‘aid’, they call it ‘aid’ but is usually corruption money or loan.
For example, take a look at what is Ukraine getting. Not aid, most of it is some kind of loan.
I think definition of aid is that they don’t own anything in return, but US is not using it like that.
Hilarious that some of the assets up for privatisation are in Russian-controlled territory. Truly another level of grift
You can see a map of all the assets they’ve already sold here: https://privatization.gov.ua/mapa-ob-yektiv/
Best part about it is that they’re literally selling property that is inside the regions Russia annexed and currently holds 🤣
Myths of “Humanitarian” Intervention
CONTRARY TO POPULAR belief, U.S. leaders are no different from those of most other countries in that they have a dismal humanitarian record.
True, many nations including this one have sent relief abroad in response to particular disasters.But these sporadic actions are limited in scope, do not represent an essential policy commitment, and obscure the many occasions when governments choose to do absolutely nothing for other peoples in dire straits.
In addition, most U.S. aid missions serve as pretexts for hidden political agendas. They are intended to bolster conservative procapitalist regimes, build infrastructures (roads, ports, office complexes) that assist big investors, lend a cover for counterinsurgency programs, and undermine local agrarian self-sufficiency by driving independent farmers off lands that are then taken over by corporate agribusiness.
I don’t understand why everybody is downvoting you. It’s a well known fact that throughout its 247 years of existence, the United States has literally never committed a single atrocity. I’m not saying the United States is perfect; maybe it committed an atrocity or two a couple of times, but nothing that was a big deal.
There are the Indian Residential fake school genocide that continued after the Cold War, the subjugation of communities of freed slaves, the Black Wall Street massacre, the Cold War massacre against a mass of peaceful workers who demand meritocracy on the excuse that human rights advocate are evil Soviet agents, and the current planned illegal dumping of hazardous landfills and industrial chemical waste (which contains components of the chemical weapons by British in WW1) onto to the lands of First Nations and African American communities to poison the water and food sources.
You ever wonder why the United States is wealthy while other countries are not? Unequal Exchange and Neocolonialism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjLmYCfKU7o
Also this thread is a good summary: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1493599447904931847.html
In 2015, the North’s net appropriation from the South included:
- 12 billion tons of embodied raw material equivalents
- 822 million hectares of embodied land
- 21 Exajoules of embodied energy
- 188 million person-years of embodied labour
To put these figures in perspective:
- 12 billion tons of raw material equivalents is 43% of the North’s annual material consumption. In other words, nearly half of the North’s material consumption is net appropriated from the South.
- 822 million hectares of land (more than twice the size of India), would in theory be enough to provide nutritious food for up to 6 billion people, depending on land productivity and diet.
- 21 Exajoules of energy would be enough to cover the annual energy requirements of building infrastructure to ensure that all 6.5 billion people in the global South have access to decent housing, public transport, healthcare, education, sanitation, communication, etc.
In other words, all of this productive capacity could be used to provide for local human needs, but instead it is roped into servicing capital accumulation in the North. Patterns of net appropriation reproduce deprivation in the South.
