There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

afraid_of_zombies ,

Amnesty international took the side of Russia, not the best source.

EmperorHenry ,
@EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

People from Saudi Arabia have been on the UN human rights panel for awhile

whiskeyandramen ,
@whiskeyandramen@lemmy.world avatar

It’s getting harder and harder to make satire because it keeps becoming reality.

AgentGrimstone ,

The world is not even trying anymore

FriendBesto ,

Hahahaha.

Klown world.

KuroeNekoDemon ,

This is how you know the UN is a complete fucking joke at this point that we still waste tax dollars on

iknowitwheniseeit ,

The purpose of the UN is so that nuclear powers have a forum to talk, instead of, you know, ending all human life on the planet.

Everything else is just sort of stuff that came along once you had all the countries of the world sitting around realizing that they should do something once they’re in the same room.

KuroeNekoDemon ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    SpaceCowboy ,
    @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca avatar

    It reflects the reality of the world.

    Say the UN security council ordered Russia to immediately withdraw from Ukraine. Great, right?

    Then Russia just says “No.”

    Ok now what? What can anyone do when a country that has nuclear weapons refuses to comply with an order from the UN? I guess they could write another strongly worded letter which would also be ignored.

    The nuclear powers can unilaterally veto anything because that’s simply the reality of the world. If you have the UN trying to enforce something that a nuclear power doesn’t want that could lead to a nuclear war. Which would be bad.

    If countries are satisfied with writing resolutions that accomplish nothing then it’s better than having a war. And that’s the ultimate goal of the UN, to make countries waste time on UN resolutions that accomplish nothing instead of having wars.

    Don’t think of the UN as a police force, they aren’t. Think of it more like a global politics version of lemmy. A lot of idiots writing angry things at one another and getting nothing done. But getting nothing done is better than having a war.

    Mr_Blott ,

    Tax dollars

    Tell us more about your country’s attitude towards abortion

    KuroeNekoDemon , (edited )

    You mean Canada? We’ve had pro choice for years. Do not assume everyone is American

    Also this makes you and everyone else who does this look like an asshole so fuck off

    Riven ,
    @Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Akchually, I know what you’re saying but technically you’re also American, as in, from the continent of America. I’m just being cheeky ignore me.

    systemglitch ,

    twitches in Canadian

    Summzashi ,

    The UN is working 100% as intended. You want world war 3 because you dislike what this article says? Absolutely delusional.

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Amnesty is not a news source. They are fundraising, here. The article is devoid of necessary contextual information.

    UN Commission executive boards are elected not appointed positions. In some UN bodies, chairs rotate in alphabetical order, but not this one. Maybe there was a midterm vacancy and the seat was filled by an appointment process? What is that process? When is the earliest the seat could be recalled?

    SpaceCowboy ,
    @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca avatar

    I can’t find anything about their process.

    There’s really not much about it, the UN page is here: www.un.org/en/global-issues/gender-equality

    Mostly they seem to have conferences every decade or so and occasionally declare a “International day for X”. Seems like a PR kind of thing to me.

    But at any rate it’s a bad look for the UN. Indicates a dysfunction in the organization that whatever process they have allowed this to happen. I mean it looks like it’s a PR campaign that actually makes them look bad. If Guterres was competent he’d shut the thing down entirely and start another one that didn’t suck. But since he’s an idiot and he will probably just say it’s somehow Israel’s fault.

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Page 22 re: election of officers.

    documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/…/n9777521.pdf

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    Amnesty is not a news source.

    It is providing news.

    They are fundraising, here.

    Their website has a donate button. This article doesn’t ask for donations, although it does advertise another Amnesty report.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    What? They literally aren’t journalists and this literally isn’t journalism. It’s click bait to get people to click that donate button.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    They may not be journalists, but this certainly is news.

    “They campaign against abuses of human rights worldwide.”

    The information shared seems to be high-quality and relevant to their cause. It certainly isn’t “10 bad things about Saudi Arabia, number 7 will shock you”.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah it’s not serious news for serious people. It’s click bait. Not as transparent as your example perhaps, but not much different.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    If the article is clickbate then it should be easy to respond to the serious points (for serious people) that:-

    Saudi Arabia’s 2022 Personal Status Law, creates gender-based discrimination in

    • marriage,
    • divorce,
    • child custody,
    • inheritance.

    Saudi Arabia’s authorities supress freedom of expression including expressing support (ie tweeting about) for women’s rights.

    Saudi Arabia must demonstrate its commitment through concrete actions domestically.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Those points are all true as far as I know.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Here you go, here’s what an actual article on this looks like.

    theguardian.com/…/saudi-arabia-un-womens-rights-c…

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    Ironically your preferred article uses Amnesty “clickbait” International as one of it’s sources.

    Right at the top of the guardian’s website it says “Support us now”. Doesn’t that, by your definition, make it clickbait?

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Uhhh, why are you so hostile? I didn’t make up the concept of good journalism versus sensational shit.

    This the the part I am talking about. None of these details are included in Amnesty’s blog post, because it cuts against the outrage. Can’t very well lose your shit over it if nobody else wants the chair. I think it’s safe to say that anyone concerned about this now do their part to make sure the body has the impetus to contest the seat, next time. Perhaps there is more to the story. Perhaps this was a protest? Perhaps spring in the body with no time to mount a challenge? I don’t know.

    Saudi Arabia has been chosen as the chair of the UN commission that is supposed to promote gender equality and empower women around the world, after an unopposed bid for leadership condemned by human rights groups because of the kingdom’s “abysmal” record on women’s rights.

    The Saudi ambassador to the UN, Abdulaziz Alwasil, was elected as chair of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), by “acclamation” on Wednesday, as there were no rival candidates and no dissent at the CSW’s annual meeting in New York.

    Alwasil was endorsed by the group of Asia-Pacific states on the commission. When the outgoing chair, the Filipino envoy to the UN, Antonio Manuel Lagdameo, asked the 45 members if they had any objections there was silence in the chamber.

    “I hear no objection. It is so decided,” Lagdameo said.

    Normally a country holds the chair for two years, but the Philippines was put under pressure from other members of the Asia group to split its tenure and pass the post on to another country after one year. Bangladesh was expected to take over but late in the process, Saudi Arabia stepped in and lobbied for the chair, in what is widely seen as an attempt to burnish the kingdom’s image.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    why are you so hostile?

    Because you lumped a well respected human rights NGO in with buzzfeed.

    You were attacking the messenger, not the message, which made me think you were defending SA’s appalling human rights record. But you’ve admitted what was written is correct so I’m much less hostile now.

    I didn’t make up the concept of good journalism versus sensational shit.

    In this case the “sensational shit” was one of the sources that the good journalism was based on.

    None of these details are included in Amnesty’s blog post.

    Is it really relevant that the seat was won uncontested? Not to an organisation who’s sole purpose is to highlight human rights abuses. Not to OP. OP could have linked to the Guardian’s article rather than Amnesty’s but the point they are making about hypocrisy remains.

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    I think Amnesty is half shit. This is what they do. They spread half truths and outrage bait and raise money with it. They use some of that money to do some great and important work. They also use some of that money to spread the shit.

    This article was not published to inform people. It was published to outrage people and raise money off it. Amnesty is glad this dude got appointed. 🤑

    Keeponstalin ,

    Except they don’t, they even link to a more detailed article that includes many more reference links for more information. Not to mention entire reports about the human rights abuses in detail.

    There is no evidence they ‘spread half truths’ or ‘outrage bait.’ Sounds like you just want to discredit them because the human rights abuses they report about Israel make you uncomfortable.

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    The evidence is in this thread. Try and keep up. They make me uncomfortable because they are half truths. This how Amnesty funds itself. No shite they find human rights abuses wherever they look. Their job is not to vindicate people, it’s to accuse them. Surgeons where I’m from always find a reason to operate. To hammers, everything is a nail. I find your approach to evaluating Amnesty’s credibility as a news publisher to be shallow and self serving.

    Keeponstalin , (edited )

    So you’re mad that a Human Rights Organization is reporting on the details of Human Rights abuses Saudi Arabia has institutionalized to oppress women, showing exactly why the UN appointing Saudi Arabia is a terrible decision. It’s a report on Saudi Arabia, not the UN.

    The Guardian is a news outlet reporting on the UN Decision, it makes sense they report on the details of the UN proceedings, and quote Amnesty on the human rights violations.

    What part of the Amnesty report is a half-truth? They are reporting on exactly what human rights abuses Saudi Arabia has committed and how. This is not a general news outlet like The Guardian or The Intercept. Amnesty reports on human rights. They don’t report anything on without substantial evidence either.

    Who are they vindicating here? It’s certainly not Saudi Arabia, they talk about how they are guilty of oppressing women. It’s not the UN either, they detail exactly how this decision goes against the UN charter.

    JustZ , (edited )
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Your specialty is being emotionally over reactive and putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

    If you can’t see the literal language I quoted from the guardian article that was entirely omitted from the Amnesty blog post, and you don’t see what the problem is with treating Amnesty as journalism, than you are beyond redemption and your media literacy is just not adequate.

    And btw, Saudi Arabia is a great example of how your buddies in Hamas plan to rule over all of the Levant after for real genociding all the Jews and Christians and installing an Islamic caliphate: theocracies cannot be a legitimate source of human rights since any concept of religious law is entirely made up by the people in charge of it and anyone can claim to be the next prophet.

    Keeponstalin , (edited )
    1. Nothing in the Guardian article contradicts or discredits the Amnesty article, in fact it uses Amnesty as a source. You’ll notice how the HRW article the guardian also sources also doesn’t go into the details of the UN appointing Saudi Arabia. That’s because human rights organizations focus on reporting about human rights. The details of how the UN appointed Saudi Arabia despite their oppression of women, does not change the reality that Saudi Arabia oppresses women. The human rights organizations are reporting on that reality of oppression, because that’s the focus of a human rights organization.
    2. I support a One-State Solution with equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians. Palestinians do have a right to armed resistance against Apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and settler Colonialism. Hostilities need to end.
    Jimmyeatsausage ,

    I guess the “freedom of the press” forum leadership spot was already taken?

    whome ,

    Weren’t they head of the human rights council?

    exanime ,

    The UN: how can we be more of a joke to the world??

    EvilEyedPanda ,

    Oh oh, let’s appoint an atheist to the board of Islamic affairs!

    TopRamenBinLaden , (edited )

    Even then, I think an average atheist politician would handle Islamic affairs more fairly than an average Muslim politician would handle gender equality affairs, at least in most cases.

    There is no atheist book that the atheist has to follow. The Quran, on the other hand, has misogyny kind of built into it, sadly.

    Edit: I feel like I should add that this misogyny problem isn’t unique to Islam. The Abrahamic religions all have outdated takes on gender equality. I would have the same negative feelings about a devout Christian politician being put in charge of gender equality.

    SocialMediaRefugee ,

    Well we know his wife won’t be driving him to the meetings

    liquidparasyte ,

    Reality really is beyond satire.

    MalReynolds ,
    @MalReynolds@slrpnk.net avatar

    Satire Sartre : Hell is other people…

    S_204 ,

    The UN is a captured organization. It no longer serves its purpose, and is now an arm of the oil producing countries state departments more than anything. I don’t have a good suggestion for what to replace it with but it’s sure AF not worthy of being respected any longer.

    MystikIncarnate ,

    Did it ever serve it’s purpose?

    dwalin ,

    No third world war yet. So i assume yes.

    doors_3 ,

    That is an incredibly low bar to judge any organization. There are multiple conflicts going around the world that UN has done nothing to do. When it comes to permanent members of the Security council, the UN is powerless. Heck, it is powerless if one of the permanent members decides to flex it’s muscles somewhere else geographically either.

    Also, no world war is also largely due to presence of nukes with nations. The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction prevents nations from going into full blown wars when 2 nuclear powers are involved.

    dwalin ,

    The UN has the power the nations want to give it. And for now, its this. Dont complain about the UN, complain about our governments

    S_204 ,

    At one point I’m sure it was helpful to someone. Now it’s just a weapon the oil producing countries plus China of the world wield against the rest.

    cokeslutgarbage ,

    I’m young and ignorant, so I don’t know what I’m talking about and I’d be open to anyone posting any links for me to learn from. But I remember being in middle and high-school 20 years ago, and learning about the UN’s “millennium goals” that they were trying to achieve by 2015. And they were… awesome. Like the real definition of awesome. They were awe-inspiring. And they made me hopeful as a young teen. And I remember when 2015 came and went and they hadn’t even come close to meeting those goals. And I remember thinking, okay, well, they’ll keep trying. But they didn’t keep trying, and in fact I never heard anyone talk about the millennium goals ever again. And then 2016 came, and at least from my American-centric viewpoint, the world has been on a rapid decline since then. And I am honestly so hopeless, like rock bottom hopless, like, I don’t know what the future is gonna be, but i can’t imagine a good one if we stay on this path, and I don’t know what to do, because I’m not a world leader.

    I used to have so much respect and admiration for the UN but they’re just as garbage as every other power in the world. This post is a fucking joke. My ex partner is from Saudi. I remember excitedly asking him about his opinion and his families opinion when women were first given permission to drive and he was DISGUSTED. Said “this should have happened ages ago, Saudi is using this as a PR move, why should we be happy that women are just now getting this right?”

    Anyway. Sorry for the long response to your sarcastic comment. Have a good day. Xoxo.

    Agent641 ,

    Sorry that your faith in supranational organisations was so thoroughly squashed. It do be like that though. For a little while, Truman hoped that all nuclear weapons could be put under the control of the UN. Then that went belly up when the soviet union under Stalin learned how to build them. Theres always the IAEA though.

    doors_3 ,

    Truman never wanted that. He flew around knowing that his nukes gave him an advantage over the USSR. From this paper, it is clear that Truman wanted to maintain an atomic monopoly and as for Joint Chiefs of Staff, they didn’t want to share the nuclear secrets with any organization including the UN.

    FordBeeblebrox ,

    The whole point was a united nation front to avoid another Nazi war, but they gave the blue hats no teeth. It served purpose for purpose sake but no real action

    NotAtWork ,

    The UN’s purpose is

    “To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;”- United Nations Charter, Chapter I: Article 1: Section 1

    the other sections reference international friendship and equal rights, but section 1 is the meat f why it exists, the UN was created after two World Wars, it’s primary goal is to prevent a third and has so far been overwhelmingly successful.

    ThatWeirdGuy1001 , (edited )
    @ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world avatar

    I don’t think peace through submission was the original goal here though is the point

    azertyfun ,

    Kinda was. That’s why the UK and France have a permanent seat on the UNSC but Germany and Japan categorically do not.

    ThatWeirdGuy1001 ,
    @ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah peace through making the bad guys submit. Not rolling over and just letting them take whatever they want because “well if we actually did anything it would cause a scene”

    Like a cop seeing someone break a law and going “wow that sure sounds like a lot of paperwork” and them walking away

    S_204 ,

    We’ve avoided world wars by allowing conflicts to fester around the globe. I’d be curious whether the death toll would be higher had there been a world war, but I guess there’s still plenty of people left to die in forgotten places like Sudan so the calculation will have to wait.

    Jimmyeatsausage ,

    Pretty sure the fallout from WW3 is gonna hurt everyone everywhere…war in Sufan is still a pretty long way off from a death toll in the billions.

    SpaceCowboy ,
    @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca avatar

    I’d rather the assholes of the world think they’re accomplishing something by writing bullshit resolutions rather than dropping bombs.

    We just have to not take the UN seriously while still having the authoritarian assholes think the UN is serious business.

    The Security Council is the only thing that ever really mattered anyway. Having the nuclear powers have to sit in a room together is important. The General Assembly has always been a clown show.

    We have a bunch of alliances between democracies (NATO and other alliances) and the security council because we have to negotiate with the authoritarians with nukes. The minor despots can have the UN General Assembly to clown around in. Better to have petty narcissistic dictators throw their tantrums in the UN GA rather than expressing their feelings with their military.

    cheesymoonshadow ,
    @cheesymoonshadow@lemmings.world avatar

    Any Expanse fans? We need James Holden to stick his dick in it.

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    Man, the world’s gonna be a MUCH better place when the House of Saud finally goes the way of the dinosaur.

    NounsAndWords ,

    Unless it’s just replaced with something objectively worse…which wouldn’t be the first time in history something like that happened.

    DragonTypeWyvern , (edited )

    They already massacred Yemen as a monarchy while their crown prince is known for dismembering journalists, they’re about as bad as it gets.

    NounsAndWords ,

    Maybe I’m just cynical, but I can imagine many, many ways it could get worse and only a few of them involve nuclear or bio weapons.

    FordBeeblebrox ,

    This oil fields aren’t moving. If the Saus family is ousted, we just talk to the new family

    What I would to see is a Saud realizing he’s on the outs, crying on the tarmac. But that’s just mean

    leftzero ,

    This oil fields aren’t moving.

    Yes they are. We’ve been moving them out of the ground and into the atmosphere for almost ninety years.

    shundi82 , (edited )

    I don’t want to nitpick, because everyone gets what you’re trying to say.

    But dinosaurs still exist today: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_birds

    grrgyle ,

    I would also be fine with them evolving into something more relevant to the times

    Nachorella ,

    it may be hard to believe but womens rights have been progressing steadily. link

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s a long long way to go, but I’m glad they at least seem to be heading in a positive direction.

    JadenSmith ,

    They already did, but some other Saudis realised those dinosaur bones had oil and they went full circle again.

    MissJinx ,
    @MissJinx@lemmy.world avatar

    I believe one day in the future, maybe by aliens hands or maybe by some incredible new discovery, religion will cease to exist and the world will be finally peacefull with people working for the betterment of their lifes not praying for a ghost

    edit: a religion plague that kills only dumb people also works lol

    AnAngryAlpaca ,

    This will not happen, as long as other people find a way to use “religion” for power, influence or financial gain. Some people already thought that the mass adaption of the internet would be the end of religion, scams and other fraud preying on the gullible minds, because people could just read up what the catch is and not fall for it, right?

    Unfortunately the scams just adapted, made their own flashy homepages that mostly outranked critical information and people just choose to belive what they want to belive.

    MissJinx ,
    @MissJinx@lemmy.world avatar

    We didn’t know how dumb people really was.

    Gigan ,
    @Gigan@lemmy.world avatar

    The UN is a joke

    KneeTitts ,
    @KneeTitts@lemmy.world avatar

    why am I not laughing???

    nutbutter ,

    It’s a bad joke.

    Plopp ,

    UN trolling hard these days. Damn

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •