SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
US leaving UN Human Rights Council -- 'a cesspool of political bias'
US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley announced the United States is withdrawing from the UN Human Rights Council Tuesday, accusing the body of bias against US ally Israel and a failure to hold human rights abusers accountable. The move, which the Trump administration has threatened for months, came down one day after the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights slammed the separation of children from their parents at the US-Mexico border as "unconscionable."
Speaking from the State Department, where she was joined by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Haley defended the move to withdraw from the council, saying US calls for reform were not heeded. "Human rights abusers continue to serve on, and be elected to, the council," said Haley, listing US grievances with the body. "The world's most inhumane regimes continue to escape its scrutiny, and the council continues politicizing scapegoating of countries with positive human rights records in an attempt to distract from the abusers in its ranks."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 20 2018, @11:41PM (5 children)
If you truly think that, then you live in a thought bubble. Opposition to far left radical progressivist moral authoritarians comes from every side except radical progressivist havens. SJW nutjobs exist, and I have ample evidence for it, but people of your persuasion always seem to have the same "it's a fringe case" attitude and dismiss evidence regardless of how much of it there is, whilst never seeming to afford the same courtesy to people who disagree with you.
One alt righter goes postal? See, they are all unhinged lunatics!
One Marxist professor tweets about wanting white genocide? Fringe case, fringe case, shut up you neo-nazi racist sexist homophobe bigot!
This is not a healthy attitude. Tribalism and bias do not produce ideas which are strongly consilient with reality. Bias exists to help us ensure we don't get eaten by predators, but it's woefully maladaptive when it comes to examining large complex systems such as human societies.
Then again, that might just my personal bias as someone who tries their darnest to combat their personal biases at every step.
It has bad connotations because of SJWs. It's very much like national socialism or communism in that sense, it's not the term in purely descriptive capacity by itself, but the people who it describes that are bad. You can commit injustice in the name of benign ideas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2018, @11:47PM (3 children)
No, it doesn't. Now go away, you unauthorized racist misogynist homophiliac!
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Thursday June 21 2018, @02:03AM (2 children)
Hey, that's an insult to homophiliacs.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Thursday June 21 2018, @04:31AM (1 child)
Not to mentions the Homophonophiliacs, of whom we have far too many here on SolylentNews. Let me say, exampla gratia, "loose" or let me refer to the current "precedent". And a bit of pedantry in the defense of language, against the forces of idiotic uneducated and only marginally functionally literate white stupidity. Gawd, anyone who calls themselves "white" is by definition stupid. Stupid white people. Stupid for thinking they are white, when they are not. And more for thinking they are. There is no such thing as "white", it is only a back-formation by slavers to mean "not-slaves". So I think it is time to enslave the whites, give them iPhones, and turn them over to their corporate masters. Stupid white people.
(Score: 3, Touché) by melikamp on Thursday June 21 2018, @02:27PM
That's like saying, it's time to sip some tea, to drink tea, and get on with the tea drinking.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by cubancigar11 on Thursday June 21 2018, @04:24AM
I will further go ahead and tell you why it I consider it a bad term in itself. There is no such thing as "social" justice. There is only individual justice. There is a body to deliver justice, created over thousands of years that is called Judiciary. It deals justice to the individual(s), or at least that is how it is supposed to work. When it doesn't, that is corruption.
Do poor people have bigger trouble than richer people in climbing the social ladder? Of course! A rich man can invest 0.1% of his wealth and become richer but a poor man cannot invest 0.1% of his wealth otherwise what will he eat? This is a reality. And as much as some people might want to claim, it is not fair. But fair is not judicious. An unfair system, an existing bias, needs to pointed out and a solution devised so that it doesn't occur again. Justice is done ONCE, and then it is done. They are fundamentally different.
This is why "social justice" is by default on the far left. It is about extracting revenge, and once it has done that, its progenitors need to find some other social injustice to continue their successful enterprise.
PS: And then add "warrior" into it, which is a politically correct word for mindless-single-purpose-drone.