the2real4mafol said:
How is it in China with human rights then? do tell! |
I don't think you even know what human rights are if that's your response to my statement.
the2real4mafol said:
How is it in China with human rights then? do tell! |
I don't think you even know what human rights are if that's your response to my statement.
MDMAlliance said:
I don't think you even know what human rights are if that's your response to my statement. |
Human rights is just freedom of speech, association, the right to buy anything. the right to vote, the right to protest and stuff like that. (i don't think minimum wage is a human right is it?)
Government acts like SOPA and indefinite detention without trial, use of torture to get information out of people, police brutality in peaceful protests are many ways that go against.
China's use of force against it's own people just to move them from their homes and build the Olympic stadium in Beijing is a way that China abused human rights, while the blocking of sites like facebook and twitter is just another.
Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)
'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin
Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030
the2real4mafol said:
Human rights is just freedom of speech, association, the right to buy anything. the right to vote, the right to protest and stuff like that. (i don't think minimum wage is a human right is it?) Government acts like SOPA and indefinite detention without trial, use of torture to get information out of people, police brutality in peaceful protests are many ways that go against. China's use of force against it's own people just to move them from their homes and build the Olympic stadium in Beijing is a way that China abused human rights, while the blocking of sites like facebook and twitter is just another. |
That's not exactly what human rights are. Human rights are those rights that are believed every human should have. One such right is the right to life. People in China have that right. To say you have no human rights in China is incorrect, and many people who have been there will agree with me. Human rights are an issue in China, yes. Just like they're an issue in Russia, and the USA.
edit: It may be more of a prevalent issue in China, yes.
MDMAlliance said:
edit: It may be more of a prevalent issue in China, yes. |
I completely forgot about the right to live lol, that is in every country lol. But at least we come to an agreement on this now.
Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)
'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin
Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030
|
the2real4mafol said: I know that section from Lukashenko you shared is aim at Britain (my country), but it is really all America that wanted war in Iraq. It's just my government at the time were so spineless, that they followed the USA there, despite MILLIONS of us not wanting to go to war! We are just a puppet state of the USA now, when it comes to foreign policy it seems! Iraq was a pointless war really that achieved nothing more than the deaths of hundreds of thousands (not quite at the holocaust level yet lol), nothing has changed there as terrorist bombing still happen there, killing saddam hussein probably did worse than good. We in the west need to just stop intervening, none of these countries pose a threat to us at all. The last countries that ever did pose a threat were Germany and Japan back in world war 2, ever war since then was not necessary. But he has a fair point, about the way the west does things and how they are not necessarily right. But back to the topic, how do we define human rights anyway? How America define them, is probably different to that of Russia or China. All i know, is they seem to exist in most countries, but they are just not official acts that were passed in government. Finally, nice soviet poster :) |
Regardless of how you define them, in 99,99% of cases the use of "human rights" is strictly manipualtive. Surely there're multiple international courts, which jurisdiction differ depending on the country and free will of various goverments if they accept or deny such jurisdiction. But most of the time decisions issued by these courts do NOT have binding legal force (e.g. International Court of Justice does not have this even if you fall under its jurisdiction). And if you think of it, really? How do you suppose to enforce his decisions? Start a war? If you have some rights (I mean rights from strictly legal point of view, not ideals, hopes or good intentions) you need a repressive apparatus (=law enforcement or police) to enforce those rights if they happen to be violated. The bottomline, unless conspirologists are right and ZOG occupied entire planet, there's no such thing as human rights. There're rights of a citizen, everything else are ideals, hopes and good intentions that a) differ from person to person, culture to culture etc. b) most of the time used in a strictly manipulative manner for purposes of political nature.
As of now even the authority of current international organizations such as UN and courts it have is questionable. Why? Well, mostly because such organization, created after big confilcts with good intentions to prevent such confilcts in the future, exists manily due to competing political powers and if one fails entire construction become just a tool for gaining political purposes for another political force, what ultimately lead to anothe big war (it happend to Congress of Viena after Napolionic Wars, basically World War Zero, it happened to Legaue of Nations, and surely is happening to UN right now).
//My comment regarding Holocaust was mainly to illustrate manipulative nature of number of people killed there, esepcially how Lukashenko treated it multiplying by x10. There're no comprehensive reserach regarding civilians deaths in Iraq during occupation, just quote from human rights activists claiming "100 thousand deaths". Given how accurate these people are, what sources do they ussually have (=no sources), their bias and people and organizations they are affilated to I usually do not consider them a good source to go by. Though it pointless to deny systematic atrocities and wrongdoings in Iraq and how Nazis treated Jews it should be noted that there're no official nor scientific acquired numbers, and what's is usually quoted is for manipulative purposes. That's basically why I compared these events. The same applies to a lot of other publicly accepted "numbers and facts" of similar nature.
Russia/USA and many other countries suck in human rights and live on double standards....honestly debating about witch one is the best is basically being an idiot and wasting precious time.