• 0 Posts
  • 56 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: May 11th, 2025

help-circle



  • plyth@feddit.orgtoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlHow did your country vote?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Part of the EU explanation:

    https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-new-york/eu-explanation-vote-–-un-general-assembly-action-a80l48-declaration-trafficking-enslaved-africans_en

    We were prepared to support a text that emphasises the scale of the atrocity of the transatlantic slave trade, the importance of remembrance, and the need to continue combating slavery in its contemporary forms. Instead, the text before us raises a number of legal and factual concerns that we cannot overlook.

    3 arguments

    First, the use of superlatives in the context of crimes against humanity is not legally accurate, such as the use of “gravest” in the title and throughout the text, which implies a hierarchy among atrocity crimes, when no legal hierarchy between crimes against humanity exists. It risks undermining the harm suffered by all victims of these crimes and lacks legal clarity crucial for ensuring accountability. We firmly reject introducing ambiguity in this respect.

    Second, the selective inclusion of lengthy, historical, and contentious references to regional jurisprudence and selective and unbalanced interpretation of historical events - such as in Preambular Paragraphs 21 and 23 - is at odds with accepted UN practice, as well as the stated universal and forward looking objective of this initiative. It risks creating divisions when unity is both necessary and achievable. The role of the General Assembly is not to substitute itself to the academic debate amongst historians.

    Third, we are also concerned by certain legal references and assertions that are either inaccurate or inconsistent with international law. This includes suggestions of a retroactive application of international rules which was non-existent at the time and claims for reparations, which is incompatible with established principles of international law. The principle of non-retroactivity, a fundamental cornerstone of the international legal order, must be strictly upheld. References to claims for reparations also lack a sound legal basis. Any framework for reparatory justice must be grounded in existing multilateral instruments.









  • what he is able to buy for himself

    To compete with Musk in building rockets.

    There are always things that more money can buy.

    walkout to protest ICE

    That’s circular. ICE exists to introduce the new direction

    freaked out every CEO

    CEOs, but not billionaires. Those with billions can be as creepy as they want as Musk and his bought mothers show.

    anyone at that level is capable of thinking about long term

    that’s where they can actually do whatever they want

    What would that be? Unless they all long for the most depraved sex and immense environmental destruction I don’t know what they couldn’t do.

    They need to keep the army intact or America’s power will quickly dissolve. They need to keep people innovative or their army becomes useless with outdated weapons.

    Owning a bunch of desperate humans is not fun.

    There must be a reason to go along, but it must be something ‘good’. People do the most vile things to do something good.









  • plyth@feddit.orgtoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlWhat will a post US empire world look like?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The US must have been thinking about China at least since 1990. Now they fumble the hardest when they need to be the wittiest?

    I don’t buy it. The US are preparing to contain China. At best they have AI and robotics first and retake global productions. But I expect a war. Edit: And unless the USA lose, the empire will remain for a long time.

    It’s difficult to say what the winner will do with a most likely radioactive world. I would expect that there is no need for disinformation, especially if robots do the policing. So those people who survive will have a physical constrained, but intellectually rich life.

    However, without AI and destroyed knowledge from bombing the civilization centers, technology could also fall back to the 1960s or even 1860s, but with internet.