this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
889 points (97.6% liked)

World News

38969 readers
2378 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Diplomats walk out on Israeli prime minister’s speech at UN to protest against devastating war on Gaza and latest attacks on Lebanon

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The veto power in the UN makes it not functional. When China, Russia, France, The United Kingdom, or the United States veto something it's done, without debate or "peaceful resolution."

Veto power in the UN.

US using it's veto power 34 times against ending the war in Gaza.

Russia using it's veto power against using war in Ukraine.

When the big kids in the playground can do everything they want there is no space for debate or peaceful resolution, everyone else just shows up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

well yeah, you don't want everyone to have veto power, because then nothing happens ever. The idea behind a few people having veto powers to is to establish some sort of protection for the big players, since they're likely to be the most contested, though depending on how you set up the legislation and member functionality of it this may not be relevant at all.

TBF i have little to no knowledge of how the UN works, just that it is a thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

People are indoctrinated to believe that because votes are involved the process is somehow magically subject to meaningful reform and input from the masses.

A process where people were meaningfully enfranchised wouldn't need to rely on something so abstract as votes. Voting is a process by which people are convinced to trade in their actual power in exchange for a piece of paper.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thanks for this, that's a fantastic way to phrase it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Thanks, I don't think it's worded quite right though, because "in exchange for" implies the vote itself does something. The reality is that people are convinced to give away their power because they believe in the piece of paper.

The oiece of paper itself is almost worthless.

I only say that because I'm sure someone will want to split hairs over it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A process where people were meaningfully enfranchised wouldn’t need to rely on something so abstract as votes.

how is this one supposed to work? Just curious, since voting seems to be the only real method of direct representation, unless you're suggesting a global at will military force, which, would be a thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Federated communities that make decisions on consensus, with the fundamental rule that "those affected get to decide".

There's a lot more to it and there's a lot to unpack in just the above paragraph, but if the only alternative you can imagine is a global military dictatorship then it's hard to know where to even start explaining it to be quite honest.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

global military dictatorship

it's not necessarily a global military dictatorship. Although that would be one aspect of it.

Currently i would argue that global geopolitics IS a federated system of operations, that's why wars and conflicts happen.

piracy is kill on lemmy.world, dbzer0 hasn't killed it. There are many examples here.