UN considering making "Cultural Appropriation" illegal

[Khalisako]

Well, there goes the rap music industry.

To my understanding, this law focuses on native cultural appropriation. Not blacks. Blacks aren't native. Nor are whites.

[Imperializt Russia]

Well, there goes the rap music industry.

To my understanding, this law focuses on native cultural appropriation. Not blacks. Blacks aren't native. Nor are whites.

Yes and no, it's talking about traditional culture of an ethnicity that has been around for hundreds or thousands of years.

"Rap culture" is not a part of this, for obvious reasons.

[Grenartia]

Doesn't exist.



Controlled by the people, not the state.



"Money" also doesn't exist.



Also wrong.




The Soviet Union never claimed to be Communist.

I point you to the party that created the Soviet Union, which was *GAAAAAAASP* Communist!

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Commun ... viet-Union

And it was founded by a Communist!

http://www.history.com/topics/vladimir-lenin

Of course, one can be open to the idea that the country strayed from pure communism as it got more powerful, but it cannot be denied that the USSR at least had Communist roots-unless you simply flat deny the existence of the Russian Communist Party.

The Soviet Union couldn't even achieve socialism, much less communism. At best, the closest it came was an authoritarian state that made a big show of trying to achieve socialism (and then communism), but which made no actual progress towards it.

EDIT: got beaten to the punch.

[Gauthier]

To my understanding, this law focuses on native cultural appropriation. Not blacks. Blacks aren't native. Nor are whites.

Yes and no, it's talking about traditional culture of an ethnicity that has been around for hundreds or thousands of years.

"Rap culture" is not a part of this, for obvious reasons.

You mean it's not a legitimate reason to sneer and whack off to supposed UN incompetence and irrelevance!?

[Luminesa]

Yes and no, it's talking about traditional culture of an ethnicity that has been around for hundreds or thousands of years.

"Rap culture" is not a part of this, for obvious reasons.

You mean it's not a legitimate reason to sneer and whack off to supposed UN incompetence and irrelevance!?

"Here at the UN we like to make sure that every culture is properly considered in its own place, in its own context, in its own culture. Therefore, things that are not part of their own culture are parts of another culture, and therefore we cannot say that they share a culture. We seek to connect the world by putting everything back into its general culture, therefore respecting cultures and making sure that other people respect those cultures. However, because we have no set definition as to what defines culture, we say that "culture" is whatever people consider to be a part of themselves. What makes them whole on an individual level. Therefore, if someone decides to listen to the mixtape you and your 'homies' brewed in your mother's basement, that is appropriating the culture of that individual, and we shall send you a strongly-worded letter indicating that you have done wrongly, and that you should not sell anymore mixtapes. We hope that this will help you to be a better individual, a more cultured and sophisticated individual.

With respect for your individual culture,
The United Nations."

[Proctopeo]

Yes and no, it's talking about traditional culture of an ethnicity that has been around for hundreds or thousands of years.

"Rap culture" is not a part of this, for obvious reasons.

You mean it's not a legitimate reason to sneer and whack off to supposed UN incompetence and irrelevance!?

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

[Imperializt Russia]

You mean it's not a legitimate reason to sneer and whack off to supposed UN incompetence and irrelevance!?

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

Maybe A, Israel actually does 20 condemnation-worthy things a year and B, maybe it gets condemned so many times because we expect better of a "western" nation?

Just a thought.

[Proctopeo]

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

Maybe A, Israel actually does 20 condemnation-worthy things a year and B, maybe it gets condemned so many times because we expect better of a "western" nation?

Just a thought.

Ignoring the subjectivity of this, you failed to address Saudi Arabia getting influence on human rights issues.

[Luminesa]

You mean it's not a legitimate reason to sneer and whack off to supposed UN incompetence and irrelevance!?

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

Ah, but that's all just a fantasy to "whack off" to, I suppose. Be careful not to take Gauth too seriously, Proct, otherwise you're just a Trump-supporting-Russia-loving-fascist. :^))))

[Proctopeo]

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

Ah, but that's all just a fantasy to "whack off" to, I suppose. Be careful not to take Gauth too seriously, Proct, otherwise you're just a Trump-supporting-Russia-loving-fascist. :^))))

I've learned from other forums that it's best to play along with this type of poster, because it's more fun that way.

[Imperializt Russia]

Maybe A, Israel actually does 20 condemnation-worthy things a year and B, maybe it gets condemned so many times because we expect better of a "western" nation?

Just a thought.

Ignoring the subjectivity of this, you failed to address Saudi Arabia getting influence on human rights issues.

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

[Proctopeo]

Ignoring the subjectivity of this, you failed to address Saudi Arabia getting influence on human rights issues.

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

Have you read all the UN condemnations against Israel, by chance?

[Imperializt Russia]

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

Have you read all the UN condemnations against Israel, by chance?

I imagine many of them are condemnations of the same thing, so it's not really "20 a year", as action against Israel is consistently blocked by the US veto. The occupation and blockade of Gaza, questionable military tactics, casual approach to the sanctity of non-Israeli human life, settlement construction, there's no shortage of issues to raise on Israeli conduct.

[Proctopeo]

Have you read all the UN condemnations against Israel, by chance?

I imagine many of them are condemnations of the same thing, so it's not really "20 a year", as action against Israel is consistently blocked by the US veto. The occupation and blockade of Gaza, questionable military tactics, casual approach to the sanctity of non-Israeli human life, settlement construction, there's no shortage of issues to raise on Israeli conduct.

Imagination can be deceptive, you know...
I also hope you won't pretend Palestine is innocent; you haven't yet, but I hope you don't go there.

also the land the Palestinian Arabs are on is rightfully Israeli clay

[Athrax]

Have you read all the UN condemnations against Israel, by chance?

I imagine many of them are condemnations of the same thing, so it's not really "20 a year", as action against Israel is consistently blocked by the US veto. The occupation and blockade of Gaza, questionable military tactics, casual approach to the sanctity of non-Israeli human life, settlement construction, there's no shortage of issues to raise on Israeli conduct.

No, but there is a single-minded focus on Israeli action instead of, say, Saudi Arabia's executing witches. It kind of undermines them as an organization when their protestations are so narrowly applied

[The Horseland]

There are valid reasons for the former, like Saudi Arabia getting control of the HRC and being elected to be part of the Women's Rights Commission. Or the condemnation of Israel twenty times a year, which could also be filed under "irrelevance", depending on your outlook.

tl;dr: There exist legitimate reasons to consider the UN incompetent, but this isn't one of them; by itself, at least.

Maybe A, Israel actually does 20 condemnation-worthy things a year and B, maybe it gets condemned so many times because we expect better of a "western" nation?

Just a thought.

Many countries do 20 condemnation-worthy things per year. Can we please condemn an equal percentage of all countries' condemnable actions?
Also, here are my views on the issue:
Who in their right minds could support a policy basically to kill off cultural expression. A culture isn't some individual entity you can separate from the rest of the cultures. What next, are they going to ban learning foreign languages? Oh, wait, that's appropriating culture. So yes, that would be a side effect. The UN needs to figure out what they can do, stop wasting money, and pass SENSICAL resolutions. Oh yeah, and completely reform the security council.

[Imperializt Russia]

Maybe A, Israel actually does 20 condemnation-worthy things a year and B, maybe it gets condemned so many times because we expect better of a "western" nation?

Just a thought.

Many countries do 20 condemnation-worthy things per year. Can we please condemn an equal percentage of all countries' condemnable actions?
Also, here are my views on the issue:
Who in their right minds could support a policy basically to kill off cultural expression. A culture isn't some individual entity you can separate from the rest of the cultures. What next, are they going to ban learning foreign languages? Oh, wait, that's appropriating culture. So yes, that would be a side effect. The UN needs to figure out what they can do, stop wasting money, and pass SENSICAL resolutions. Oh yeah, and completely reform the security council.

That's not what the fucking proposal is.

All that's being done, is that traditional aspects of protected cultures will now be considered to be intellectual property, and thus covered under international IP law.

That's. Fucking. It.

[MERIZoC]

do you mean to imply that nsg has engaged in an ill-informed circle jerk?

[Salandriagado]

Ignoring the subjectivity of this, you failed to address Saudi Arabia getting influence on human rights issues.

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

To be specific: the Human Rights Council appointments are regional, and rotated among nations in that region. Saudi Arabia got the middle east one because... fuck, there aren't a whole lot of good options there to rotate between.

[Rio Cana]

The UN is making its existence more and more questionable to me. Either it's reformed or it should get replaced with another organisation. But at this point it has been focusing on very unimportant issues.

A local radio talk host who is left-leaning criticized the UN. She was really angry. She said that they are good for nothing. That they cannot handle anything right. That they only do the bidding of certain nations. She was upset because UN observers had gone to Colombia to the civilian populated rural areas the FARC were established. That they came with air conditioned housing while the population sweated it out without much of anything. The FARC were giving up there weapons but they did not appropiate them to destroy them or stop other so called guerilla and or criminal groups from entering the areas FARC were vacating. The UN even reported that they had never experienced this. That when the guerilla group moved out that another group quickly moved in.

[Luminesa]

do you mean to imply that nsg has engaged in an ill-informed circle jerk?

The UN asks that you clarify on this well-informed statement, for the good of civilization. :^3

[Luminesa]

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

To be specific: the Human Rights Council appointments are regional, and rotated among nations in that region. Saudi Arabia got the middle east one because... fuck, there aren't a whole lot of good options there to rotate between.

> Jordan raises its hand in the background.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Because I haven't bothered to read into why or how they did reach that position so I obviously can't comment on it.

I agree that the Kingdom was certainly no human rights ambassador before the appointment, still isn't, and likely won't be when it leaves the post.

To be specific: the Human Rights Council appointments are regional, and rotated among nations in that region. Saudi Arabia got the middle east one because... fuck, there aren't a whole lot of good options there to rotate between.

The Middle East shouldn't have one.

[Proctopeo]

To be specific: the Human Rights Council appointments are regional, and rotated among nations in that region. Saudi Arabia got the middle east one because... fuck, there aren't a whole lot of good options there to rotate between.

> Jordan raises its hand in the background.

They should expand it to include northern Africa so Tunisia can have fun, too. Or just scrap it and subject them to the American one so they have a positive influence with lots of boats (with guns on them).

[Luminesa]

> Jordan raises its hand in the background.

They should expand it to include northern Africa so Tunisia can have fun, too. Or just scrap it and subject them to the American one so they have a positive influence with lots of boats (with guns on them).

ANYONE BUT SAUDI. ANYONE.