• orgrinrt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    This seems a bit too convenient a spread to be as simple as that. The resolution very likely was phrased in a loaded way or had some bit that was dubious. Seeing as the second red one is Ukraine and all of the west is yellow, while Russia, Iran, China, India etc are green, there very likely is context that isn’t being given to us, either intentionally or by accident.

    Edit: With Russia, China, India, especially, I mean their adventures with oppression of minorities and unequality in general between cultural groups or heritages. I’m not saying the West is without fault or anything, but clearly the ones voting green are neither. They probably wouldn’t vote against their own alignments here unless it’s just word salad without meaning or responsibilities. Which is something I’m confident would lead a lot of Europe at least not accept it because it’s just a watered down version of something actually desirable.

    • RexWrexWrecks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Russia, India, and China don’t have a “nazi” or “neo-nazi” problem. It looks like the resolution was specifically against that, so stop "whatabout"ing this shit and acknowledge the western countries have fucked up on this vote.

      • FMT99@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Now do one about dictatorship and judicial independence. See how the map looks. These are just bullshit virtue signaling resolutions that have no impact on anything.

    • wpb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The resolution very likely was phrased in a loaded way or had some bit that was dubious

      These resolutions are publicly available on the UN website, are typically quite short, and actually quite easy to read in general. This one in particular is only 11 pages long, which includes skippable boilerplate. So this assertion is relatively easy to back up and doesn’t need to rely on assumptions, and it can actually be quite fun to read one of these resolutions; you get to feel like a proper journalist or scholar or something. So I would suggest you give it a read and seek out the bit that you find most objectionable.

      Personally, based on not much more than gut feelings and historical precedent on similar distributions in votes, am a bit more uncertain than you about the reason behind this distribution. If we take the Palestine cease fire vote in the UN of December 2023, for example, you have a very similar distribution. And I know for a fact that that was an earnest, unobjectionable resolution, that was only voted down by the US because it was in their material interest to do so, and voted down by US client states (or abstention) because they’re client states. But on the other hand, we also have the obvious context of Russia using this exact language as an excuse for their illegal invasion of Ukraine, so it’s entirely conceivable that there’s a section in there that says sth like “and thus, Russia shall invade Ukraine, and we’re all cool with that”. As such, I’m on the fence, and I’ll read the resolution later. But do give it a go yourself! It’s a very satisfying exercise

    • ghen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 hours ago

      OP made Crimea green. There’s definitely an agenda here And they gave away their country of origin with that little switch.

      • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Was gonna say this, although not the part about their “country of origin” (Russian does not automatically mean gullible).

  • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Equal shame for all the countries that abstained. There is not a damn chance any country is genuinely unsure how they want to vote so an abstain vote in this case is just “I want to vote against but am too embarrassed to.”

    Which happens to be the entire West, not a single country commonly considered “Western” voted in favour. Surprise surprise

    • bob_lemon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s not a surprise, really. The proposal was sponsored by the Russian Federation and includes several talking point that they have since actively used to justify their fucking invasion of Ukraine (I.e. Nazis working to disrupt democracies cross-border).

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      We had a shitstorm in Poland over this, it’s extremely shameful that a country that suffered so much from nazism did voted like that, but government just responded “EU decided this”

    • Manticore@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Tell me about it. NZ has the most right-wing neo-liberal pro-American-politicking cabinet we’ve had in a long long time. (The PM is also so incompetent he’s polling the lowest approval we’ve had for a long time, possibly ever). They got in power off the backs of post-Covid economic hardship, despite having no proposed solutions other than funding landlords and cutting environmental policy.

      If it had been put to the citizens, I believe we would’ve been for it. But the current cabinet doesn’t want to piss off American partners no doubt, hoping abstaining let’s them sit on the fence a little longer while pretending we’re ultimately n9t the bad guy. That will be the reason for most of those abstaining.

      I’m disgusted.

  • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    24 hours ago

    I’m guessing, based purely on the countries highlighted, that this is a Russian sponsored resolution.

    There are plenty of more genuine resolutions you could’ve picked, but they wouldn’t have fit your narrative as well. Please don’t launder Russia’s lies just to embellish your point.

    • bob_lemon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      You would be correct: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1654458?ln=en&v=pdf

      At the 44th meeting, on 6 November, the representative of the Russian
      Federation, on behalf of Algeria, Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia
      (Plurinational State of), Burundi, China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
      Eritrea, Kazakhstan, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mali, Myanmar,
      Nicaragua, the Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, the Sudan, the Syrian
      Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam
      and Zimbabwe, introduced a draft resolution […]

      At the [48th] meeting, the representative of the Russian Federation made a statement.

      Also at the same meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Kyrgyzstan (on behalf of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, composed of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan), Belarus, the Russian Federation and South Africa.

    • Manticore@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      I think its more likely that the abstaining countries rely on America for trade or military in some way and don’t want to aggravate them politically but clearly aren’t willing to vote alongside them.

      • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Or, as the other (better informed) guy said. This resolution equates tearing down soviet monuments to be Nazism.

        That by extension means it equates Ukraine (the country partially occupied and fraudulently annexed by Russia) with Nazism. Countries which respect Ukraine’s sovereignty (and have enough skepticism of Russia to read more than the title) wouldn’t want to vote against (because of the title) but also wouldn’t want to vote in favor.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Tearing down monuments to WW2 veterans who fought against the Nazis certainly suggests a certain affinity with the Nazis.

          • Asetru@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 hours ago

            It doesn’t. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. Monuments that glorify Soviets might be torn down for a plethora of reasons that don’t have anything to do with nazism and have a lot to do with Soviet atrocities.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 hours ago

              I’m comfortable to say people tearing down memorials to the soldiers who faught against the Nazis to replace them with memorials to the people who fought for the Nazis makes you a Nazi.

              Feddit continuing not to beat the charges.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      23 hours ago

      “If Russia says Nazis are bad, than Nazis must be good!”

      Liberal politics is just reaction.

      • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I said the resolution is bad, not the principle. You’re again misrepresenting something to further your own narrative.

        • Enkrod@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          You are correct, see my other comment.

          If you read the resolution and the answers of national governments why they abstained, the answer is found in points 4 and 14 of the resolution, where everyone who fought against the anti-Hitler coalition is condemned and equivocated with nazi-sympathisers. This does include people who opportunistically fought againt the Red Army in the baltic states and Ukraine for national liberation from the USSR, but not necessarily on the german side.

          This resolution is a veiled attemp to paint even the people who fought against Russia for freedom from the USSR but not for Germany as part of the Nazi movements in Soviet states that did fight for Germany.

          • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 hours ago

            “The resolution is bad because it condemns people who fought alongside the Nazis to genocide the USSR.”

            Not beating the Nazi allegations.

              • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                This is just the European equivelant of defending the confederates, except the confederates weren’t allied with the literal Nazis.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          22 hours ago

          So the content is the resolution is good, but its nonetheless contacted some kind of metaphysical badness unrelated to it’s content due to it being proposed by a bad guy and not a good guy.

          Maybe we can get it proposed by Israel instead, then it would be a good guy presenting it because they only invade non-white countries

          • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Russia wrote it for a reason. Think for a few seconds on why that might be.

            And please stop lumping me in with the imperialist crowd. I’m anti-imperialism, but unlike some of y’all I (rhetorically) oppose all imperialism not just western imperialism.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              22 hours ago

              So the content is the resolution is good, but its nonetheless contacted some kind of metaphysical badness unrelated to it’s content due to it being proposed by a bad guy and not a good guy.

              I’m anti-imperialism, but unlike some of y’all I (rhetorically) oppose all imperialism not just western imperialism.

              “Unlike you, I believe that all lives matter, not just black ones”

              • Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                22 hours ago

                I never said the content of the resolution is good. I haven’t read it. I’m just assuming it isn’t since Russia sponsored it. And even if it is actually good, the hypocrisy of the Russians sponsoring a condemnation of Nazism is notable.

                Just because a country is anti-American doesn’t mean it’s anti-evil. I shouldn’t need to explain this. I don’t know why I even tried. This isn’t worth it. You’re not acting in good faith. Drawing a false equivalency between “all lives matter” and “all colonialism is bad”. Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine is bad. Israel’s genocide of Palestinians is bad. America is bad. All three things can be true at once, the world isn’t black and white. Seriously what level of Reddit-brain must you have to try to say stuff like this.

                I should really just mute this whole conversation. I’m gonna look for the button.

                • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  14 hours ago

                  I’m just assuming it isn’t since Russia sponsored it.

                  Ok, I’m just going to not read your comments and assume they’re bad because your a westerner.

                  the hypocrisy of the Russians sponsoring a condemnation of Nazism is notable.

                  What a disgusting thing to say.

                  You’re not acting in good faith.

                  Can I ask a serious question? Who is it that told you idiots that any disagreement is “bad faith”? Because you all deploy this exact phrase, word for word, any time anyone disagrees with you. It’s your favourite thought terminating cliche.

                  Drawing a false equivalency between “all lives matter” and “all colonialism is bad”.

                  It’s a completely apt equivalence, you just don’t want it to be.

                  Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine is bad. Israel’s genocide of Palestinians is bad. America is bad. All three things can be true at once, the world isn’t black and white. Seriously what level of Reddit-brain must you have to try to say stuff like this.

                  What the fuck is this complete non-sequitor? Not to mention it runs counter to your position up to know (“if Russia says Nazis bad, then Nazis good”)

                  the world isn’t black and white.

                  Your whole argument is that Russia is bad, so anything they do is bad! That’s the most black and white argument imaginable!

                  I should really just mute this whole conversation. I’m gonna look for the button.

                  Google Satre’s quote about anti-Semites

      • Merva@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It is funny because tankie thought is literal positive reaction to anything Russia and China does. Your comment shows it is also pure projection.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Not at all, Marxists are quite critical of Russia, for example, for being deeply socially reactionary, or China for engaging with trade with Israel, rather than sanctioning it. Marxists don’t accept prevailing western narratives surrounding enemies of the US Empire, which anti-Marxists try to simplify into simple reaction against the US Empire, rather than actually engage with the reasoning for supporting, say, China overall fronted by Marxists.

          • Merva@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Not at all, Marxists are quite critical of Russia

            That remains to be seen. Hasn’t happened yet. But perhaps some day?

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              This is deliberate ignorance. Marxists see the modern Russian Federation as a right-wing, Nationalist Capitalist country that is socially reactionary. Marxists tend to support Russia’s movements against the US Empire, which is seen as a much greater evil, and appreciate ties to countries like China that may have a positive influence on Russia reverting to Socialism, but there is much to be critical of in Russia. When you have to make up your opponent’s position, you’re deliberately lying to others, and frequently yourself as well.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      21 hours ago

      We can’t condemn the Nazis because if we condemn the Nazis people will think we’re Nazis. When people see that we won’t condemn the Nazis, that’s how they’ll know we aren’t Nazis.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      I’m guessing, based purely on the countries highlighted, that this is a Russian sponsored resolution.

      Pretty funny how you saw that all of Latin America, Africa, and Asia voted against genocide, and your first reaction is to call them russian bots.

  • hitwright@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    24 hours ago
    1. Expresses deep concern about increased frequency of attempts and activities intended to desecrate or demolish monuments erected in remembrance of those who fought against Nazism during the Second World War, as well as to unlawfully exhume or remove the remains of such persons, and in this regard urges States to fully comply with their relevant obligations, inter alia, under article 34 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 194

    Clearly designed to enforce Russian rethoric and force the glorification of USSR. Not surprised it’s voted against by Ukraine.

  • RockLobstore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    24 hours ago

    So…. Anyone want to sponsor me for a work visa outside the USA? This ship is sinking and I’m surrounded by racist assholes apparently, and I want out!! Seriously….

    • Nindelofocho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Getting a TEFL/TESOL certification is probably easiest way to go about it. Most countries require a bachelor’s degree to be there on a work visa outside of some circumstances. It still wont be “easy” but itll be easier than trying to sell a skillset thats redundant in a EFL country. Beware of scams and look for accreditation

  • dryfter@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    2 days ago

    As someone from the U.S., given the history we know about the Trail of Tears and trying to erase Native Americans from existence, this isn’t surprising in the least. Sad, yes, but not surprising.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      Just like all the colonial powers voting “I don’t know about this one dawg” because they know their history

      • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I hate to tell you this, but basically every country has the same story, except the very young. They don’t need to learn from our history; they should learn from their own.

        • djsoren19
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Lots of countries committed colonialism, not many countries committed genocide on the native population and stole their land to create and expand their nation. The U.S. and Israel are members of a short list.

            • Grapho@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Ok? Those are the ones we were talking about on this map, youre moving the goalposts from “every” to “yeah the whole international community” which was the point to begin with. These countries get on their high horse when they have an exceptionally genocidal history.

              • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 hours ago

                These countries get on their high horse when they have an exceptionally genocidal history.

                My point was meant to point out how countries with genocidal histories like to point out others as the ones to avoid repeating examples of rather than their own history.

                You’re being straight up racist assuming it’s only white western countries commit genocides.

        • djsoren19
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Lots of countries committed colonialism, not many countries committed genocide on the native population and stole their land to create and expand their nation. The U.S. and Israel are members of a short list.

            • Grapho@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              It’s horrifyingly common among European countries. That’s not “every country” unless you think only westerners are civilized.

              • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 hours ago

                Somali, Chile, Argentina, south Africa, Japan, Korea, China. It’s horrifyingly common no matter what area.

                Also, what part of genocide do you think is about being civilized…?

                • Grapho@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  South African apartheid was a Dutch colonial project. There’s been no genocide in China and the one in Korea was perpetrated by the US.

                  Also, what part of genocide do you think is about being civilized…?

                  Either you have the shittiest reading comprehension or you’re deliberately misrepresenting the argument to twist it into such a comical interpretation. You’re the one that said “every country” and proceeded to link to a NATOpedia page that fails to list a whole bunch of European/US genocides and even then is short, oh, about 96% of countries on earth.

                  Despite numerous instances of racial discrimination in many Latin American countries (most often at the hands of CIA backed organizations like Pinochet’s government or the Brazilian junta) the fact is that none of these countries were founded on a war in favor of maintaining slavery and expanding into indigenous lands. In fact, most were founded by the descendants of indigenous peoples casting off the their colonial masters.

                  To say that every country has been founded via genocide is to imply this is just a normal, unavoidable thing, which is genocide apologia. I wish westerners would stop whitewashing their Nazi ass societies like smearing the rest of us is a good alternative to doing something about the legacy of violence you were raised by.

  • KazuchijouNo@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    2 days ago

    UN General Assembly resolution on “combatting the glorificarion of Nazism, neo-Nazism […] Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and memes made with mematic”

  • punksnotdead@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    For a decade, Russia has submitted a text denouncing the ‘glorification of Nazism’

    In the context of the war in Ukraine – and with Russia justifying its invasion, which began on 24 February, by the desire to “denazify” the country – many states that had previously abstained decided to vote against the resolution

    In its explanation of the vote, the European Union recalled that it had been advocating “for years that the fight against extremism and the condemnation of the despicable ideology of Nazism must not be misused and co-opted for politically motivated purposes that seek to excuse new violations and abuses of human rights.”

    According to the press release published on the UN website, Ukraine called this text hypocritical believing that, contrary to its title, it was a pretext used by Russia to justify its brutal war against its country and the despicable crimes committed against humanity.

    The countries opposing the resolution emphasize at every turn that they do not in any way condone the Third Reich. “We reaffirm our strongest condemnation of all forms of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” Ukraine insisted in 2019, while recalling that 8 million Ukrainians died in the Nazi offensive.

    Before the vote, Australia managed to get an amendment to the draft resolution adopted (63 votes in favor, 23 against and 65 abstentions) inserting a new paragraph in which the General Assembly “notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism, and underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism.”

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/11/09/why-france-and-51-other-countries-voted-against-the-un-resolution-condemning-nazism_6003471_8.html

    Hmm…

    • Hirom@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Thanks for the context.

      Given Russia submitted the text, and given how european countries voted, I suspect this is mostly about Russia looking for justifications for attacking a neighbour and grabbing land.

      Defending Nazism or showing Nazi symbols is illegal in Germany. Holocaust denial is illegal in several european countries. Yet they abstained.

      They’d probably vote for such a text if it came from another country that doesn’t “undermine genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism”

        • Hirom@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          Seached and found that the European Union published an explanation for its vote on a similar draft submitted by 2022 by Russia.

          EU Explanation of Vote – UN General Assembly: Draft Resolution on Combating glorification of Nazism

          This both explain the EU’s rationale for not voting Russia’s draft, and explicitly condemn Niazism

          The European Union is unequivocal in its commitment to the global fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, anti-semitism and related intolerance. Our joint fight against contemporary forms of all extremist and totalitarian ideologies, including neo-Nazism, must be a joint priority for the whole international community.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      France: Imperializing and committing atrocities in Vietnam, Algeria, and much of Africa for decades. Has strong relationship with the US and Israel. Votes with US and goes along with all its wars.

      Algeria: No relationship with Israel. Votes against genocide.

      • Alfredolin@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Wrong on this one. France did show it can say no! (and then France had another limp president who ran back to US with its tail between its legs… Anyway.)