Globally Rational

You are browsing the archives of human rights.

This is the first post by Kola, our newest writer. Please join me in welcoming him to Globally Rational; hopefully, we will be seeing more great content in the future.

Hello class.

When it comes to the issue of international minimums on human rights, I usually take positions that mobs of good people would stone me for. I don’t believe in interfering with the natural economic/political/social progression of things, even if we may consider ourselves more ‘humanely evolved’ than our neighbors. It’s brutal, but sometimes we have to just sit on our hands and let the world mend itself.

However.

While I do not like the idea of policing every state on worldwide policies, I do believe there are barest minimums. Among these few is fair treatment of both genders. Social evolution will show that in our transcendence from hunters and gatherers, where a man’s muscle structure might lead him to believe he holds a more significant role in the tribe, women have suffered through thousands of years of half-rights and only recently ended up with what they have been entitled to all along: the same as everyone else. The final step of this evolution, the complete removal of gender labeling in constitutions and courts is one of the few social goals that can be regarded as completely correct. Truly, as the education of a country advances, so to will suppressed women be recognized by their men for what they are: equal.

The major problem in this I see developing is that in countries with economic and educational disparities, women still have quite the fight ahead of them. And the shield being put up by these states is CULTURE. (Cute, Utterly Loony Tricks Undermining Real Evolution)

Culture is an important and scary element of every state. It is the heart of Jihad vs McWorld, and the true conflict for most of the people being manipulated into suicidal frenzies. The western markets would crush every culture that let them in, just to see a 5% increase in profits, and it is a real danger to the developing world. But it has made the word itself altogether too powerful, too easily misrepresented for the sake of corrupt governments and ignorant populations. It is swung around by the people of under-evolved societies as a catch-all answer for why they execute gays, imprison rape victims, and persecute people who change religions.

“This is not America,” “This is not our culture,” are not rational excuses for flat ignorance.

Popularity: 57% [?]If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Popularity: 57% [?]

If you were an employer looking at resumès (let’s say that the job candidates are actually cities), would you hire Beijing? Take a look at their resumè:

• They invaded Tibet years ago and still refuse to let them have their independence; meanwhile, they continue to oppress the locals.
• They refuse to accept the independent status of Taiwan.
• They execute even more people (per capita) than states like Iran, which we blame for excessive executions. China singlehandedly accounts for 90% of the world’s executions.
• The Great Firewall of China censors the entire country from visiting a huge multitude of websites, including Google, Wikipedia, MySpace, and even NBA.com.
• Religious freedom is a joke there; Roman Catholicism, for instance, is banned.
• They rank #162 (out of 169) in the worldwide Press Freedom Index, about the same as countries like Somalia (159), Iran (166), and Cuba (165). Would we give the Olympics to Somalia, Iran, or Cuba?

Consider Beijing’s competition for the job (the other finalists)… would you hire Beijing over any of these four?

• Toronto, which is one of the most well-designed/developed cities in the world.
• Paris, which pretty much speaks for itself.
• Istanbul, which has made huge strides in the last 20 years in terms of both economic and social development (unlike Beijing, which maintains its abysmal record).
• Osaka, which has a rich history and, thanks to recent Japanese advancement, a rich present/future.

Why did we still give the Olympics to China? Well, here’s a hint: George W. Bush is still planning on attending the opening ceremonies, despite pressure from Hillary Clinton and many others. But Bush does have a record of being very interested in sports (and the prospect of developing relationships with major trading partners) but not in free speech and human rights.

When Beijing was offered the spot, VP Li Lanqing said that “The winning of the 2008 Olympic bid is an example of the the international recognition of China’s social stability, economic progress and the healthy life of the Chinese people.” Yes, it’s an example of “international recognition” of China’s progress… but just because we recognize its truth doesn’t mean that it’s true.

Popularity: 23% [?]If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Popularity: 23% [?]