 GENEVA - Rich nations should not cut back their aid to the worlds poor because of the global financial crisis, the United Nations Human Rights Council said on Monday.
| Why not? "We can't afford it right now seems a valid reason..." |
| "We haven't yet had lunch!" |
| Oh. Well. That's different. I guess. |
It also said it was time to set up a fairer international economic system.
| And they'll decide what is fair, thank you ... |
| People keep inventing fairer economic systems. They always turn out to be even more unfair than dumb old free enterprise until they collapse. Somehow it's the guys who were running them that arise from the rubble with their pockets full of boodle. |
In a resolution that failed to win the support of Western powers, the 47-member council urged all states "to refrain from reducing international financial resources for development, including official development assistance and from imposing protectionist measures".
| 'Nother words, the only ones who were against it were the guys that would have to pay for it? |
It backed recent calls to boost participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making, such as on the boards of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.
| Gets the pigs closer to the trough that way ... |
| The reason they're "developing" is that as a rule they're incompetent, often to the point of silliness, which would mitigate against allowing them to get too close to anything too important. |
The resolution passed with 31 in favour, 14 abstentions and two absent at the end of a two-day special session on the effects of economic woes on human rights, which was called at the initiative of Brazil and Egypt on behalf of African states.
| Brazil used to be a pretty prosperous country, back around the turn of the last century. Egypt was a pretty prosperous country about the time of Nefertiti. Most African states would be providing material for comedy routines in a world that wasn't cursed with political correctitude. |
The resolution said the council "expresses deep concern that the universal realisation and effective enjoyment of human rights are challenged due to multiple and inter-related global economic and financial crises".
| And it's totally cutting into the ability of the kleptos to rake off their skim ... |
But developed countries--including European Union members, Canada and Japan, with backing from Mexico--argued the resolution went too far into fields like trade which were beyond the councils remit.
| We actually make money with trade, and letting countries like Zim-Bob-We or Central African Republic tinker with it is not a recipe for anybody's future prosperity. |
Many also voiced concern that an emphasis on collective social and economic rights would distract attention from ongoing violations of individual rights, such as free speech and freedom to form labour unions.
C'mon now. Why would the Human Rights Commission be concerned with stuff like that...
Forming labor unions and demanding free money from someone else often go hand-in-hand, so at least they're being consistent.
The Geneva-based body, set up in 2006 to replace the Human Rights Commission that was seen to have failed to genuinely protect rights, has fallen into familiar political patterns with developed and developing countries often squaring off.
| Because it's the same people after all ... |
Bastids!
Waiter! Menu! Chop-chop, boy!
| In successful countries, rights accrue to the individual. In loser rathole states, rights accrue to the state. In successful countries we have individual rights, and in failed states they have Human Rights™, and even they're pretty casually violated by the boodlers at the top. |
|