2009 UN Racism Conference

at first glance, the Durban Review Conference bears a striking resemblance to a train wreck. upon closer examination, however, i find that it resembles not so much a train wreck as a really horrible train wreck.

the reason that everything is so terribly awry is, basically, that there's no middle ground on Israel. you can't say something like "Israel does a lot of things right, but there are areas where it could show marked improvement". you have to say either "Israel is comprised of horrible demons who control the entire world from their secret Jew-caves; anyone who says otherwise is a Zionist conspirator" or "Israel is comprised of equal parts awesome and totally awesome, and is totally and completely justified in anything they feel like doing; anyone who says otherwise is Holocaust-denying Nazi scum." this binary bullshit remains as true at the international level as it does on the intrablags.

the lowdown is, the biggest name--the only head of state--speaking at the conference is fucking Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. that's like having Jerry Falwell give the opening address at a conference on expanding gay rights. for our next trick, let's address child abuse by shooting babies. there's more to it than that, but Ahmadinejad's speech typifies the dispute.

Ahmadinejad's speech was received, alternately, with applause and walkouts, depending on whether a given audience member hailed from a nation of antisemitic aggressors or Zionist apologists. many nations, starting with Canada and including the US, simply refused to send a representative to the conference at all. because, y'know, who cares about human trafficking or anti-Muslim racism (irrrrrrony!) or the rights of people who engage in non-heterosexual lifestyle--them A-rabs are gonna say bad things about Israel, and we won't be a part of it!

We're not attending because the last conference was a clusterfuck. This conference is a clusterfuck. It's not that we don't care. It's that we don't believe this conference is going to accomplish a damn thing. And from the looks of it... that belief really isn't unfounded.

The next one will be a clusterfuck too

but what are we doing aside from not attending?

more like 2009 UN Awkward Conference, am i right guys?

Much of the problem stems from using Israel as the bargaining chip in a complex game of strategy. No one wants to talk about the substantial problems Israel has, not necessarily because they're afraid of being called Anti-Semitic, more along the same lines that they are using their supposed buddy-buddy relationship with the Jewish state for their own benefit at the negotiating table.

*sighs*

Electing a black president maybe?

BTW, do these conferences actually do anything?

Sending Mitchell to the middle east and meeting with the King of Jordan.

You don't actually read anything unless it's written by a reactionary loon, do you?

This was all rather predictable wasn't it? Crazy Iranian leader is invited to speak at conference. Crazy Iranian leader is floundering in terms of popularity back home. Crazy Iranian leader is obsessed with Israel. Crazy Iranian leader makes speech intended to piss off delegates, destabilise conference, and gain political mileage in Iran.

Crazy Iranian leader fails on that last one.

I don't know. I would have to look into it.

This conference is a joke. There were clown protesters for fuck sake. And they gave the mic to a well known anti-Semite.

We need to have larger talks about racism in the world. It's important. We just can't have them like this.

I have to give the Obama administration Kudos on this one. Especially where protection of the 1st Amendment was sited as the reason for not attending. I think these kind of meetings have a tendancy not to distinguish between Racism, which I think is perfectly fine, and Racial Descriminination, which is far from perfectly fine (the difference the former is a mindset, while the later is a course of action).

You want to explain yourself there?

Glad to. Simply put, you can't make somebody like somebody else. They have to decide that on their own. You can make not liking someone else a crime, but all that's going to do is keep a person quite about not liking somebody else. It won't change their opinion. Only that person can decide whether to like somebody or not, and by which criteria they decide to like somebody.

So . . . you don't know what racisim is?

It's a dislike of a certain ethnic group, if I'm not mistaken.

Link

It is not a dislike. It is pure ignorance. And to say that ignorance is alright is, in itself, ignorance.

What happens if you're knowledgable about a particular group, and STILL don't like them? What's that called?

Edit: Your link didn't say anything about being ignorant.

Knowing or not knowing about a group is irrelevant. And it isn't my fault if you can't understand the definition.

The word ignorance was not contained in the definition you provided. And it's not irrelevant, as ignorance is the opposite of being knowledgable.

Are you being dense? The ignorance is in the realm of basic science, in the belief that ANY group, whether the person has knowledge of of any specifics of the group or not, are inferior to any other group, based on race. The ignorance is in the idea that there are different levels of humanity. That is where the ignorance lies. Simply trolling because the word "ignorance" is not in the dictionary definition does not mean that the ignorance is not implied BY the definition. Did you skip every day of school that they went over reading?

I keep forgetting. You're not at all interested in intelligent conversation. You're just trolling.

Well, regardless, an individual is, I believe, well with in his or her rights to both have that belief and express that belief.

that's not at all the same as thinking that racism is "perfectly fine".

Well, if he's entitled to his beliefs, and he's entitled to express his beliefs, then what's the issue?

The method that is used to express those issues.