Yesterday, a Declaration of the trafficking of enslaved Africans and Racialized Chattel Enslavement of Africans as the Gravest Crime against Humanity was voted at UNO. As usual, Israel and the USA voted against. How did your country vote? Any thoughts about it?

  • Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    You only posted half of the title.

    Declaration of the Trafficking of Enslaved Africans and Racialized Chattel Enslavement of Africans as the Gravest Crime against Humanity

    • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      The “Gravest Crime against Humanity” part honestly explains why so many countries abstained.

      The slave trade was an absolute atrocity and certainly one of the gravest crimes against humanity but should we label it as the gravest crime? Do we really need to introduce a ranking between slavery, the holocaust and dozens of other genocides instead of agreeing that they are/were all bad without picking one as the worst?

      • ageedizzle@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Yeah, exactly. Why make it a competition? The wording is honestly just bizarre

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Sadly, I would bet that it’s the jewish lobby that pushed a lot of countries to oppose this. They have this need to make the holocaust be the worst thing that has ever happened to any people in the history of time.

        The holocaust certainly bad, it’s among the worst mass killings of all time, and the fact that it happened in relatively modern times makes it worse because the world generally isn’t as brutal as it once was. Is it worse than the Mongol invasions, which may have killed more than 10% of the entire world’s population at the time? Worse than historical wars in China which killed tens of millions at a time when the entire world’s population was under 200 million? Where would you rank African slavery in that? Is it less bad because fewer people died, or worse because there are things worth than death? I don’t really think it should be something you rank at all. And, I’d also oppose any attempt to rank any of them as “the gravest crime against humanity”, because what’s the point of that?

      • Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        It’s possibly the fact that it specifies the enslavement of Africans too. I don’t know much about this, but would that sound like it’s minimising other countries experiences, or current slavery?

        Edit: clarified a sentence

    • ceiphas@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      8 hours ago

      The abstaining countries mostly has a Problem with “the gravest crime against humanity”, because there should be no ranking in crimes against humanity.

      Where do you place the Holocaust, the holodomor, the crusades? The conquest of the americas?

      • doleo@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Yeah, sure, it was a semantic problem. Not a reperations problem. /s

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Side thing, but I don’t see the Crusades as at the same level of the Holocaust or the Holodomor. They were religious wars of conquest not campaigns of extermination. They were brutal, sure, but if you add them, then you have to start piling a bunch of other wars in there too, like the Mongol conquests, the Timurid conquests, the Arab conquests, the Ottoman conquests, the Aztec conquests etc. Which kind of dilutes the point of “grave crimes”.

        There is nothing particularly unique about the Crusades, and at the time, the Roman Empire that invited them and tried to sanction them actually had a legitimate claim of them being reconquests of Roman territory (even though they ended up killing it off anyway in 1204).