NationStates Jolt Archive

The United States is not only one of the few countries not to have ratified the Kyoto Accords, one of the few countries not to recognise the ICJ, the *only* country (other than Somalia, which lacks a government) not to have signed the international Convention on the Rights of Children, the only Western country to have retained the death penalty, and the *only* country in the world to execute juvenile offenders...

...it's now also isolated itself within UNESCO, by being almost alone in opposing a declaration in favour of cultural diversity:


US all but alone in oppositing UNESCO cultural pact

Choosing to defend Hollywood's interests over joining an international consensus, the United States stood almost alone at Unesco Thursday in opposing a new convention on cultural diversity designed to combat the homogenizing effect of cultural globalization.

The convention, the result of two years of heated and occasionally bitter negotiations, was adopted at Unesco's Paris headquarters by 148 votes in favor, with the United States and Israel voting against and just four countries - Australia, Nicaragua, Honduras and Liberia - abstaining.

Even though the convention fell short of the hopes of its original sponsors, Canada and France, its adoption was called an important step in protecting threatened cultures, particularly in developing countries.

However, the Bush administration argued that it could be interpreted as authorizing governments to undermine the rights of minorities and to control both culture and the free trade in ideas and information. Under the convention, governments will be permitted to use subsidies and quotas to promote their culture and, implicitly, to limit the access of Hollywood movies to their markets.

Speaking after the vote, Louise Oliver, the U.S. ambassador to Unesco, said that the United States was the world's most culturally diverse country, but it feared the convention "could undermine, rather than promote, cultural diversity."

However, most of Washington's allies disagreed. Britain's ambassador to Unesco, Timothy Craddock, speaking for the European Union, said, "This is a great day for Unesco." And, without mentioning the United States, he noted: "With one country, we have agreed to disagree on this issue."


http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/20/news/unesco.php

Thoughts? Comments?

The United States is not only one of the few countries not to have ratified the Kyoto Accords, one of the few countries not to recognise the ICJ, the *only* country (other than Somalia, which lacks a government) not to have signed the international Convention on the Rights of Children, the only Western country to have retained the death penalty, and the *only* country in the world to execute juvenile offenders...

...it's now also isolated itself within UNESCO, by being almost alone in opposing a declaration in favour of cultural diversity:



http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/20/news/unesco.php

Thoughts? Comments?
Thoughts? I don't think the Bush White House knows what homogenize means..

Under the convention, governments will be permitted to use subsidies and quotas to promote their culture and, implicitly, to limit the access of Hollywood movies to their markets.

While this may seem like a good thing, as US Hollywood films are crap in most cases, it strikes me as a form of censorship.

I must probably shock some of you, but I agree with the US in this. Them not having ratified the Convention on the Rights of Children is shameful, though. It is mentioned often as another tarnish on their already less than clean reputation.

Mildly offtopic; Australia isn't a signatory to the International Convention on the Rights of Children as far as I understand; there was some clause in there that got noses out of joint. Its one of those things that have "in principle" agreement to.

The United States is not only one of the few countries not to have ratified the Kyoto Accords, one of the few countries not to recognise the ICJ, the *only* country (other than Somalia, which lacks a government) not to have signed the international Convention on the Rights of Children, the only Western country to have retained the death penalty, and the *only* country in the world to execute juvenile offenders...

...it's now also isolated itself within UNESCO, by being almost alone in opposing a declaration in favour of cultural diversity:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/20/news/unesco.php

Thoughts? Comments?

I guess that the liberal elites who are members of the Film Actors Guild have more power with Republicans that I thought.

Aren't Hollywood and the Republican Party at odds with each other?

While this may seem like a good thing, as US Hollywood films are crap in most cases, it strikes me as a form of censorship.

No more than trade agreements and tariffs usually are. If this were truly America's position, then in order to be consistent, we'd have to eliminate tariffs and 'most favored nation' trading status with everyone to whom they currently apply.

Heh. Maybe I'm just saying that because I'm learning to enjoy Bollywood over Hollywood anyway . . .:D

Mildly offtopic; Australia isn't a signatory to the International Convention on the Rights of Children as far as I understand; there was some clause in there that got noses out of joint. Its one of those things that have "in principle" agreement to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child#Signatories

According to UNICEF, the Convention has been ratified by 191 countries. Only Somalia and the United States have not ratified the CRC. Somalia is currently unable to proceed to ratification as it has no recognized government.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/treaty15_asp.htm

"Australia accepts the general principles of article 37. In relation to the second sentence of paragraph (c), the obligation to separate children from adults in prison is accepted only to the extent that such imprisonment is considered by the responsible authorities to be feasible and consistent with the obligation that children be able to maintain contact with their families, having regard to the geography and demography of Australia. Australia, therefore, ratifies the Convention to the extent that it is unable to comply with the obligation imposed by article 37 (c)."

I must also agree with the US decision on this pact. Nothing good can come of this -- between censorship and quotas (yay! More ill-conceived quotas!), it's a good thing that at least one country can remain sane. It just happens to be the last country you'd expect to call 'sane'...

Mildly offtopic; Australia isn't a signatory to the International Convention on the Rights of Children as far as I understand; there was some clause in there that got noses out of joint. Its one of those things that have "in principle" agreement to.

The Convention reflects this global consensus and, in a very short period of time, it has become the most widely accepted human rights treaty ever. It has been ratified by 192 countries; only two countries have not ratified: The United States and Somalia, which have signalled their intention to ratify by formally signing the Convention. .

Source: http://www.unicef.org/crc/crc.htm

Edit: Bugger, Fass beat me to it.

I must also agree with the US decision on this pact. Nothing good can come of this -- between censorship and quotas (yay! More ill-conceived quotas!), it's a good thing that at least one country can remain sane. It just happens to be the last country you'd expect to call 'sane'...

If you all think that Hollywood movies are so bad, why would your country want to pass restrictions on how many could be imported?

That implies that the residents of your country want to see them, and you want to restrict them.

Sounds like censorship to me.

Edit: Bugger, Fass beat me to it.

Hah! :p

Tabbed browsing pwnz j00!

Hah! :p

Tabbed browsing pwnz j00!

I was busy uploading my holiday pics, that's my excuse. :)

I was busy uploading my holiday pics, that's my excuse. :)

No, we all know you were browsing porn...

Normally yes, but not tonight. I've only got a dial-up connection, so I can't check out naked women & upload my piccies. :(

Normally yes, but not tonight. I've only got a dial-up connection, so I can't check out naked women & upload my piccies. :(

So, if you had a broadband connection, you would be doing cam all the time? :fluffle:

So, if you had a broadband connection, you would be doing cam all the time? :fluffle:

Err yes, yes that's it. With broadband I'd be uploading my holiday pictures everynight. None of that filthy porn for me. Nekked ladies, who needs them. ;)

"Australia accepts the general principles of article 37. In relation to the second sentence of paragraph (c), the obligation to separate children from adults in prison is accepted only to the extent that such imprisonment is considered by the responsible authorities to be feasible and consistent with the obligation that children be able to maintain contact with their families, having regard to the geography and demography of Australia. Australia, therefore, ratifies the Convention to the extent that it is unable to comply with the obligation imposed by article 37 (c)."

Me be wrong. I didn't realise you could ratify conventions in part. I just remembered learning about Article 37(must have been) of the Convention when the High Court decided to use it to override Australian law; since the government had already given in principle support.

I had a feeling Australia was inviolation of an article; but it turns out that it is the General Declration, Australia is violating.

Uh, I don't see any benefit from this treaty, so why sign it? It's not like international law is too simple at the moment. Quotas and other protectionism can be set by single countries, but it is better for everyone if they don't. Writing in a stupid paper that they approve of protectionism for a certain kind of goods does not make anyone better off.

Besides, most people only take part in culture in their own nation, so increasing divergence in the world by closing states just means less diversity for actual people.

I love how people always complain that the US never signed the Kyoto Accords. Its quite funny really.
China signed them (or did it? Eh.), but it doesnt follow them (theres a lovely story on CNN about riots in China caused by lead poisoning in water supplies due to improper dumping/leakage from factories).
Would you like us to do the same thing?

We have our own child labour laws, and they are quite effective. 'Course I stopped caring about them on Saturday ;)

I don't understand how Bush can claim that the US is the most culturally diverse country when it's ideology is based on conformity so it can increase it's economic dominance. It's a self-proclaimed melting pot.

I don't understand how Bush can claim that the US is the most culturally diverse country when it's ideology is based on conformity so it can increase it's economic dominance. It's a self-proclaimed melting pot.

I don't know where you got that from. Political correctness in the United States demands that instead of conforming (as might have been the rule 25 years ago), people keep right on wearing the clothing they had in their native country - refuse to learn English - hire only their own countrymen (in violation of labor laws but no one prosecutes them for it) - etc.

Additionally, the schools in my area are required to stifle Christianity and favor Islam. Organized prayer is forbidden for Christians during the school day, as is fair in my eyes, but Muslims are not only allowed organized prayer, they are given special rooms to do it in. And a teacher to supervise.

And our government does not run Hollywood - in fact, Hollywood seems to be very opposed to the Republicans and makes films specifically to outline that displeasure.

My mistake

My mistake

See the new movie, "Good Night, and Good Luck"

Even if Hollywood is opposed to Republicans, it still generates stereotypical and shallow characters that do little to promote diversity

And I understand that there are those that break those boundaries, but there's still a lot of crap

And I understand that there are those that break those boundaries, but there's still a lot of crap

Tell you what. Come to Herndon, Virginia. Ostensibly a garden spot in the middle of suburbia, outside of Washington, D.C.

If you don't speak Spanish here (and none of the adult Spanish speakers were born here), you won't even be able to buy lunch.

I love how people always complain that the US never signed the Kyoto Accords.

Because if they did and did follow it- it would set a good example for the rest of the world. Now, other states just go.... Look, they're not doing it, why should we bother?

I love how people always complain that the US never signed the Kyoto Accords. Its quite funny really.
China signed them (or did it? Eh.), but it doesnt follow them (theres a lovely story on CNN about riots in China caused by lead poisoning in water supplies due to improper dumping/leakage from factories).
Would you like us to do the same thing?

We have our own child labour laws, and they are quite effective. 'Course I stopped caring about them on Saturday ;)Um... Kyoto Protocol has absolutely nothing to do with lead in water...

YAY, government desicions I can agree with. From a cursoury glance it looks like this UNESCO is a bunch of crap. If your culture is so "belle" then it would have nothing to fear from the U.S, right?
On the other hand, if having access to McDonalds' and James Bond Movies is going to destroy your social fabric, then you really didn't have a culture in the first place.
Further, French culture wasn't created by a series of government acts, it was created by people entertaining themselves in whatever way they saw fit. After awhile, alot of people decided that the same things were fun or helpful, and so they became commonplace and conventional.
After all, the people in Paris still speak France, in spite of the fact that Opera (a largely Italian genre) swept through the world centuries ago. London has yet to dissapear, inspite of the fact that the Viennese School scattered their musics across the world.
However, if you want to maintain your culture, then we all have to give up guns and noodles (well, the Chinese can keep their guns and noodles, but they can't use marinara sauce on either one). Also, every non-USian will have to send all of their Jazz recordings back here and forget that they exist, ethnic food groups in the US will have to be banned (ah well, egg rolls were fun while they lasted), and I expect the English to ship their horses back to the French. I suppose I'll also have to leave college now, since the only people who are allowed to run Universities are the Arabs, it was their culture after all. Oh, and Canada, sorry about this, but your going to have to give the French government its language back (I suppose I'll have to learn a Native American language while I'm at it, too).
Such a shame, diversity and cultural diaspora were fun while they lasted, but at least this way Le Snootier won't have to worry about producing food people like, because there is no alternative to French food in France anyway.
YAY! Panicked protectionism!

In plain lanugage: The world is not a fucking museum, it changes. The masses made culture the way it is, and if they feel the need to change it, they should be allowed to.

In plainer language: FUCK YOU, UNESCO!

Well, Kyoto is a trap, but the rest of these shows that the US has an evil leader.

Didn't the US refuse to sign something on the rights of women too?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v110/Doveofwar/ta0001.jpg

No more than trade agreements and tariffs usually are. If this were truly America's position, then in order to be consistent, we'd have to eliminate tariffs and 'most favored nation' trading status with everyone to whom they currently apply.

Sure, as soon as governments stop giving subsidies to companies inside their borders and don't start government owned companies. Until then all tariffs do is help balance the playing field.

Didn't the US refuse to sign something on the rights of women too?
The wording of both treaties interferes with out soverienity, something which the constitution strictly forbids.

Sure, as soon as governments stop giving subsidies to companies inside their borders and don't start government owned companies. Until then all tariffs do is help balance the playing field.
That's just false.
You have FTAs with plenty of countries that have state-owned enterprises, and you keep tariffs with countries that you do have FTAs with!
And when German firms want to import steel to the US, not only do they have to pay extra, no, that money goes 100% to US steel producers.
And to top it all off, the head of that steel producer (Timken in Ohio) is now the US ambassador in Germany. Just to rub it in a bit.
:rolleyes:

The US has it in it's best interests to make the globe into a single culture with it's capital in Hollywood USA, why would they give THAT up I ask you?

The wording of both treaties interferes with out soverienity, something which the constitution strictly forbids.
You sure?

All I kept hearing was that the administration refused to sign it because there was a line about access to proper medical care in it and that could be interpreted to be access to abortions.

Thoughts? I don't think the Bush White House knows what homogenize means..
It's the the homosexualization of the population; it's parter of the grander scheme of the homosexual agenda and their wanton attack on morals and family values... didn't you know?

So what Cuba signs all kinds of treatys and dosent keep them,
alot of nations do the same thing.

What can I say. We're one of a kind. Marching to the beat of our own drummer. Never another cattle in the herd.....

I’m sure glad the US didn’t sign this. If you’re culture can’t compete with the sterilized and utterly mediocre quality of ours, it doesn’t deserve to exist.

Under the convention, governments will be permitted to use subsidies and quotas to promote their culture and, implicitly, to limit the access of Hollywood movies to their markets.

While this may seem like a good thing, as US Hollywood films are crap in most cases, it strikes me as a form of censorship.

I must probably shock some of you, but I agree with the US in this. Them not having ratified the Convention on the Rights of Children is shameful, though. It is mentioned often as another tarnish on their already less than clean reputation.
After reading your post, I was about to say Hell had frozen over, but then I checked the sports section and saw the Cubs are still out of it so I guess it hasn't happened yet.

What I do dislike though is that apparently Hollywood TV Shows and Movies are made to break even and make a profit in the US alone - with the result that for overseas consumption they don't necessarily need to make a profit.

They are dumping them - ever wondered why in Germany, or in the UK, or in Australia, the channel which shows "Lost" always also shows "Alias" (that is just an example, I doubt those two shows belong to the same package deal)?
They sell them in packages, for dumping prices, and it becomes unprofitable for domestic producers to even bother.

And that's sad, because qualitatively, much non-US stuff is utterly enlightening compared to most of the crap they sent from Hollywood.

That being said, I was very impressed with "Lost". One of the best TV productions ever, and a worthy addition to any program.