exactly why the United States consistently votes "NO" to making food a basic, non-negotiable human right at the United Nations.
https://x.com/Chetuyachinago/status/2079656785401794796
I decided to do a little historical research to understand exactly why the United States consistently votes "NO" to making food a basic, non-negotiable human right at the United Nations. What I discovered was truly shocking and highly revealing.
It appears that the entire American legal system is built almost exclusively on the cold, individualistic concept of "negative rights": which are mere freedoms from direct government interference, such as the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, and protection against unlawful search and seizure.
A "right to food", on the other hand, is a positive right, meaning it legally, structurally requires the government to actively provide a material service, a life-saving commodity, or survival resources to its citizens. Now it becomes glaringly clear why the US government has historically resisted codifying any positive economic, social, or cultural rights, such as the rights to universal healthcare, affordable housing, clean drinking water, or basic food, into law.
They claim that these survival needs are merely "policy goals" to be debated and legislated democratically, rather than fundamental, non-negotiable constitutional rights.
The US Mission to Geneva has explicitly admitted that if the right to food were formally recognized as a legally binding, international human right, the US government deeply fears it would face massive, endless domestic lawsuits from its own impoverished citizens over systemic poverty, structural food insecurity, and widespread malnutrition. Furthermore, Washington fiercely opposes the legal concept of extraterritorial obligations: the revolutionary idea that wealthy, imperialist nations have a binding legal duty to provide aid, agricultural resources, financial assistance, or food to the starving citizens of other countries that they have spent centuries exploiting, plundering, and destabilizing.
This stark contrast between the US government’s fierce opposition to a legally binding "right to food" and its absolute willingness to instantly intervene with trillions of dollars to bail out failing private corporations, massive banks, and corporate monopolies is the ultimate double standard. It can only be described as the classic, brutal reality of "socialism for the rich and cutthroat capitalism for the poor."
Indeed, we always see that America proudly, eagerly guarantees an ironclad financial safety net for bloated corporate entities, massive defense contractors, and Wall Street venture capitalists to prevent market failures, bankruptcies, and bad investments. Yet, they flatly, ironically decline to guarantee even a basic safety net for human lives to prevent widespread nutritional failures.
posted by Satish Sharma at
12:48
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home