Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Clean environment could become U.N. human right

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 152 posts

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#71

Post by snapcaster »

croes wrote: post #48
_hilro wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because sovereign nations and their citizens aren't going to kowtow to some unelected supranational organisation? 7 billion people in the world and they should all be ruled by a bunch of bureaucrats??? I hope that day never comes.

Sure, how to you explain the WTO and the IMF? 7 billion people in the world are already ruled by a bunch of bureaucrats. But it's ok if it's for profit and not human rights, I guess.

I think both are bad. Have you ever met someone who dislikes the UN but loves the WTO and IMF? I think you're arguing against a strawman with this comment

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#72

Post by respondo2134 »

z3ncyberpunk wrote: post #45
blacktriangle wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're saying no to a Chinese puppet org (the UN) using clean environment as an attack on them while China does nothing to address their environmental impact.

China has more renewable energy than any one in the world

More coal generation too. All this means without context is that they're big. Their commitment to green initiatives has been extremely toothless to date

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#73

Post by a_diplomat »

Hi. Diplomat working with UN issues here. The issue at hand here is not this resolution in itself. It's the fact that opening up human rights to "new" rights sets a precedent. And that precedent will be used by other countries to shift the language on human rights in a more authoritarian direction - or dilute human rights as such.

So it's basically about using one set of issues, which in substance are hard to fight, to weaken human rights as a whole. But it could just as easily have been about something else, like the "right to development", which has been pushed by authoritarian countries for years.

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#74

Post by smoldesu »

vagrantJin wrote: post #44
throwawaybchr wrote: post #6

China has been denying people human rights daily, what does the UN do to them?

Wow. The anti-Chinese rhetoric on this thread is bordering on horrifying. I had to ctrl+shift+F the webpage to see if I missed something on the Reuters article relating to China. What does Chinese policy on human rights have anything to do with the above mentioned article?

If I had to guess, it's because China is one of the most notoriously polluted countries that are also on the security council that will oversee this bill. While the United States and UK are pretty much guaranteed to veto, I think a lot of people are interpreting China as the swing vote here.

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#75

Post by bamboozled »

fellodip wrote: post #50
bamboozled wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. The US is not flying bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads at large populations just to intimidate them.

https://apnews.com/article/europe-europe-air-force-russia-7f... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/russia-mig-31-... US does these things, its just not highlighted front page material in American press when it happens, so it goes unnoticed to American populations unlike when adversaries like Russia fly bombers near Alaska. Also US conducted similar maneuvers as what China did to Taiwan but to Iraq preceedi…

I re-read my original comment, I have no idea how the US was inject into this actually.

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#76

Post by p_l »

sofixa wrote: post #60
bamboozled wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. The US is not flying bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads at large populations just to intimidate them.

It does as the sibling commenter pointed out, furthemore it used to fly bombers with nuclear warheads around the clock, nearly bombing itself and its allies numerous times in the process.

It also regularly played "chicken" with flying bombers into USSR space at one point, which nearly got us preemptive strike starting WW3

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#77

Post by tomrod »

a_diplomat wrote: post #73

Hi. Diplomat working with UN issues here. The issue at hand here is not this resolution in itself. It's the fact that opening up human rights to "new" rights sets a precedent. And that precedent will be used by other countries to shift the language on human rights in a more authoritarian direction - or dilute human rights as such. So it's basically about using one set of issues, which in substance are hard to fight,…

Sounds like this is why we can't have nice things!

I'm pretty clueless when it comes to diplomacy. What is the drive for authoritarians? How do you negotiate with them, or otherwise limit their influence? (and is that desirable?).

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#78

Post by mensetmanusman »

a_diplomat wrote: post #73

Hi. Diplomat working with UN issues here. The issue at hand here is not this resolution in itself. It's the fact that opening up human rights to "new" rights sets a precedent. And that precedent will be used by other countries to shift the language on human rights in a more authoritarian direction - or dilute human rights as such. So it's basically about using one set of issues, which in substance are hard to fight,…

Where are there any reports that discuss concerns such as these? E.g. why is it hard to find the argument for why environmental rights could be at odds with civil rights?

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#79

Post by aabaker99 »

chki wrote: post #49
rtkwe wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any resolution from the UN has to get approval from the security council iirc so if the US or UK object it'll never be formally adopted by the UN. > They mention legal concerns from Washington but don’t explain them for some reason. Odds are they haven't actually been spelled out because they amount to "it'll cause huge disruptions to business because they'll all suddenly be suable for their decades of environmental…

> Any resolution from the UN has to get approval from the security council iirc so if the US or UK object it'll never be formally adopted by the UN. That's not correct. The general assembly can adopt resolutions and is meant to adopt resolutions by itself. Those resolutions are non-binding however. The security council needs to agree if the resolution touches on security relevant topics. And the security council is t…

Was going to say this and I'll further add that the GP, when referencing US or UK objections, is referring to the veto power that the permanent members of the security council, often referred to as P5, have on security council resolutions. Any one P5 member can veto to block the adoption of security council resolutions.

Re: Clean environment could become U.N. human right

#80

Post by gnomewascool »

FredPret wrote: post #65
maccolgan wrote: post #63

A "clean" environment is so subjective and temporal, I don't understand how it can be a "human" right... Why does UN keep digging into this hole of irrelevancy and bs?

Also, if it is a right, who is to provide it?

Who is to provide, say, "a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family", which is also a basic human right, as listed by the original (1948) Universal Declaration of Human Rights[0]?

The fact that there's nobody to provide it, doesn't mean that it's not a basic human right.

[0] https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...

Post reply on HN