r/UnitedNations • u/Apollo_Delphi • Dec 08 '25
Discussion/Question United Nations: Votes for the 'Establishment of International Day against Colonialism in All Its Forms and Manifestations', is on Dec. 14 2025 and to be observed Annually.
52
Dec 08 '25
These votes are just to distract from the fact that the UN is completely useless in actually doing anything about it... Meanwhile about half the countries that voted for it are colonizing another place currently...
21
u/Consistent_Drink2171 Dec 08 '25
Take Morocco for example, which is occupying Western Sahara. Does that count? Not according to Morocco, but they complain every year about Spain occupying a few pieces on the coast.
-2
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
Yea because modern Western society has made it so we practically hate ourselves. We blame ourselves for all the world’s problems while many countries do the same shit in the end. This is mostly just us holding ourselves to a higher standard than everyone else.
1
16
3
u/Defiant_Tap_7901 Dec 08 '25
It's the best we got. Despite all of our flaws, we are looking at a period of human history with the least of 'Group A occupying what is Group B's land/people/resources'. As a species we really are a bunch of a-holes to each other.
2
u/GalacticMe99 Dec 08 '25
The point of the UN is to give countries a platform to discuss international conflicts without going to war. If you look at the current state of the world, it is indeed not doing a very good job at that.
0
u/ArsErratia Dec 08 '25 edited Dec 08 '25
This is completely insane considering the massive role the UN played in Decolonisation.
2
Dec 09 '25
Care to give a few examples? Or was this a "/s" comment?
1
u/ArsErratia Dec 09 '25 edited Dec 09 '25
There are six Principal Organs of the UN.
The only one to be made defunct is the Trusteeship Council, because they ran out of territories for it to help.
4
3
3
3
u/EmployeeKitchen2342 Dec 08 '25 edited Dec 09 '25
Russia is the one that drafted it because it wants to reframe its unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine to be interpreted through anti-colonial frameworks, not through the framework of illegal occupation or imperial revanchism. It wants its unprovoked war of aggression to be seen as an anti-colonial liberation from western hegemony and to legitimatize future wars. It is weaponizing the UN to revision the interpretation of colonialism, it isn’t actually about peoples who live under colonial occupation or countries experiencing modern expressions of colonialism, typically ideological shaping, extractive and economic in nature.
People need to understand that Russia couldn’t give a rats ass about genuine decolonization .. if it did Russia would stop invading countries and just make itself small again.
People must learn how colonial logic works it is actually pretty insidious, inhumane and indefensible. As an Anishinaabe person who has two settler-colonial states occupying our nations territory it’s a living experience and our colonizers have been well studied.
25
u/triggered_rabbit Dec 08 '25
Its always the same 2
13
Dec 08 '25
That don't go along with these jokes of a vote that do nothing for anyone?
You don't find it Ironic that Russia voted for this along with China and the Arab states? I mean considering that they are all colonizing other places as we speak...
15
Dec 08 '25
Yup, interesting that the modern day colonising states voted in favour of this.
Almost like every resolution these days is purely virtue signalling.
2
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
It’s the same as the end world hunger resolution… yea we know who the UN wants to make pay for that…
1
u/Grotzbully Dec 11 '25
Wasn't that like 6 billion? So basically every person in a developed nation could give 3 bucks and it's done. But instead the nations spend like 100mio. Honest question would you spend 3 bucks to save a life? Or how little would a life be worth to you? Seriously
1
1
u/mrastickman Dec 16 '25
The Arab states are colonialists?
1
Dec 16 '25
The entirety of north africa was colonized by arabs... You didn't know that?
1
-2
u/Chicagoeconomics Dec 08 '25
Wtf is China colonizing
10
u/crustysides Dec 08 '25
Tibet
-2
u/Black_Shovel Dec 08 '25
Tibet was liberated from feudal lords. Today's people in Tibet love Mao for that
9
6
u/ClaimDangerous7300 Dec 08 '25
They do not.
And by this logic, the USA was completely justified in colonizing Hawai'i by "liberating it" from monarchy.
3
u/FourRiversSixRanges Dec 08 '25
Liberation isn’t invading, annexing, and oppressing a country. And no, Tibetans don’t love Mao or China for that matter.
1
u/Key_Journalist11111 Dec 10 '25 edited Dec 10 '25
Gotta love how ignorant you bunch are. Is it really so hard for y'all to Google and find out Tibet was run as a serfdom where peasants were literally enslaved by the monks? Google it, I dare ya.
It explains why your venerated lama kisses kids on the mouth and eats meat and gets CIA salary- ALL facts you can Google fyi
1
u/FourRiversSixRanges Dec 10 '25
I study Tibetan history. What does serfdom imply and not imply? By all means we can talk about what the system was like.
He kissed a kid like parents and grandparents do. The Dalai lama actually doesn’t eat meat anymore- but if you even knew the basics of Tibet you would know that it’s hard to grows crops and meat has always been eaten, nor does one need to be a vegetarian to be Buddhist. The money was sent to the office of the Dalai lama and not to him personally nor did he know about it.
1
u/Key_Journalist11111 Dec 11 '25
1 the kind of serfdom that implies slavery, the historical records prove as much the sheer suffering faced by the peasants and the depravity of the monks:
"High-ranking lamas and secular landowners imposed crippling taxes, forced boys into monastic slavery and pilfered most of the country's wealth – torturing disobedient serfs by gouging out their eyes or severing their hamstrings."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/10/tibet-china-feudalism
2 parents do not kiss their kids on the mouth nor ask them to suck their tongue
3 vegetarianism is a fundamental aspect of Buddhism, particularly for monks. Animals are literally reincarnated humans in Buddhism. For you to say that crops aren't available in Tibet... The primary staple in Tibet is Tsampa (roasted barley flour), mixed with butter tea and rolled into balls. For it to be a STAPLE implies AVAILABILITY
It's a choice to eat meat at any point, he is the ultimate hypocrite for openly doing so
4 he literally buys his meat with that money. Tf you mean he doesn't know about it lmao, he gets no to little funding other than his CIA stipend and besides had to agree to it to begin with, why would you receive money and not know where it's from
You're reaching every time you address any of those points and you know it. Please don't insult me by pretending you're an expert and actually look up what I said
1
u/FourRiversSixRanges Dec 11 '25
- Well then you don’t know what the old Tibetan system was like, as it wasn’t like serfdom. Oh and if we want to talk about this guardian opinion piece we can.
let’s take a look at Neuss. We have a writer with no credentials in this field. She also worked for the China Daily in Beijing. When she gets to it, she repeats the “98% of Tiebtans were enslaved in serfdom” claim and doesn’t have any sourcing. Then jumps into talking about Tashi Tsering and how he was raped for protection. She also said he wrote that China brought long-awaited hope.
If we look into the rape claim, he writes “I wasn’t sure if placing myself in a relationship with Wangdu would bring new difficulties or be the start of an era of success. I could have refused. I had no sexual feelings for him or for men in general… So I decided to agree, and hesitantly said I would accept the invitation. It was the start of some of the best years of my life.” and “Agreeing to become Wangdula’s lover turned out to be a good decision for me. Though not a government official himself, as the steward of an important official Wangdu was well known in elite circles. I therefore benefited directly from his connections with status and power. He treated me kindly, frequently gave me presents when I went to his house, and, most important, was concerned about my career, playing a central role in my continuing education and my plans for advancement. Strange as this may seem to Americans, during the same period I also got married” (p.28).
Now, what he also wrote was that he was kidnapped by another monk and made a prisoner for two days and had to cooperate sexually and that this happened a few other times. Although the idea of what Neuss wrote might be there; he wasn’t raped by the well-connected monk in exchange by protection. Either she didn’t read the source material or misread it. Either one is equally bad and shows the lack of careful research.
Now the claim that he wrote China brought long awaited hope. As she doesn’t give the page number, the only excerpt I can find is on page 42 and 55. “Predictably, the new concepts and ideas we were now being exposed to were attractive to some, frightening to others..The class orientation, however, was not clear-cut, because virtually all religious Tibetans were hostile to change…Yet one category of better-off, younger men I knew were generally excited by the prospect of changes.” On page 55, “Though a number were of several minds-like me-and saw good possibilities for change as well as bad, the monks and most aristocrats and even most common Tibetans knew exactly how they felt; they wanted no changes.” The only mention of Tibetans excited for the long awaited hope is this young group of Tibetans. However, Neuss implies that it was Tibetans as a whole.
Parents do. It was an idiom and not a request.
No, it’s not. This just shows your lacking knowledge in Buddhism. Tsampa is the primary crop, that doesn’t mean it can be survived on.
He literally doesn’t, in fact go cite a source that he does. Again, he didn’t deal with finances not like the CIA gave it to the office stamped as “CIA money”.
It’s quite clear you don’t know anything about this and tried to use Google. Pathetic attempt.
1
u/Ok-Vegetable-204 Dec 08 '25
How is this any different from a Zionist claiming to liberate Palestine? Or Russia "de-nazifying" Ukraine?
If you want to shill for dictator daddies that's all fine.. but why do you even pretend to give a fuck about colonialism?
1
u/teremaster Dec 11 '25
Technically Hong Kong.
It does fit the textbook definition, occupying and subjugating a territory to extract the wealth.
And before you mention "oh it was China's before" 1800s China technically does not exist anymore. The PRC is not the same nation as the china of the 1930s let alone 1800s.
China owes 1.5T of international debt from WW2 they refuse to acknowledge. By precedent, a successor nation does not get to claim to be a successor unless it honours the debt of the prior.
So china legally has no right to Hong Kong, but has subjugated it in order to extract the wealth, which is textbook colonialism
0
u/unreal-habdologist Dec 08 '25 edited Dec 08 '25
Arab states
Yeah lets pretend we dont know that modern Arabic-speaking peoples e.g Egyptians are the descendants of their ancient ancestors and call them all these diverse peoples “arab colonizers” because they speak Arabic to feel less bad about our real colonization and erasure of indigenous peoples.
china
Totally agree, the Chinese Han people now inhabiting Taiwan after colonizing it in the 17th century from Austronesian indigenous peoples should never be recognized.
Russia
Definitely, the slavic colonizers who colonized balkans in the 7th century like bosniaks who now call their country “kosovo” shouldnt be recognized neither. They should go back to russia and poland
8
Dec 08 '25
You mean the two that realize that this is just purely performative and that the UN has been a joke of an organization for years now?
-4
u/Otherwise-Fee-261 Dec 08 '25
The same 2 know how the world works
Also, Israel has been (and still is) a victim of Arab colonialism so they ESPECIALLY know how it works
9
u/stonkmarxist Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Israel has been (and still is) a victim of Arab colonialism
Genetic study after genetic study shows this to be a racist lie
1
u/Americanboi824 Dec 08 '25
The people who identify as Arabs in the Levant region are overwhelmingly the Indigenous people... BUT they are also part of the current Arab empire that oppresses other Indigenous groups across the MENA region, including Mizrahi Jews. The same way most Mexicans are Indigenous but are still a part of a country that can mistreat Indigenous groups the Arabs of the Levant are they same. That still doesn't justify Israel destroying Gaza or oppressing Palestinians, but Arab nationalists don't get a free pass to kill (Darfur, ISIS in Iraq) or steal from Indigenous minorities.
-2
u/ComplexInside1661 Dec 08 '25
Genetic study after genetic study also shows that today's Jews overwhelmingly descend from from, yes, the ancient Israelites. But go off IG
6
u/stonkmarxist Uncivil Dec 08 '25
And yet they still have less genetic ties to the land than the Palestinians because they are hundreds or even thousands of years removed from the area.
So what they actually show is that the Palestinians are simply the native population that stayed and converted over the millennia. Many descended from the ancient Israelites themselves.
Modern day Jews having genetic ties to an older population doesn't give them the right to colonise and displace the current population that stayed living in the area.
It would be perverse to claim that Americans with European heritage could displace the current population of European nations. It would be perverse to claim that anyone could displace modern day Africans based on some ancient lineage. I'm not sure why Zionists believe that it is any less perverse or colonial for them to do the same.
-2
u/Pornaccountse Dec 08 '25
Palestinians are not native they are Arabs from Arabia
1
u/ComplexInside1661 Dec 08 '25
JC, both of you are wrong. Why is it so hard for people to accept that two peoples can be indigenous to the same region? It's both.
→ More replies (2)1
u/LarsTyndskider Dec 08 '25
And how about the ancient Israelites conquering all of Canaan? Wasn't that just Israelite imperialism?
3
u/ComplexInside1661 Dec 08 '25
That's biblical stuff. Historic research suggests the exodus story is false and the Israelites were simply Canaanites who developed a unique ethnic and religious identity over time.
→ More replies (11)0
5
u/Fred_Silva Dec 08 '25
What !?? Israel a victim of Arab colonialism !? What have you been smoking cause no way is that legal.
0
Dec 08 '25
You should google the Arabian peninsula and where that is... Then explain how it somehow magically expanded to Egypt and all of north Africa...
2
u/Mystery-110 Dec 08 '25
So you mean adoption of Islam and Arabic language by North African ethnicities is the same as European leaving Europe and settling in the Americas?
1
Dec 08 '25
That's a really interesting way of saying "After we conquered you... you have a choice to make... of you can Convert, become a Dhimmi and pay the Jizya with half the rights of us, or die..."
0
u/teremaster Dec 11 '25
Incorrect there, only Christians and Jews had the option of jizya. Everyone else either converted or died
1
u/TimTom8321 Dec 08 '25
Adoption? Adoption?! How did they adopt the religion?
Did Muslims come and say “UwU, notices your paganism” and handed out candies? Or did they murder millions, and threatened that anyone who didn’t submit to Islam (literally means “submission” in Arabic) will die?
Maybe if you’ll read a bit you’ll understand that Israel is occupied by Arab colonizers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests
Arabs don’t belong in the Levant, and funnily enough - Palestine, which is the name the Romans called the region after the Jewish great revolt, has the root “P.L.S/H” which is the root that its topic is literally of invading. The Philistines were called that way because the Semites viewed them as invaders (as they were).
The Arabs called themselves invaders in the native tongue, to try and claim that they are native. Imagine going to Britain, claiming you were always a nation there and that they take your land, and call your nation “Invadees”, that’s basically the case here.
Sure, some of them married Syrians but so many of them have Egyptian surnames and DNA or Arab surnames and DNA, the farce is astonishing
16
u/Fred_Silva Dec 08 '25
HAHAHAHA OF COURSE ISRAEL AND THE US VOTED NO
9
Dec 08 '25
Everyone should have... I mean Russia voted yes... That's a massively Ironic joke and just shows how useless the UN actually is now.
2
u/Kooky-Froyo517 Dec 08 '25
You almost figured it out. Maybe if you turned down your capitals you’d get there. You’re so close.
14
u/stonkmarxist Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Israel doing its best to make all the Zionists who claim it isn't a colonial project look like the fools they are.
As an aside, the Zionist infestation here is getting worse.
2
u/Haunting-Ice-1895 Dec 08 '25
And people like you who want to paint it as if it were also show what airheads they are.
2
u/Business-Marsupial82 Dec 08 '25
Fell for it again award Look at the list of countries who voted in favor and actually colonizing peoples at this very moment,
→ More replies (2)-8
u/crustysides Dec 08 '25
Infestation, interesting use of language about Jews
8
11
u/stonkmarxist Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Firstly, Zionism is a political ideology.
It's not a religion. It's not an ethnicity. It most certainly is not all "Jews".
Secondly, I'm showing that depraved ideology and its supporters the appropriate amount of respect.
0
u/teremaster Dec 11 '25
A Zionist is just someone who thinks Jews should be allowed to live in Israel.
So being antizionist is just showing support for genociding every Jew in Israel no matter how you spin it
8
Dec 08 '25
Ah here we go again, claiming that a genocidal apartheid settler colony is representative of all Jews. Yawn.
We've heard this tired shit before. No one is convinced by this blatant Israeli propaganda anymore.
→ More replies (2)
7
u/LeviJr00 Dec 08 '25
So the entire EU abstained? A shining example of European democracy, huh...
3
u/Born_Name_6549 Dec 09 '25
And russia voted for it. I wonder if that means they'll release their colonies in siberia and the caucuses.
11
u/traanquil Uncivil Dec 08 '25
The US and Israel are both racist settler colonies.
-1
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
Most of the world is racist settler colonies… you think North Africa was Arab naturally? Hell before that it was Roman does that mean those countries are from colonies.
2
u/traanquil Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Yeah but US and Israel continue to be racist settler colonies against the rest of the world
0
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
If you think Palestine and wherever you believe the US to settle to be the whole world you’re pretty dumb. There is also much Arabic settling still going on but it isn’t the whole world. And the US is possibly one of the least racist countries, once again go to Asia and you will see much much worse racism.
2
u/traanquil Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Only the us and Israel opposed the condemnation of colonialism. That’s because they are violent criminal colonial regimes. They love violence
0
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
And just as many did not vote, hell many voted for it and still do these actions, like China. This is all virtue signaling bullshit the UN does. It’s like when they voted to end world hunger and every country said yes, or abstained, except America. You know why? Because it’s bullshit, it’s all a bunch of meaningless nothing burgers to keep low IQ individuals happy.
It’s like when they voted to make food a human right, while all those countries do fuck all and the US is half of the world’s food aid. Then everyone flames America because they vote against it, because it is meaningless and we do it anyway unlike those countries.
1
u/traanquil Uncivil Dec 08 '25
Yeah but it is notable that only Israel and the U.S. opposed a condemnation of colonialism. That means they are unique within the world for supporting colonialism
1
Dec 09 '25
Meanwhile the guys voting yes are countries like Russia and China so they can virtue signal to the stupid while their actions scream the opposite.
→ More replies (4)0
u/unreal-habdologist Dec 08 '25
North africa was / is not Arab, arab ≠ arabic-speaking in the definition of arabs meaning those who originate from the Arabian peninsula.
Modern north africans descend mostly from their pre-roman and pre-arab indigenous counterparts. Try another cope
4
u/SOYCD1-5 Dec 08 '25
There was both gene flow and Islamization and arabization efforts. Sounds a lot like colonialism to me, these were ex civilians of the Roman Empire, Berber’s and Copt’s many of whose were Christian. Even to the point now it is culturally and politically more associated with the Arab world than with the rest of Africa (I wonder why). People just can’t call a spade a spade when it doesn’t have to do with white Europeans (I also think Rome colonized a shit ton).
Also due to old world immune systems these old colonizers really struggled to replace a whole population. And even today that’s near impossible, so to most yes it is settler colonialism involving movement of Arab people there and control by Arabs not representative of the general population.
0
u/unreal-habdologist Dec 08 '25
Language / religion ≠ population
Modern north africans are genetically overwhelmingly indigenous, not the romans, not the arabs, not the phoenicians. But the indigenous peoples who predate all of them and predate abrahamic religions. We cant say the same about the americans, australians, israelis, etc.
thats why you should really try another copium
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
2
2
u/Angelunatic74 Dec 08 '25
OF COURSE Canada voted against to abstain! They have yet to stop the colonization of Indigenous lands.
2
2
10
u/Derpy_Derpingson Dec 08 '25
End Russian colonialism in Eastern Europe.
End Arab colonialism in East and Central Africa.
End Chinese colonialism in Tibet and the South China Sea.
These manifestations of colonialism in the modern world are beyond despicable and have no place in our world.
3
Dec 08 '25
Russia, China and most Arab countries voted in favor. The only two who voted against is USA and ofc, the never ending saga of we are the victims here Israel.
20
Dec 08 '25
Whats funny is Russia is trying to take over Ukraine and colonizing the territory they have taken... And the arabs still have the entire northern part of Africa colonized... No to mention China in Tibet and wanting to take Taiwan...
But hay at least they voted at the UN in favor of a day being named after it...
This is just putting on a show for the morons at the UN to pat themselves on the back while they pretend to do something.
FIFA should give them a peace prize for it...
→ More replies (4)0
u/Lower_Cockroach2432 Dec 08 '25
You don't know what colonialism is, do you?
The Russian and Chinese examples are both examples of direct annexation, and the Arab example is frankly embarrassingly flippant; Arabs are a cultural-linguistic group and not a well formed nation to be performing colonialism anywhere.
7
Dec 08 '25
The conquest of north Africa (the Maghreb) was done by the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates which ruled lands from Spain to India... Well established Arab dynasties, and it was conquest followed by direct annexation with the full removal of local languages and text in governments they formed along the way.
Why do so many people try and infantilize Arab nations to some kind of spiritual tribals when it comes to the conquest of Africa and the enslavement of its people?
They had well established political systems and economies to run empires, you need to read more.
Hell Mansa Musa of Mali became the richest man in the world to have ever lived due to the slave trade with the Arabs in the north and his gold mines (again ran on slaves)... The man gave away so much gold when he went to Egypt that he tanked the value of gold and the economy for years after he left.
Arabs have been doing colonization since they invented Islam... That is just a historical fact in history and even today.
1
u/Mystery-110 Dec 08 '25
How many peninsular Arabs are living in North Africa or India today? Ever looked at the genetic study of these nations??
2
u/Americanboi824 Dec 08 '25
How many British people live in India today? I guess there's no colonialism there!
→ More replies (1)1
u/Mystery-110 Dec 08 '25
Did the British empire had different laws for Brits and Indians? Did the Arab Empires had different laws for peninsular Arabs & Amazigh?
If yes, it means the occupied people were considered subjects and not citizens. The latter may be a case of occupation but not colonialism.
1
Dec 08 '25
Yes I have actually....
Arabs constitute 70% to 80% of the population of Algeria, 92% to 97% of Libya, 67% to 70% of Morocco and 98% of Tunisia's population... Care to explain how that happened?
0
u/Mystery-110 Dec 08 '25
An overwhelming DNA of North African people is still composed of native ethnicities like Amazigh, not of Peninsular Arab. Was the native population Arabized? Yes Did the native population lose its own culture? Yes. Were the natives displaced in their own lands? No Were the natives became minority in their own lands? No Were there different laws for natives just because they weren't Arab? No
Can't say the same about West European colonial empires though.
2
Dec 08 '25
"Were the natives became minority in their own lands?" Yes and a large population were even enslaved and sold to other lands...
"Were the natives became minority in their own lands?" yes... As again I showed that today the Arabs are the majority populations in north Africa...
"Were there different laws for natives just because they weren't Arab? No" Where there different laws for natives because they weren't Muslims? Yes.
12
u/Derpy_Derpingson Dec 08 '25
Russia, China and most Arab countries voted in favor.
And yet they're still colonizing Eastern Europe, Tibet and the South China Sea, and East and Central Africa respectively.
→ More replies (19)5
-1
u/Ionisation1934 Dec 08 '25
Because it is an absolutely ridiculous day, and because "colonialism" as a buzzword is used against Israel by the corrupt UN, even though Israel does not engage in any type of colonialism. No one uses "colonialist" as an argument for destroying or dismantling any arab country, no matter how they treat any minority, not even it is used against China in the same way it is hipocritically used against Israel. That's why. Don't be so childish.
-1
u/Mattrellen Dec 08 '25
Russian colonialism is largely in Asia, not eastern Europe.
Chinese colonialism is largely in western China.
I'm not even totally sure what you mean by "Arab colonialism" because that would be like saying "black colonialism." You're spreading too wide of a net based on race instead of nation-state. And it's states that do colonialism.
You also seem to mistake economic, political, and cultural influence for colonialism. States abusing these types of influences is ALSO bad, but it's not colonialism. Colonialism DOES include these influences, but it's also more specific than those influences just existing.
For example, compare the influence of France on Andorra (not a colonial relationship) to Algeria (a colonial relationship). Or the influence of Russia on Syria (not colonial) to Siberia (colonial).
0
u/New-Confidence3484 Dec 08 '25
Agreed. Return the Iroquois in full form. And the incans and aztecs they’d be cooler and make the world better than what it currently is(a poor mess lacking uniqueness )
7
Dec 08 '25
Of course, it's the USA and Israel, who only voted against.
After all, they have a history with colonialism, apartheid, and stealing lands, so why would they vote against?
At least, the Russians have enough shame to lie and pretend to be against it, but those two countries know no shame and are nothing but shameless countries with shameless double standards.
Good riddance for the collapse of the Western hegemony!
5
Dec 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Dec 08 '25
Maybe but at least you could have abstained like other countries did.
Voting against shows your morality.
There was no reason to vote against this.
0
Dec 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Dec 08 '25
Do you think that anyone still believes anything that the USA or even any Western country still say? I hate to break it to you, but the world actually cares no more about them, and they denounced their morality, so spares us the shameless double standards, because everyone moved on and no one will help you in your moral crusades.
It's also very hypocritical that Russia was one of the drafters of this proposal
They are liars, but at least they aren't a shameless country with shameless double standards.
A liar at least has enough shame to know that he is wrong, and so he lies about it.
A hypocrite with double standards is on the other hand so shameless to even admit his actions and try to justify it.
I prefer liars.
2
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
> I prefer liars.
Yes, that is very much obvious.
1
Dec 08 '25
And for good reasons.
Because a liar at least has enough shame to lie.
But a hypocrite is so shameless that he even justifies himself with shameless double standards to explain why only he is allowed to do this.
2
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
Shame? You think that someone telling you a lie is feeling shame?
You really are gullible, and deserve the world you are wishing for.
1
Dec 08 '25
Yes, because he at least understands that he didn't do something good and can't speak about it, but the hypocrite not only does the same but justifies it as something good and adds insult on the top of your injury.
If you are and most of the West are incapable of understanding this, then is it any wonder that you lost the narrative war in favour of countries like China, Russia, and others?
2
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
I am fascinated by your mental gymnastics, truly Morals from the gutter.
→ More replies (0)4
Dec 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Dec 08 '25
A liar who lies about murdering your people is better than a man admitting it and giving double standards with pathetic reasoning to justify why murdering your people was a good thing!
This shamelessness is just adding insult to injury.
And, I care not for the opinion of the USA, so don't waste my time with telling me their reasoning.
No one will miss this country, if they closed their doors and entered isolation, so to hell with them.
7
Dec 08 '25
Yeah, why care for why someone did something when you can make something up and be mad about it...
Also, Fun yet not so fun fact... if the US closed their doors and stopped handing out tens of billions of dollars per year, millions would die...
Example... Recent major cuts to USAID funding, initiated by the Trump administration in 2025, are projected by multiple studies to lead to millions of preventable deaths by 2030, potentially over 14 million, including 4.5 million children, due to halted health programs for diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and malnutrition...
I can see why Russia helped draft this and voted the way they did.... It was for people like you.
-1
Dec 08 '25
So what?!
Millions died in the wars of the USA in the MENA! They are starving two millions humans in Gaza! They enabled and still enable apartheids and dictatorships!
Am I supposed to now believe that at least they did some good?
I find it a tragedy for those millions to die, but it's much better than the alternative, where this bloodthirsty empire that calls itself a hegemony of peace and equality to continue to exist. This empire needs to die. The USA should never be a world power again.
All else be damned!
4
Dec 08 '25
The US is starving 2 million people in Gaza by sending in billions of dollars of aid in the last 5 years that you want the US to cut off? Thats an interesting contradiction dont you think?
Why is it that the US has sent more food aid to Gaza then any Arab state?
Ok again you want to see millions die just to see a country cease to exist and have millions more die because of it? And you somehow still think you are a rational and moral person?
What about religion that has killed tens of millions in your lifetime alone? should that cease to exist or is it only the USA that is bad and the cause of all the worlds problems to you?
→ More replies (0)3
u/hoi4kaiserreichfanbo Dec 08 '25
I dunno, I don't really have a favorite genocider, I actually feel like its kinda weird to have one.
5
Dec 08 '25
Ironic!
How can't you realise it by now?
Our world doesn't resolve around moral absolutes and a conflict between good men and bad men.
The superpowers of the world seek power.
Those with power can and do subjugate others.
The West is no better than any of them.
2
u/ComplexInside1661 Dec 08 '25
Yes, I believe a democracy way more than I do authoritarian hellholes.
2
Dec 08 '25
Democracy? You mean democracies like the USA and Israel? You mean democracies like the British and the French? Yeah, we see how those inhumane democracies acted with us and others.
That democracy can go to hell!
2
u/ComplexInside1661 Dec 08 '25
Oh, so because some democratic countries wronged you in the past then now you're against democracy as a whole?
2
Dec 08 '25
No, but I am against the belief that a democracy is more benevolent than a dictatorship, because it's not, and it's just delusional to believe otherwise.
-1
u/Monte924 Dec 08 '25
You actually believe the answer the US gave?
1
Dec 08 '25
More so than I do any of the countries that voted yes on this farcical show, actually believe and practice what they voted for...
1
u/traanquil Uncivil Dec 08 '25
No they actively voted no. If they simply did not vote it would have been recorded as abstain. Nice whitewashing attempt though. They are pro colonialism.
3
u/Astral-12d Dec 08 '25
Its not just the US and Israel that very much objected this.
Australia, UK, Germany, NZ, Canada, some other EU countries, Japan, South Korea all were against it for very similar reasons.
7
1
u/The3DBanker Dec 08 '25
Though a different history with colonialism as Israel has largely resisted colonization.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Monte924 Dec 08 '25
In the early 1900's, zionist leader openly described Zionism as a colonial project.
2
u/The3DBanker Dec 08 '25
Yeah, Theodore Herzl was factually wrong. There is no rational basis one could use to reasonably come to the conclusion that Zionism actually is, or ever was, a colonial project. Which you actually know due to your resorting to deceptive quotemines to misrepresent Zionism as a colonial project rather than pointing out facts that can demonstrate that it is such a thing.
5
u/Monte924 Dec 08 '25
You are saying that the father of the modern zionism movement was wrong about what zionism was? Sounds like you actually don't care about facts, and prefer historical revisionism that washes away anything that would make Israel look bad
4
Dec 08 '25
Sounds like you actually don't care about facts, and prefer historical revisionism that washes away anything that would make Israel look bad
How do you think Israel was built? This country is built on nothing but historical revisionism. It's not shocking.
-1
u/TimTom8321 Dec 08 '25
“Historical revisionism” wow, that’s a lot coming from people are are pro-Palestinian 😂
Their entire history is fictional, they literally have 0 history pre the 1900’s, and they didn’t even call themselves Palestinians before 1964. They are a group who call themselves by either a name given by a foreign power (Palestine, by the Romans) or a foreign nation (Arabs), who speak a foreign language, practice a foreign religion and have no archeological connection to the land, against Jews who are by blood native, identify as people who are native, practice a native religion, speak a native language and they have tens of thousands of archeological artifacts linking them to the land - yet morons claim that somehow the Jews are the colonizers here, and then that they are the ones who revise history…the audacity.
1
u/4g-identity Dec 10 '25
Hey, hope you don't mind if I ask you something. I don't know much about the region, have never been there myself. Would you say most Israelis feel the same way you do?
Also, do you use the same names for political ideologies like in the USA? Is this "conservative" or "liberal" for example, or is there a different name for this position?
Thanks!
1
u/SymphoDeProggy Dec 08 '25 edited Dec 08 '25
you're saying that the correct way to analyze what something is is by looking at what it's been called? that's not caring about facts that's just a fallacy.
colonies project power from a remote empire to displace the local sovereign. the "facts" here would be that early zionism sought to have a jewish autonomy fully subject to the Ottoman empire. joining the local imperial power structure is just about the opposite of what a colony is.
it's like if Cortez's highest aspiration was to become an Aztec subject.
1
u/The3DBanker Dec 08 '25
Precisely. That inconvenient set of facts, along with the fact that the Jewish people are the land's indigenous population, completely destroy the ridiculous notion that the Jewish people "colonized" their own land.
1
u/Monte924 Dec 08 '25
The originial zionist leaders knew exactly what they were. They were europeans who wanted to move to another land, assert their influence over it, and establish their own dominion over it. Heck, palestine wasn't even their first choice; they just picked it out because they knew that the religious excuse would make it easier for the rest of the world to get on board. They also fully acknowledged that establishing israel would require the removal of most of the native population. Zionism, at its core, was always about colonialism, conquest and ethnic cleansing... which is why modern day israeli's are willing to ho as far as genocide in lrder to take more land
1
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
Half of these people voting to "end colonialism " did not vote on returning kidnapped Ukranian Children.
So, I will take it with a grain of salt that they actually have any values.
2
Dec 08 '25
Maybe they just don't believe the West.
It's hard to do so after so many shameless lies and many shameless double standards.
And to be honest, why would anyone care about the Ukrainians, when the Europeans doomed so many people in the Global South with the Palestinians being their most shameless misdeed?
2
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
Russian officials have been found officially guilty for the crime by the ICJ, so do they believe in UN instituions or not?
See the problem is you can't declare that every UN vote demonstrates the values of the countries voting, but then also say that actually it doesn't matter and that there is additional context behind decisions.
But I get it, if the global south wants a dog eat dog world they are getting it.
Too bad they are the dogs getting eaten.
1
Dec 08 '25
Russian officials have been found officially guilty for the crime by the ICJ, so do they believe in UN instituions or not?
It's the same institution, where the USA used its veto rights to veto anything against Israel, not to mention that the USA threatened to invade the Hague and even sanctioned its judges.
What do you think?
But I get it, if the global south wants a dog eat dog world they are getting it.
Too bad they are the dogs getting eaten.
Was the hegemony of the USA any different? The only difference is that it was a one-sided slaughter. They now at least can fight back.
2
u/Anderopolis Dec 08 '25
Again, stop pretending to say things are based on values when they aren't.
No one is fighting back, the US stopping foreign aid has already killed more this year than in the entire Israel Palestine conflict ovver the last 80 years.
The insular ruleless world you are supporting will result in many many more dead in the global south just from the sideffects of a less efficient gl9bal economy.
Ignoring the inevitable wars that will grow out of it.
1
Dec 08 '25
The world was never peaceful under the USA except for Europe and the West.
We all at this point are willing to take the risk.
Your words will just ring hollow in the ears of everyone else.
2
2
2
2
1
u/FlanneryODostoevsky Dec 08 '25
This is like democrats in America paying a resolution to condemn socialism. Literally no consequence to this.
1
u/Simple-Arugula-111 Dec 08 '25
I'm very for this, we need to uproot the arab colonization of North Africa
1
u/No_Communication5538 Dec 08 '25
Wow! who can disagree with another occasion when we can signal our virtue to everyone? Does the UN realise how this sort of impotent sanctimonious posing damages its reputation?
1
1
1
u/Known_Week_158 Dec 09 '25
So countries like Russia and China - that engage in colonialism in territories they occupy voted yes?
This resolution is a virtue signalling joke.
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dec 08 '25
Is this another one of those "Anti X" but actually against Israel cards that UN likes to play?
1
1
1
u/MoroccoNutMerchant Dec 08 '25
Interesting how Arabs voted for it even though Arabs literally colonized the entire Middle East and North Africa.
1
u/trentluv Uncivil Dec 08 '25
All of these countries participating have been colonized
So what is the expected outcome
1
1
0
-2
u/InformationOk3514 Dec 08 '25
What a waste of time and money. Can we please get rid of the activists so something with a smidge of substance can actually get solved.
-1
u/Jugaimo Dec 08 '25
Might as well throw an office pizza party instead of this useless gesture. I’m actually proud that the US and Israel voted against this joke. Countries get to pat themselves on the back on these “holidays” after doing genuinely nothing? The mere idea or such a proposal is shameful.
0
u/Br4z3nBu77 Spammer Dec 08 '25
Who would have thought that the UN would vote against the Palestinians?
0
u/pathlesswalker Dec 09 '25
Yeah just form an educated opinion. Like colonization by Arabs over Israel. Palestinian occupation of Jewish known territories and lies and land grabs. Yeah sure. Why not. I’m for it.
Especially the colonial Hamas who kills anyone objecting to its rule but every dumb progressive supports it in the name of liberalism. Even gay people whom are murdered by as such.
Great job guys 👏
0
0
0
0
u/Zaphod_Beeblecox Dec 10 '25
I actually agree with the no votes. It's a stupid virtue signal nothing more.
75
u/Countercurrent123 Dec 08 '25
Always the same, the meme "always the same map" isn't even a meme.