Summary provided by https://notegpt.io/pdf-summary
Summary The International Court of Justice has found that Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, violate international law. The Court determined that Israel’s actions, such as its settlement policy, acts of annexation, and discriminatory legislation and measures, constitute a breach of international law, including the prohibition on the use of force and the non-acquisition of territory by force. Israel’s presence in the territory is deemed unlawful, and the Court has called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages caused, and non-recognition of the illegal situation by states and international organizations.
Key Insights The International Court of Justice has determined that Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, violates international law. Israel’s settlement policy, acts of annexation, discriminatory legislation, and measures were found to be in breach of international law. The Court has called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages, and non-recognition of the illegal situation. The General Assembly and Security Council of the United Nations are tasked with considering further action to end Israel’s presence in the territory. The Court emphasizes the importance of achieving a just and lasting peace in the region for the benefit of all parties involved. Frequently Asked Questions Question
What actions were deemed unlawful by the International Court of Justice in the Occupied Palestinian Territory? Answer The Court found Israel’s settlement policy, acts of annexation, discriminatory legislation, and measures to be in violation of international law.
Question
What measures did the Court call for to address Israel’s presence in the territory? Answer The Court called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages caused, and non-recognition of the illegal situation.
Question
Which international organizations are obligated not to recognize the illegal situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory? Answer All states and international organizations are obligated not to recognize the illegal situation in the territory.
Question
What role do the General Assembly and Security Council of the United Nations play in addressing Israel’s presence in the territory? Answer The General Assembly and Security Council are tasked with considering further action to end Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Agreed. Let me see what I can do.
They’re just categorically different, there isn’t an “inside” or an “outside” in the sense of spatial structure as that is something derived a posteriori as part of thought.
So… there are things that are either within the category of thought or not? Is thought mutually exclusive to material? Is thought composed of material or the other way around? Or are they both the same?
I’m not sure what it would even mean to say reality is “thought”.
That is the standard definition of idealism, is it not? That existence is immaterial?
But what justification is there that what is thought of is actually in existence outside of thought? One can think of things that do not exist outside of thought.
What justification is there that reality isn’t thought by it’s very nature?
How do you justify the premise that reality is objectively-existent?
Language like that plus the failure to treat the subject of discussion to dignity was almost enough for me to remove this comment, on it’s own. Thankfully, the community has spoken using the tools available to them to indicate that your behavior is unacceptable. Keep it up and you’ll be removed.
Interesting that this is being downvoted.
It would be great if someone could articulate the negative sentiment towards bitcoin.
As a former software developer, and someone who has briefly experimented with the blockchains, I can say that the technology is vastly over-hyped and completely misunderstood.
Can Human Rights be furthered by use of blockchains? It’s quite possible.
But what use is there focusing on the simplest of use cases: bitcoin?
Indeed, it is:
https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/18443730 <- universal healthcare and human rights
The right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health[10]—a right that practically all countries have committed to uphold
Except, the United States still hasn’t ratified.
https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/17662154 <- map of who hasn’t ratified
https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/17841177 <- easy-to-read ICESCR
Thanks for taking the time to reply, db0! That is much appreciated.
Comment removed for violating “0-tolerance for breaking all three rules at once”
See https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/18229170 and https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/18182706 for relevant UN and academic discussions about this topic.
This is the human rights community, so I’d be interested to hear what people think about, say, a third-world farmer using slash-and-burn agriculture to meet their basic needs.
A simplification of the question, from a human rights perspective is 1) does a given activity cause injustice for the human rights of others? and 2) is the actor within their rights to perform said activity?
Based on the little that I’ve read about slash-and-burn agriculture, it appears to be a sustainable choice for growing populations, but it is not sustainable for large populations. Also, that is apparently a fairly well understand farming technique, historically speaking. So it might be safe to say, that in this third-world, subsistence situation, the answer to 1) might be no and 2) might be yes.
One of the Human Rights is the right to work, so yes, sometimes human rights-based approaches will align with profit motives as equally as it will with environmental motives. What a human rights-based approach does not allow for, however, is letting profit motives overpower environmental motives.
also, apologies to everyone at lemmy.sdf.org if i am flooding local for you. i’ve been busy adding a bunch links
they also have an email address: membership at sdf dot org, but yeah, the internal BBS is where it is at.
We are a public access UNIX system, so it’s not as much of a void as it might seem :D
Well, please do share what you find!
You are on the right track w/ idealism vs materialism in psychology, at least.
The question there arose from the brain: how do you rectify the mind/soul with the brain/body? Dualism apparently fails (the idea that there is a separate mind from the brain) which leaves only some form of monism. A sort of hybrid materialism-idealism seems to make the most sense, where consciousness is a property of the universe, like time or space, and different entities have differing consciousnesses. In that sort of a philosophy, when talking about the brain of a person you are equally talking about the experience that person is having, just in different terms.
I suspect that in sociology that would be some sort of unified anarcho-marxism, if such a thing exists. The atomic theory of society seems to be the thing where they are working on unifying language. If society is fully atomized, asking whether a new society arises due to free choice or resource demands is like asking whether rivers rise due to rain or sewer overflow, if that makes sense?
this was one of my favorite childhood games, thanks for posting this!
apparently, depending on the language used, it will drive the easily angered on the right to insanity
You are very welcome!
I’m glad to be able to be of appreciation, as I know how that is - looks like you are in the right place to discuss political science though!
In the interest of conversation, maybe you can explain or point me to an explanation of why Anarchism vs. Marxism is considered “idealism vs materialism” in sociology?
In Psychology, we had an “idealism vs materialism” debate, but it is mostly resolved with a sort of “idealistic materialism” or “materialistic idealism” where, essentially, “idealism <=> materialism”, as I understand it.
I’m curious about what the current state of the art is, in that debate!
Either way, I’ll definitely spend some time in !politics@lemmy.ml checking things out.
For further disambiguation: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-system-of-apartheid/