r of racist incidents in several countries and the rise of skinhead groups, which have been responsible for many of these incidents, as well as the resurgence of racist and xenophobic violence targeting members of ethnic, religious or cultural communities and national minorities, as observed by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in his latest report.”
The Resolution states that these acts represent an abuse of freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful assembly and more importantly calls on states to, “…take the necessary measures to put an end to the practices described above, and calls upon States to take more effective measures in accordance with international human rights law to combat those phenomena and the extremist movements, which pose a real threat to democratic value.”
It calls on states, (a) “To condemn all propaganda and all organizations that are based on ideas of racial superiority or that attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form;…”
The Resolution’s most important ideals are expressed in these sections in my view.
It calls on states:
(c) “To declare as an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, and incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;”
(d) “To declare illegal and prohibit organizations and organized and all other propaganda activities that promote and incite racial discrimination and to recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;”
(e) “To prohibit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, from promoting or inciting racial discrimination;”
When you look at these ideals it would be the end of all far right organisations based on racial superiority such as the British National Party in the UK or the Ku Klux Klan in America. It would spell the end for media organisations that perpetuate ideas of immigration based on skin colour. The Daily Mail, The Sun, and many UK newspapers would struggle to fill their newspapers which often publish anti-immigrant stories.
It would spell the end for politicians and political parties who use immigration as an excuse for society’s problems. It would be the end of police racist stop and search. The end of newspapers highlighting crimes based on race.
It would spell the end of irrational nationalism, and the ideas that other people are foreigners to a country, on an earth which belongs to us all. No more census forms based on race and religion. No more alarming statistics about the birth rates of non whites.
The aims and potential effects of this Resolution I believe are numerous and revolutionary.
Despite all this however, Carla Stea said in her article that America, Britain and Europe voted against this Resolution on December 19, 2011.
John F. Sammis, the United States Deputy Representative to The United Nations Economic and Social Council, explained in a statement on November 17, 2011, why America would not be voting in favour of the UN Resolution. He said:
“The United States supports many elements of this resolution. We join other members of the Third Committee in expressing revulsion at any attempt to glorify or otherwise promote Nazi ideology. The United States has been a strong supporter of the UN’s efforts to remember the Holocaust and has a deep commitment to honoring the memory of the millions of lives lost. We also condemn without reservation all forms of religious intolerance or hatred.”
“We remain concerned, however, that the resolution fails again this year to distinguish between actions and statements that, while offensive, should be protected by freedom of expression, and criminal actions motivated by bias that should always be prohibited. The United States shares the concern expressed in this resolution regard