The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Human rights are definitely a good idea & concept to have in the world, to eliminate poverty and inequality. Unfortunately, they are not always referred to and are often ignored. Most countries in the world did sign the pact to obey the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but not all and not all of the countries that agreed to go by them have been doing so. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is basically a list of universal laws and rules that every country must follow, in order to maintain peace and for every global citizen to be equal.

If not for The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the world's poverty levels would probably be higher, there is a chance that inequality would be a more socially acceptable concept and more governments could (still) be monopolies and dictatorships.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has seemingly been one of the things that has improved life quality for people (especially poor people) in the past 60 or so years. Since they were brought into action, not long after World War II, there haven't been any wars taken place in first world countries, people have been able to fight for their rights and win, like Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela and Dictatorships have stepped down. Now, These things all could have happened without the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but in my opinion, it certainly helped.

Of course, Human Rights do get breached very frequently, especially in 3rd world countries. The protests in Egypt, Libya and other Middle Eastern countries have definitely shown how little progress has been made in some places. The Egyptian protesters had been rallying against their power mongering dictator leader for almost a month before he gave in, which sparked hope for people in other parts of the world who are in a similar situation. Hundreds of Egyptian protesters died, just because they wanted to know what it was really like to have these "Universal Human Rights" that they had heard so much about.

I think there are quite a few people and groups who are responsible for the lack of Human Rights in some countries. The UN, and its representatives could possibly be doing a better job of making sure people all over the world are getting treated the same; fairly. But, of course, it's not just the UN's fault that leaders of countries are not being true to the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Each country's leader and UN representative should be making sure that they're doing the right thing in order to make their country a better place to live in, and to give their country a better name. I believe that the UN should be punishing leaders and counties in some way for not following the Declaration to prevent these breaches from occurring in the first place.


-Expert Blogger Darcy Power

And I was like, Babel, Babel Babel, ohh!

The 2006 movie Babel highlighted differences in countries, mainly Morroco, Japan and Mexico.

One of the things highlighted was the family stucture portrayed throughout the film. In Morocco, the young boys of the family (probably about 7-11 years old) were trusted with the rifle to protect the goats that were being farmed by the family for meat and income. The man of the house went off to the nearest town to do buisness all day, and the women and young girls did work around the house. In Japan, a father and daughter lived in a big city, and the daughter would go off and have fun with her friends, while the father was at work all day. This was suprisingly similar, except the child could easily go off and do whatever she wanted because of the wealth of the family, and common Japanese family structure. Finally, to compare these with, was the Mexican and American families. The Amreican family was quite rich, with the parents hiring a maid to take care of the children, while they were in Morrocco, mourning the death of another son of theirs. The Mexican family was seemingly quite poor, but they managed to have lots of fun with the smallest things at the maid's son's wedding. In that family, all of the adults were equal, and the children could be easily entertained.

Annother thing to not was the health standards in the different countries. In Morocco, where Susan (the American tourist) got shot, there wasn't a hospital or anything like one anywhere near where they were. There was nothing that could be done where they were except keep pressure on the gunshot wound, and stitch it up with a hot needle and thread. There weren't any other examples for the other countries in the film, but we know anyway that the health system in Japan or America would have been able to take care of something like this.

I believe that the director & writers of this film were trying to convey a message about guns and irresponsibility with guns in the world. The father of the two Moroccan children had trusted his young, pre-pubescent children with a rifle to protect their livestock from wild animals. Obviously, this turned out to be a bad idea. Of course, most people in Western societies wouldn't give their young children guns, but because of this family's structure, and the way that these people live, it wasn't an idea that would be questioned. Unfortunately, the young Moroccan boys were misusing the gun, and ended up nearly killing an innocent woman. This is saying that the director and writers of the film have the opinion that guns are dangerous, and should only be used by responsible people, or no-one at all.

Lastly, it is mentionable that the people in charge of the making of this film had a fairly big task to try and portray the world, and the different countries that these events took place in. I can't really comment on this, because I don't really know much about all of these countries and their people's life styles, but, whether they were right or wrong about it all, the film makers were fairly convincing throughout the film that they knew what they were doing, making this movie.


By the very talented etc Darcy Power.