Changes

Talk:Amnesty International (view source)

Revision as of 14:32, October 29, 2008

1,171 bytes added , 14:32, October 29, 2008

Line 23: Line 23:

::I can agree. They take the greedy road, legal courts of Democracies are where the money is. Closed nations, authoritarian nations are too much work, too much risk, no great finacial payoff if any. Anti-Democracy is well suited.--'''Jpatt'''[[User:Jpatt| ]] 22:07, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

+

:::Disagree. "Anti-democracy" implies they are opposed to the principle of democracy. Far from it. The reason many of their campaigns are focussed on democratic nations such as USA (as I believe they freely acknowledge) is that these countries have made positive statements in regard to human rights and have populations inclined to support human rights issues. AI believe they have some chances of success by raising public awareness of issues such as the death penalty & inhumane interrogation techniques, and creating pressure for these countries to make reforms. Closed totalitarian natons are much less likely to make these kind of reforms, and creating public awareness within those countries is problematic because of freedom of speech is not upheld. Obviously AI still has campaigns regarding these countries, raising international awareness & creating international pressure. If the title "Accusations of bias" is too broad, the specific name for this kind of bias (as used in Wikipedia article on AI for example) is "selection bias" - I.E. bias in terms of which countries they select for focus. [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 10:32, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

Sideways

560

edits