The US did sign and help to draft it, but to ratify you need a 2/3rd majority in the Senate. And the conservatives in Congress want domestic control over all law making and enforcement.
This could be an international treaty against punching kittens, and they would still vote no.
Edit: Itâs also worth adding that a) this (like US law) has carve outs that allow kids to work under certain conditions, and b) this isnât a labor specific treaty. This covers corporal, punishment, criminal punishment, education, gender, and sexuality, healthcare and a number of other things that are hot button issues for American conservatives.
Also, after this was drafted, the US has ratified international agreements on child labor.
Saying this is just a labor thing isnât the full story at all.
This could be an international treaty against punching kittens, and they would still vote no.
Plus McConnell would never ratify a treaty that outlaws his favorite pastime.
It has been claimed that American opposition to the convention stems primarily from political and religious conservatives.
Shocking.
Donât forget, our capitalists have been hard at work infecting the rest of the world with OUR greed disease. Weâre the ones advocating other nations stop seeing their people as valued citizens and instead as capital livestock to be exploited mercilessly.
Child labor exists elsewhere out of desperate, struggling developing economies. Weâre worse imho, because weâre doing it amid record profits, because its never enough, and our gluttonous pig oligarch owners ever demanding mooooaaaaaar, exploiting these kids whose schools theyâve already destroyed and stole the funding of through tax evasion and legislative tax policy capture.
We arenât human to them, weâre capital livestock, which just makes our non-wealthy children capital veal.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/20/republican-child-labor-law-death
IMHO, the root of the issue is that the GOP has been dogmatically opposed to international law for decades now. They donât like having to answer to anyone other than themselves. And you need 2/3rd of the senate to ratify.
Itâs more than that, because Republican governors have been actively trying and succeeding in rolling back hard won child labor protection laws.
Itâs not just about not having the foreigns telling them what to do, itâs because Republicans want children providing cheap labor to boost their stock portfolio. Here. Now.
Labor is only one of a multitude of things that this treaty addresses. Conservatives have been objecting to issues of sovereignty around its language on education, corporal punishment, criminal punishment, healthcare, sex and gender discrimination, etc.
Itâs also worth noting that this treaty has carveouts to allow certain forms of child labor. Moreover, the US was able to ratify ILO 182 to agree to ban the worst forms of child labor.
Iâm not saying child labor might not be a motivator for some of then conservatives opposed to ratifying this treaty, but there is a LOT more in there that US conservatives hate to relinquish control over, and when treaties are just focused on labor law, they have been easier to ratify.
This is more complex than just labor. The labor argument a fraction of the full story.
Capitalism isnât exclusive to the US. Itâs definitely a major breeding ground for the worst aspects of it, but itâs hardly unique in that regard.
isnt something like 99.8% of the population financially incapable of holding capital/being called capitalists?
Our brand of rigged market capitalism truly found itâs stride under Reaganâs deregulation giveaway. Weâve been exporting/advocating/bullying other developed nations to do the same ever since. There are tightly, tightly controlled, adequately taxed capitalist economies that focus on how REASONABLE capital incentive can benefit society (the point of any economy, that weâve abandoned) that can work, like the Nordic model, but now weâre coming for that too, and weâll do to them what we did to the UK and are doing to France.
Itâs an easy sell. A faustian bargain. You just need a few people in the right positions of power. âHey, YOU can live larger. You can live like a modern pharoah. Just sell out your countrymen. Do you like yachts? How about yachts the size of cruise ships?â
And Margaret Thatcher was doing her own disassembly of workerâs rights. They enabled each other, but one wasnât wholly dependent on the other for their actions.
If thatâs literally your only metric, maybe.
If thereâs no child labor, then everything is a-okay in your book?
What children are being forced to work in dangerous places? Or missing school to do so? Is there a bunch of 4th graders missing school to go into the mines?
Theyâre literally getting dragged into machinery and killed on the job right now. Yes. Granted. Theyâre undocumented immigrants currently. So weâre not supposed to care about those. Inevitably though they will move on from abusing just those children.
Honestly anyone who would ask âwhere were they bornâ when considering whether to care about children getting hurt or killed is an unredeemable monster.
American opposition to the convention stems primarily from political and religious conservatives. For example, The Heritage Foundation considers that âa civil society in which moral authority is exercised by religious congregations, family, and other private associations is fundamental to the American orderâ
No surprise there
The US barely ever ratifies treaties that require international oversight. Itâs the same reason we have the UCMJ and not the Hague court.
More like the US would rather keep its territorial integrity. They have the ability to deal with violations in house, no need to have international boards be used against us.
They have the ability to deal with violations in house
riiiiiiight, no bias at all in that. Hey, we investigated ourselves and found we are not liable to war crimes we commit abroad. how bloody fucking convenient.
Good job at giving Russia an excuse to be free of consequences when it finally loses in Ukraine. Theyâre probably going to make a case that they donât need to have international boards be used against them too, no?
You canât expect any country to take the international court seriously if you donât do it yourself. The logic that youâve just used is exactly the kind of logic that countries would use that donât want to be held accountable for their actions that go against international law.
