Com › article › 20251121014605464하기 싫었다 이이경, 제작진 강요폭로 ‘어글리 면치기’ 뭐길래재.

Will Human Rights Survive a Trumpian World?

Authoritarian Advances Threaten Rules-Based Order

The global human rights system is in peril. Under relentless pressure from US President Donald Trump, and persistently undermined by China and Russia, the rules-based international order is being crushed, threatening to take with it the architecture human rights defenders have come to rely on to advance norms and protect freedoms. To defy this trend, governments that still value human rights, alongside social movements, civil society, and international institutions, need to form a strategic alliance to push back.

To be fair, the downward spiral predated Trump’s reelection. The democratic wave that began over 50 years ago has given way to what scholars term a “democratic recession.” Democracy is now back to 1985 levels according to some metrics, with 72 percent of the world’s population now living under autocracy. Russia and China are less free today than 20 years ago. And so is the United States.

Of course, democracy is not a panacea for human rights violations; the US and other longtime democracies have their own histories of colonial crimes, racism, abusive justice systems, and wartime atrocities. More recently, authoritarian leaders have exploited public mistrust and anger to win elections and then dismantled the very institutions that brought them to power. Democratic institutions are crucial to represent the will of the people and keep power in check. It’s no surprise that whenever democracy is undermined, rights are too, as evident in recent years in India, Türkiye, the Philippines, El Salvador, and Hungary.

In this context, 2025 may be seen as a tipping point. In just 12 months, the Trump administration has carried out a broad assault on key pillars of US democracy and the global rules-based order, which the US, despite inconsistencies, was, with other states, instrumental in helping to establish.

In short order, Trump’s second-term administration has undermined trust in the sanctity of elections, reduced government accountability, gutted food assistance and healthcare subsidies, attacked judicial independence, defied court orders, rolled back women’s rights, obstructed access to abortion care, undermined remedies for racial harm, terminated programs mandating accessibility for people with disabilities, punished free speech, stripped protections from trans and intersex people, eroded privacy, and used government power to intimidate political opponents, the media, law firms, universities, civil society, and even comedians.

Claiming a risk of “civilizational erasure” in Europe and leaning on racist tropes to cast entire populations as unwelcome in the US, the Trump administration has embraced policies and rhetoric that align with white nationalist ideology. Immigrants and asylum seekers have been subjected to inhumane conditions and degrading treatment; 32 died in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in 2025, and as of mid-January 2026, an additional 4 have died. Masked immigration enforcement agents have targeted people of color, using excessive force, terrorizing communities, wrongfully arresting scores of citizens, and, most recently, unjustifiably killing two people in Minneapolis, whose deaths Human Rights Watch has documented.

The US president of course has the authority to tighten US borders and enforce stricter immigration policies. The administration is not, however, entitled to deny legal process to asylum seekers, mistreat undocumented migrants, or unlawfully discriminate. In a well-functioning democracy, no electoral mandate should supersede domestic legislation, constitutional protections, or international human rights law. Trump’s team has repeatedly bypassed these guardrails.

The violations have not stopped at the border. The Trump administration used a 1798 law to send hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to an infamous prison in El Salvador, where they were tortured and sexually abused. Its blatantly unlawful strikes on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific extrajudicially killed more than 120 people whom Trump claims were drug traffickers.

After the US attacked Venezuela and apprehended its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, Trump claimed the US would “run” the country and control its vast oil reserves. Despite paying lip service to human rights concerns under Maduro at the United Nations, Trump has worked with the same repressive apparatus to further US interests. Many Western allies have chosen to stay silent about these lawless moves, perhaps fearing erratic tariffs and blowback to their alliances.

Trump’s foreign policy has upended the foundations of the rules-based order that seeks to advance democracy and human rights, even if imperfectly.

Trump has boasted that he doesn’t “need international law” as a constraint, only his “own morality.” His administration has politicized the US State Department’s annual human rights report, stepped away from the global prohibition on antipersonnel landmines, voiced support for rewriting international rules on asylum, and skipped the UN’s Universal Periodic Review of the US’ human rights record.

His administration withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council and the World Health Organization and plans to quit 66 international organizations and programs that it describes as part of an “outdated model of multilateralism,” including key forums for climate negotiations. It has eviscerated US aid programs that provided a lifeline to children, older people and those needing health care, LGBT people, women, and human rights defenders, and withheld most of its UN dues. 

Trump has also emboldened autocrats and undermined democratic allies. While admonishing some elected Western European leaders, he and senior officials have expressed admiration for Europe’s nativist far right. He has favored autocrats such as Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, while continuing decades of US support to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

His administration has unjustifiably imposed sanctions to punish respected Palestinian human rights organizations, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) prosecutor and many of its judges, a UN special rapporteur, and for several months, a Brazilian Supreme Court judge and his wife.

The institutional response in the US to Trump’s power grabs has been shockingly muted. Much of Congress, controlled by his own party, has not challenged his supercharged expansion of executive power. The leaders of the US’ most powerful technology companies have made significant donations and sought to placate the president. Some big law firms and prestigious universities have made deals rather than assert their independence, and some media organizations seem afraid to attract the president’s ire.

Has the US switched sides on the human rights playing field? While US engagement with human rights institutions has always been selective, China and Russia have long pursued an illiberal agenda. They stand much to gain from a US government that now expresses open hostility to universal rights. China and Russia remain strategic rivals of the US, but all three countries are now led by leaders who share open disdain for norms and institutions that could constrain their power.

Together, they wield considerable economic, military, and diplomatic power. If they were to consistently act as allies of convenience to erode global rules, they could threaten the entire system. Already, a loose international network of countries such as North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Myanmar, Cuba, and Belarus work in concert with Russia and China. These leaders share very little ideologically but align in undermining human rights and promoting a regressive international agenda. In word and in practice, the US government is now helping them in this endeavor.

The US’ weakening of multilateral institutions also dealt a serious blow to global efforts to prevent or stop grave international crimes. The “never again” movement, born from the horrors of the Holocaust and reignited by the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides, spurred the UN General Assembly to embrace the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in 2005. Meant to guide international intervention to prevent and stop atrocities in tandem with efforts to prosecute and punish serious crimes, R2P made a real difference in places like the Central African Republic and Kenya.

Today, R2P is rarely invoked and the ICC is under siege. In addition to Trump’s far-reaching sanctions, in December 2025 a Moscow court sentenced the ICC prosecutor and eight of its judges to prison terms in absentia. Moreover, despite being ICC fugitives, in 2025, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was welcomed by Donald Trump in Alaska, and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Hungary, an ICC member state at the time, at Orban’s invitation.

Twenty years ago, the US government and civil society were instrumental in galvanizing a response to mass atrocities in Darfur. Sudan is burning again, but this time under Trump, with relative impunity. Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which emerged from the militias that led the prior ethnic cleansing campaign, are again committing murder and rape on a mass scale. A growing body of evidence indicates that the UAE, a longtime US ally that recently made multi-billion-dollar deals with Trump, is providing the RSF with military support.

In the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Israeli armed forces have committed acts of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, killing over 70,000 people since the October 2023 Hamas-led attacks on Israel and displacing the vast majority of Gaza’s population. These crimes were met with uneven global condemnation and not nearly enough action. Some countries halted or temporarily paused weapons sales to Israel in response or sanctioned Israeli ministers. Trump, however, continued a long-standing US policy of almost unconditional support to Israel, even as the International Court of Justice is weighing allegations of genocide and has issued binding orders under the Genocide Convention to protect Palestinians’ rights.

Trump announced in February an alarming US plan to transform Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East” free of Palestinians, which would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing. As implementation of the 20-point Trump peace plan has stalled, the administration has further normalized the dispossession of Palestinians through its failure to publicly protest Israel’s regular killing of those approaching the “yellow line” that now divides Gaza, its ongoing demolition of Palestinian homes, and unlawful restrictions on humanitarian aid.

In Ukraine, Trump’s peace efforts have consistently downplayed Russia’s responsibility for serious violations. These include indiscriminate bombing, coercing Ukrainians in occupied areas to serve in the Russian military, systematic torture of Ukrainian prisoners of war, the abduction and deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia, and the use of quadcopter drones to hunt and kill civilians. Rather than applying meaningful pressure on Putin to end these crimes, Trump publicly berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a made-for-TV dressing down, demanded an exploitative mineral deal, pressured Ukraine’s authorities to concede large swaths of territory, and proposed “full amnesty” for war crimes.

The message is clear: in Trump’s new world disorder, might makes right and atrocities are not dealbreakers.

Com › star › 20251121그놈의 면치기 논란이이경은 하기 싫었고, 놀뭐가 시켰다 스타. 이이경 면치기할 때 국물 사방으로 튀어, 비위생 논란. 엑스포츠뉴스 이창규 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다. 지가 놀뭐에서 면먹을때마다 저렇게 먹었음 멤버들 질색하는 반응 즐기면서 그러다 심은경 편에서 그게 엄청 화제가 된거임 그때 반응이 웃긴데 더럽다 또는 역하다.

개소리 ㄴㄴ 제작진 입장문에도 써있듯이 그 면치기 이이경 주체적으로 3년내내 몇십번은 했다 면먹는 장면에선 거의 다 그렇게 했음.

이날 ‘만원의 행복’ 대결은 유재석, 이이경의 패배였다, 2일 유튜브 데프콘tv는 나는 xx씨가 자꾸 생각나더라고나솔 mc들이 뽑은 최애 출연자는, 결국 이이경은 제작진의 요청에 따라 행동했을 뿐인데 비판받았고, 이를 홀로 감내했다는.

지난 14일 방송된 mbc 예능 놀면 뭐하니.. 이이경이 이례적으로 제작진을 향해 직접 서운함을 표출했고, 제작진은 이를 인정하고 고개 숙였다..

’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려졌습니다. 그는 제작진이 ‘국수집을 빌렸다’며 부탁했고, 제가 ‘예능으로 하는 겁니다’라고 말한 멘트는 편집됐다. Com › star › 20251121그놈의 면치기 논란이이경은 하기 싫었고, 놀뭐가 시켰다 스타. 아니 근데 면치기 문제가 아니라 이이경 마이너 갤러리, ’에서 배우 심은경과 식사 도중 과장된 면치기 퍼포먼스를 선보였고, 일부 시청자들 사이에서.

이이경 면치기할 때 국물 사방으로 튀어, 비위생 논란.

이이경 어글리 면치기 악플에 마음고생 이제 안 먹겠다.

’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려졌습니다. 사진 유튜브 채널 ‘데프콘tv’ 배우 이이경이 과거 ‘면치기 논란’에 대해 직접 해명했다. 지가 놀뭐에서 면먹을때마다 저렇게 먹었음 멤버들 질색하는 반응 즐기면서 그러다 심은경 편에서 그게 엄청 화제가 된거임 그때 반응이 웃긴데 더럽다 또는 역하다, 이이경 면치기할 때 국물 사방으로 튀어, 비위생 논란. 사진 유튜브 채널 ‘데프콘tv’ 배우 이이경이 과거 ‘면치기 논란’에 대해 직접 해명했다.

Com › board › view이이경 인스타 저격에 놀면 뭐하니. 충격과 공포의 면치기 이이경의 면치기를 직관하고 말문이 막힌 유재석 x 김석훈, mbc 250607 방송. 면 먹다 욕까지 먹은 배우 이이경이 결국 분노했다. 저런 게 면치기였다면 면치기 엄청나게 싫어하는 사람들이 이해가 되네요 이이경 면치기는 이미 몇차례 애기가 나왔었고 그걸 유재석이나 pd. 애초에 프로그램 하차는 사생활 논란 때문 아님, 최근 이이경은 매 순간순간 울화가 치밀었다며 놀면 뭐하니.

1,744 Likes, 119 Comments 486__comedy On J 이이경 면치기 이제 그만 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ.

’에서 불거진 면치기 논란에 결국 고개를 숙였다. 면치기 논란과 사과성 발언 이후에도 여론은 엇갈리고 있다, 아니 근데 면치기 문제가 아니라 이이경 마이너 갤러리. 이이경은 웃기려다 욕 먹었다며 위축된 모습을 보였고, 이제 안 먹겠다고 자책성 발언을 남기며 사실상 사과의 뜻을 전했다. 그의 폭로는 개인 논란이 아니라, 한국 예능계의 ‘출연자 강요식 연출’ 구조로 불똥이 튀고 있다.

충격과 공포의 면치기 이이경의 면치기를 직관하고 말문이 막힌 유재석 x 김석훈, mbc 250607 방송.. Kr › article › 202511211746003이이경, ‘놀뭐’에 많이 서운했네&mldr..

지난 7일 방송된 mbc ‘놀면 뭐하니. 이날 방송에서 유재석은 위축된 이이경의 모습에 이경이가 먹는 것 때문에 이경이가 그런 친구가 아닌데 웃겨 보겠다고 면치기하다가 욕먹고라며, 에서는 유재석이 이이경의 위생 논란에 대해 언급하는 모습이 담겼다, 또한 해당 게시글에서 추가적으로 당시 출연 중이었던 놀면 뭐하니.

아니 근데 면치기 문제가 아니라 이이경 마이너 갤러리.

Kr › news › articleview이이경, 면치기 논란에 결국 고개 숙여&mldr, ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려진다, 저런 게 면치기였다면 면치기 엄청나게 싫어하는 사람들이 이해가 되네요 이이경 면치기는 이미 몇차례 애기가 나왔었고 그걸 유재석이나 pd, 예능계로 번진 후폭풍 이제 시작일 뿐.

Com › star › 20251121그놈의 면치기 논란이이경은 하기 싫었고, 놀뭐가 시켰다 스타, 실제 심은경 앞에서 선보인 이이경의 어글리 면치기는 망한 소개팅남, 비둘기도 안 할 면치기 이이경 면치기에 크게 당황한 심은경 등 웃긴 짤. 고량주 6병에 고해성사된 첫 회식이라는 제목의 영상이 게재됐다. 욕먹으니 마치 면치기 이미지 자체를 제작진이 만든거 마냥 억울 시전하며 사생활 루머 라고 이이경씨가 하네요논란을 어이없는 면치기 논란으로 물타기 하며 이이경 사생활 루머논란에 다른 사람들이 욕먹고 있는 기이한 현상이 발생중 5 8 5.

제작진으로부터 받은 하차 권유와 면치기 강요에 대해 폭로했습니다. ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려졌습니다. 이날 게스트로는 나는 솔로 mc인 이이경과. 게스트로는 나는 솔로 mc인 이이경과 송해나가 출연해 다양한 이야기를 나눴다, 게스트로는 나는 솔로 mc인 이이경과 송해나가 출연해 다양한 이야기를 나눴다. 먼저 이이경씨가 언급한 면치기 상황은 출연자를 보호하지 못한 제작진의 불찰입니다.

여자 조수 뜻 ’ 방송 중 어글리 면치기 논란으로 인한 악플에 상처받은 심경을 고백했으며, 유재석과 하하가 그를 위로하는 모습이 전파를 탔다. ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려진다. ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려진다. 이이경이 이례적으로 제작진을 향해 직접 서운함을 표출했고, 제작진은 이를 인정하고 고개 숙였다. 티브이데일리 김진석 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란을 해명했다. 여기는 아무도 안봐 웹툰

여고생은꼴 의 제작진이 면치기를 강요했고 논란 당시 하차를 권고했다고 폭로하였다, 하루 만에. 1,744 likes, 119 comments 486__comedy on j 이이경 면치기 이제 그만 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ. 아이즈 ize 윤준호칼럼니스트배우 이이경의 mbc 예능 놀면 뭐하니. 면치기 논란과 사과성 발언 이후에도 여론은 엇갈리고 있다. 지가 놀뭐에서 면먹을때마다 저렇게 먹었음 멤버들 질색하는 반응 즐기면서 그러다 심은경 편에서 그게 엄청 화제가 된거임 그때 반응이 웃긴데 더럽다 또는 역하다. 여르멘아아 야동

오고곡 asmr 디시 앞서 이이경은 지난 5월 방송된 mbc ‘놀면 뭐하니. 이이경 어글리 면치기 악플에 마음고생 이제 안 먹겠다. 멤버들은 구매력 있는 vip 고객들을 찾아가 방문 방매를 벌인다. 실제 심은경 앞에서 선보인 이이경의 어글리 면치기는 망한 소개팅남, 비둘기도 안 할 면치기 이이경 면치기에 크게 당황한 심은경 등 웃긴 짤. 이날 ‘만원의 행복’ 대결은 유재석, 이이경의 패배였다. 여공남수 망가

연습생 서유하 그는 제작진이 ‘국수집을 빌렸다’며 부탁했고, 제가 ‘예능으로 하는 겁니다’라고 말한 멘트는 편집됐다. 티브이데일리 김진석 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란을 해명했다. ’ 이이경이 화제의 ‘어글리 면치기’ 앙코르를 펼친다. 엑스포츠뉴스 이창규 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다. 그의 폭로는 개인 논란이 아니라, 한국 예능계의 ‘출연자 강요식 연출’ 구조로 불똥이 튀고 있다.

여자친구 과거 디시 이날 ‘만원의 행복’ 대결은 유재석, 이이경의 패배였다. 누리꾼 사이에서 ‘이이경 면치기 논란’이 재조명되고 있다. 저런 게 면치기였다면 면치기 엄청나게 싫어하는 사람들이 이해가 되네요 이이경 면치기는 이미 몇차례 애기가 나왔었고 그걸 유재석이나 pd. 이이경이 이례적으로 제작진을 향해 직접 서운함을 표출했고, 제작진은 이를 인정하고 고개 숙였다. 이날 방송에서 유재석은 위축된 이이경의 모습에 이경이가 먹는 것 때문에 이경이가 그런 친구가 아닌데 웃겨 보겠다고 면치기하다가 욕먹고라며.

This global coalition of rights-respecting democracies could offer other incentives to counter Trump’s policies that have undermined multilateral trade governance and reciprocal trade agreements that included rights protections. Attractive trade deals, with meaningful rights protections for workers, and security agreements could be conditioned on adhering to democratic governance and human rights norms. Democracy already comes with benefits. While autocracies have generally fostered conflict, economic stagnation, or kleptocracy, as evidenced in multiple academic studies, including the work of the Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu, democratic institutions reliably yield economic growth. 

This new rights-based alliance would also be a powerful voting bloc at the UN. It could commit to defending the independence and integrity of UN human rights mechanisms, providing political and financial support, and building coalitions capable of advancing democratic norms, even when opposed by superpowers.

Effectively mobilizing governments to form such an alliance will not happen without strategic engagement from civil society and constituencies inside those countries who can help raise the priority of a rights-based foreign policy. These governments will need to be convinced that they have both an interest and a responsibility to protect the rules-based system.

Projects of this nature are bubbling up. Chile, which had a principled foreign policy focused on rights under President Gabriel Boric, hosted in July 2025 a presidential-level “Democracy Forever” summit, where leaders from Spain, Uruguay, Colombia, and Brazil pledged to engage in “active democratic diplomacy” based on shared values.

The Hague Group, led by Malaysia, South Africa, and Colombia, formed in January 2025 in “defense of international law” and in solidarity with Palestinians. Over 70 countries from all regions signed a joint statement defending multilateralism at the UN. Earlier, in 2017, former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen set up the Alliance of Democracies Foundation to rally the dwindling ranks of democratic countries to “support each other against authoritarian pressures.”

Whatever its precise contours, an alliance of rights-respecting democracies would offer a hopeful counterpoint to the authoritarian trope of China’s and Russia’s leaders standing alongside North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, observing military hardware in a parade in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in September. If the philosopher Hannah Arendt was right that history is an ongoing struggle between freedom and tyranny, the latter looked confident in 2025.

Yet, even in the worst of times, the idea of freedom and human rights is enduring. People power remains an engine for change. In the US, “No Kings” marches have drawn millions, protesters in Chicago, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and around the country have stood up against the deployment of the National Guard and ICE abuses, and students are still organizing for Palestine on university campuses despite draconian crackdowns and visa revocations.

Buoyed by popular resistance, South Korean parliamentarians impeached their president to prevent him from grabbing power through martial law. Grassroots aid efforts by Sudan’s emergency response rooms, Hong Kong’s fire relief, Sri Lanka’s cyclone relief community kitchens, and Ukrainian mutual aid and solidarity collectives represent the best of this trend.

In 2025, Gen Z protests against corruption, inadequate public services, and poor governance in Nepal, Indonesia, and Morocco brought to the forefront the need for governments to listen to their youth and tackle corruption and inequality. But as the difficulties of restoring rights in Bangladesh after years under an authoritarian government illustrates, gains won through public mobilization can easily be lost unless democratic participation and free expression remain unassailable.