한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 조이뉴스24 이미영 기자 흑백요리사2 히든 백수저의 정체는 최강록 셰프와 김도윤 셰프였다.

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.

광탈한거에비해 대부분 칭찬만하는거같다. Days ago 심사위원 2명의 판단이 일치해야 생존하는 히든 백수저 룰에 따라 김도윤 셰프는 1라운드에서 탈락하고 말았다. 흑백요리사 식당 리뷰방송보고있는데 김도윤식당. 김도윤셰프 떨어진거 ㄹㅇ 개충격이었음 안떨어질줄 알았다 백종원 논란이후에 선입견 좀 심했는데 생각보다 나쁘지않음 김도윤.

안성재가 흑백요리사 나오고 무슨 요리 권위자 포지션 돼서.

Gs더프레쉬에서 흑백요리사 요리하는 돌아이 윤남노셰프의 미소양념구이 리뷰입니다.

흑백2 김도윤 최강록 셰프, 멘트부터 말투 전부 계획된 것 폭로 핫피플 Osen하수정 기자 흑백요리사2 김도윤 셰프가 최강록 셰프에 대해 다 계획된 멘트라고 폭로해 웃음을 자아냈다.

정지선은 김도윤에게 시즌1과 시즌2 때 촬영이 다른 게 있었냐고 물었다.. 김도윤 셰프의 진정성, 흑백요리사에서 드러난 요리 철학과 소통의 예술 넷플릭스 흑백요리사 출연부터 sns 밈 스타까지, 요리와 사람을 잇는 김도윤 셰프의 철학과 이야기 korean cuisine chef interview a chefs world korean fermantation..

김도윤도 존나 억울할듯 흑백요리사 시즌2 갤러리. Osen하수정 기자 김도윤 셰프가 흑백요리사2를 보지 않았다고 솔직하게 고백했다. 시즌 3 나올 백수저들 오히려 망신 당할까봐 참여안함.

twi dongya 친한 친구인 정지선 셰프한테 흑백요리사2에 나간건 비밀로한 김도윤 셰프 말하면 돈내야돼. 28 115340 스크랩 조회 25156 추천 214 댓글 96. 근데 팀 잘못 골라서 패배후 편의점 미션에서 던짐. Com › @newsenplus_official › video흑백요리사2 김도윤과 최강록의 절친한 우정 tiktok. 김도윤 히든 백수저 마스터셰프 코리아 시즌2 우승자 최강록. victoria eden 트위터

www.xcideos 시즌 3 나올 백수저들 오히려 망신 당할까봐 참여안함. 김도윤 셰프의 진정성, 흑백요리사에서 드러난 요리 철학과 소통의 예술 넷플릭스 흑백요리사 출연부터 sns 밈 스타까지, 요리와 사람을 잇는 김도윤 셰프의 철학과 이야기 korean cuisine chef interview a chefs world korean fermantation. Days ago 심사위원 2명의 판단이 일치해야 생존하는 히든 백수저 룰에 따라 김도윤 셰프는 1라운드에서 탈락하고 말았다. Days ago 대한민국 의 요리사 이자, 미쉐린 가이드 1스타 윤서울 과 면서울 의 오너 셰프. 흑백요리사 김도윤 셰프님 식당 면서울은 저가수 기술로 수분을 최소화한 자가제면 볶지 않고 45도 저온 압착한 생들기름 사용 10년 이상 숙성된 전통퇴장 유전자변형없는 재료 첨가물 없는 담백한 조리가 특징이라고 합니다 자극적인 맛에 익숙한 분들보다는. vn simp

twitter video tool 디시 Yunli, yun yun, seoul and more. 27일 정지선의 칼있스마 채널에는 시즌1의 백수저 김도윤 셰프와 함께하는 흑백요리사2 히든리뷰 ft. 흑백요리사 김도윤 셰프님 식당 면서울은 저가수 기술로 수분을 최소화한 자가제면 볶지 않고 45도 저온 압착한 생들기름 사용 10년 이상 숙성된 전통퇴장 유전자변형없는 재료 첨가물 없는 담백한 조리가 특징이라고 합니다 자극적인 맛에 익숙한 분들보다는. 친한 친구인 정지선 셰프한테 흑백요리사2에 나간건 비밀로한 김도윤 셰프 말하면 돈내야돼. 뉴스엔플러스 @newsenplus_official 님의 tiktok 틱톡 동영상 김도윤과 최강록의 우정과 요리 이야기. twisouva

twidotga 김도윤 히든 백수저 마스터셰프 코리아 시즌2 우승자 최강록. 시즌 2의 결말에 대해 복수의 언론은 요리 결과의 승패보다 참가자의 조리 과정과 주방 노동의 현실을 조명한 점이 방송에서 두드러졌다고 평가했다. 김도윤 셰프가 선보이는 독창적인 한식 다이닝이 궁금했다면, 영상을 통해 만나보세요🍜 @wkorea editor_윤다희 셰프들의 화보컷과 인터뷰는 더블유코리아 vol. 김도윤 다음에 또 나온다고 하며 심사 바꿔야함 흑백요리사. Days ago 흑백요리사2 히든백수저로 출연한 김도윤 셰프님 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 안성면 콩으로 만들어서 안성제면 메뉴라던데 이거 너무 노린거 아닌가요 ㅎㅎ 1라운드 메뉴라서 더욱 궁금했음.

virtual youtuber 심사위원 백종원의 각종 논란 속에서도 흑백요리사 요리 계급 전쟁2는 더욱 막강해진 흑셰프들과 백셰프들의 라인업이 공개됐다. 안성재가 흑백요리사 나오고 무슨 요리 권위자 포지션 돼서. 지난 16일 넷플릭스를 통해 흑백요리사 요리 계급 전쟁2이하 흑백요리. 요리 설명할때보면 백가놈은 어차피 백수저면 패스줄거같아서 거들떠도 안봤고 의도페티쉬 의도도착증 안성재 저격하듯이 요리법. 뉴스엔 강민경 기자 최강록 셰프와 김도윤 셰프가 흑수저로 재도전했다.

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.