Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: The role of the UN

  1. #1
    Myra Bronstein Guest

    Default The role of the UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    ...God forbid that the UN should be involved in anything. Too democratic and accountable...
    Maggie,

    Are you of the opinion that the UN is good?
    Or at least not bad?

    I ask because so many progressive types I've talked to think the UN is pure evil. And I really don't know, but from what I've seen they don't act evil, and seem to have a lot of good people on staff.

    If this is a digression feel free to start a new thread. I'm very very curious about the UN.

    Thanks.

  2. #2

    Default

    I think it is a very flawed institution but it is worth saving and working with because it belongs to us,thatis, every single human being on earth and it has the seeds of greatness with in it. I do think it has been used for bad things and that it hasn't lived up to itself and that there are some bad one's in it and some really bad. But many are drawn to it for the best of reasons and do great work. There are significant issues with UN organisations like the World Bank and WTO with their top heavy management with the Washington consensus crew and other odious types. And there are big issues with corruption and criminal behaviour in the peace keeping forces. These faults also reflect the attitudes and corruption within the nations state which make up the UN.

    Nevertheless it does have a place at the table for every nation and also for many non nation states, on our planet. I think nearly every nation state is there in the UN and then there are also representations of entities like the PLO, Kurds, indigenous groups everywhere. Things are voted on. It is transparent. It does stand for something that is a higher ideal for our society and us as humans. The alternative is NATO and that is the organisation of choice these days for the imperial powers and their wanna bees. NATO is not democratic or open or accountable to anyone except themselves. It is geographically based and non inclusive. It is based on a bigger military, a bigger stick to hit others with until they submit. It is based on empire. It is not based on reason, science or universal human need. The use of NATO as a legitimate entity for problem solving is to be avoided, indeed the very existance of NATO is a hideous afront to humanity. It should have been dismantled when the Warsaw Pact was (and as it was understood it would be by the Warsaw Pact states. They kept their part of the deal but NATO didn't and now NATO is in Asia and looking to Africa and the ME)

    But the UN has some things going for it. Firstly, it already exists and does not have to be invented.

    People also forget how much has actually been done through UN auspices also so it is totally not all bad. Geneva Convention, Rights of the Child, Declaration of Human Rights, the work of World Health Organisation and the International Labor Organisation, UNESCO, and a thousand other things. http://www.unsystem.org/ There is a huge amount that has been done and is still being done through this organisation and it would be a mistake to throw the baby out with the bath water. The amount of things that we take for granted now that are here because of the UN is enormous.

    That there is still work to do is very true but I think to give up on the UN would be handing a huge victory to the dark side. They will have divided and conquered and won. We have to work on both a micro and macro level. Within our own counrties and with all countries and people. Through the UN and the internet are two of the best ways we can connect with others everywhere. Never give anything up.
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myra Bronstein View Post
    Maggie,

    Are you of the opinion that the UN is good?
    Or at least not bad?

    I ask because so many progressive types I've talked to think the UN is pure evil. And I really don't know, but from what I've seen they don't act evil, and seem to have a lot of good people on staff.

    If this is a digression feel free to start a new thread. I'm very very curious about the UN.

    Thanks.

    Conspiracy folks on the right tend to hate the UN. The whole New World Order stuff.

  4. #4

    Default

    Yes, Dawn, that's a whole other story there.
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote:Originally Posted by Myra Bronstein
    Maggie,

    Are you of the opinion that the UN is good?
    Or at least not bad?

    I ask because so many progressive types I've talked to think the UN is pure evil. And I really don't know, but from what I've seen they don't act evil, and seem to have a lot of good people on staff.

    If this is a digression feel free to start a new thread. I'm very very curious about the UN.

    Thanks.

    Dawn replied:
    Conspiracy folks on the right tend to hate the UN. The whole New World Order stuff.
    I'd be willing to discuss the UN, but think it needs to be seen not as one 'thing', but representing both the top-down elite's wishes [mostly expressed in their veto power in the Security Council] and the bottom-up view [expressed more in the General Assembly]. My uncle spent the later part of his life physically in [in an unofficial capacity] the UN most days. I met many delegates and more staff and think I have a pretty good 'fix' on the institution. Those with power have kept those with less from making the UN into something most in the world would like it to become. Also keep in mind the US had one of the first Secretary General's killed IMO, as he wouldn't tow their line on some issues. That was Dag Hammerskjold, who died rather mysteriosly in a plane crash. Other Secretary Generals have been found to have had their offices bugged [real advantage to having it in New York] and thus controlled and outfoxed..... There is more.
    Last edited by Peter Lemkin; 11-28-2008 at 12:59 PM.

  6. #6

    Default

    As for the Geneva Convention and all other efforts to make war palatable ...

    Well, that says it all.

    For is not the point to make war unpalatable?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •