What and Who Does the U.N. Represent?

[Oleg Bach]

I reject what seems to be your characterization of the West as "just as bad, if not worse" than everyone else. Even when coming from the left, as you do, my argument still holds water. The only way the UN interferes with our interests is its undeserved reputation in the minds of the ignorant (again, this includes many folks in the media and in politics). Many folks in the West still reflexively trust the UN and hold it in relative esteem. This needs to end. Once the mainstream view of the UN becomes one of contempt and revulsion, and not one of respect and deference, real progress will move towards its dismantling. I hope to see that in the future.

Yes - The international federation of nations was a sweet and ideal ideology - but to title an organization with the words UNITED ..............nations...................the nations are not unitied - that is why they are called nations! Nations designate extended national families or tribes that contain some adopted members - county means real estate - nations are another matter - The premist of the UN - is to unite all tribes - well that would mean that there would be no tribes - they can shut up - everyone is entitled to family - extended family - and national family. The UN dispises the family - they hate patriarchs and matriarchs because they feel that people are to stupid to make their own decisions - the UN - insults all of man kind.

[Saipan]

You can go screw yourself too.

If a foo shits, wear it.

I take it this forum is strictly liberal, if I may say so.

[jacee]

My position remains the same - anything the UN can try to claim to its credit can be done more easily and more effectively directly between nations outside of the absurdities of the UN horror show. The UN is just a platform through which we treat dictators, failed states, and inferior cultures/societies with undeserved respect.

If UN participation depended on someone's (whose?) judgement of 'worthy of respect', the arguments would go on forever, at great expense. I expect that's why it's open to all, and committee chairs rotate alphabetically. There is value in having a forum for open discussions of human rights issues - exposing the good, bad and truly ugly in all countries and tracking and reporting on implementation of UN Conventions. Whether that's enough value for our money is likely also a discussion of many opinions that could go on forever.

[Bob]

If UN participation depended on someone's (whose?) judgement of 'worthy of respect', the arguments would go on forever, at great expense. I expect that's why it's open to all, and committee chairs rotate alphabetically. There is value in having a forum for open discussions of human rights issues - exposing the good, bad and truly ugly in all countries and tracking and reporting on implementation of UN Conventions. Whether that's enough value for our money is likely also a discussion of many opinions that could go on forever.

My position is that Canada and other free nations should all withdraw from the UN. The UN should be dismantled. Allow states to make their own direct relations with one another. We don't need this bureaucratic "forum" to give soapboxes to failed states and dictatorships at the expense of the West (primarily America). The West is literally paying the way for this farce to continue, which runs contrary to all the values it claims to promote.

There is no value in a politicized institution largely dominated by Islamic dictatorships and their allies. The UN is certainly not an "open forum". Dissenting views are silenced all the time. The UN does not objectively carry out its mandate and certainly does not "expose, track, or report the bad in all countries". Indeed, the opposite is true - with the UN almost exclusively focusing on Israel and other non-issues while ignoring real problems. Do I really need to provide examples, current and historical, of major events the UN and its subsidiaries ignored?

Committee chairs rotate alphabetically? What in the world are you talking about? Perhaps there is one or two committees in the UN (it is a labyrinth of subsidiaries and committees and groups) with alphabetical rotations, but many of the subsidiaries are headed by and composed of states that are elected.

There is no legitimate defense of the UN. It achieves nothing that couldn't otherwise be more effectively achieved outside of its auspices. Moreover, the UN drains energy and money and time that could otherwise be used towards successfully addressing relevant issues. Disbar the UN, now.

Actually, I saw a video with Ezra Levant on YouTube expressing this exact position. What a breath of fresh air it is to hear a reasonable perspective advanced in the Canadian media (we'd never hear anything of the sort from the CBC).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xug1ASfHYBo

[jacee]

My position is that Canada and other free nations should all withdraw from the UN. The UN should be dismantled. Allow states to make their own direct relations with one another. We don't need this bureaucratic "forum" to give soapboxes to failed states and dictatorships at the expense of the West (primarily America). The West is literally paying the way for this farce to continue, which runs contrary to all the values it claims to promote.

There is no value in a politicized institution largely dominated by Islamic dictatorships and their allies. The UN is certainly not an "open forum". Dissenting views are silenced all the time. The UN does not objectively carry out its mandate and certainly does not "expose, track, or report the bad in all countries". Indeed, the opposite is true - with the UN almost exclusively focusing on Israel and other non-issues while ignoring real problems. Do I really need to provide examples, current and historical, of major events the UN and its subsidiaries ignored?

Committee chairs rotate alphabetically? What in the world are you talking about? Perhaps there is one or two committees in the UN (it is a labyrinth of subsidiaries and committees and groups) with alphabetical rotations, but many of the subsidiaries are headed by and composed of states that are elected.

There is no legitimate defense of the UN. It achieves nothing that couldn't otherwise be more effectively achieved outside of its auspices. Moreover, the UN drains energy and money and time that could otherwise be used towards successfully addressing relevant issues. Disbar the UN, now.

Membership in the UN is purely voluntary. Any country that doesn't want to join doesn't have to, can withdraw at any time, doesn't have to sign on to any conventions, etc. Thus, your position makes no sense to me.

[Bob]

If Canada and other free and prosperous countries withdraw from the UN, it would collapse. Why this hasn't happened yet it a product of leftism - subscription to the empty promises that the UN represents.

[Sir Bandelot]

If Canada and other free and prosperous countries withdraw from the UN, it would collapse. Why this hasn't happened yet it a product of leftism - subscription to the empty promises that the UN represents.

Really?

Israel is a member, as you know.

the Mission of Israel supports the purposes and principles of the UN, namely, as the UN charter eloquently states, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small. As such, the Mission of Israel actively engages at the United Nations on a wide range of security, human rights, humanitarian, social and economic development, and environment related issues.

http://israel-un.mfa.gov.il/

How do you respond to this?

[Bob]

What in the world would make you think that I support Israel's involvement in the UN? It's the exact same thing - it's a product of leftism and deference to this "authority" that is the UN and all of its affiliates. Still, Israel is a very small player in the UN. It's not as if Israel's withdrawal would break the bank of the UN, as would be the case in the event of America's withdrawal. It is a testament to the left-wing media of America that discussion of pulling out of the UN is non-existent.

[Sir Bandelot]

What in the world would make you think that I support Israel's involvement in the UN? It's the exact same thing - it's a product of leftism and deference to this "authority" that is the UN and all of its affiliates. Still, Israel is a very small player in the UN. It's not as if Israel's withdrawal would break the bank of the UN, as would be the case in the event of America's withdrawal. It is a testament to the left-wing media of America that discussion of pulling out of the UN is non-existent.

I didn't think that you support it Bob. In fact I knew you wouldn't. You are rather presumptuous sometimes it seems.

I wanted to see how you respond to the notion that Israel is a loyal member, while you tell us that Canada should leave the UN.

Pot, meet kettle

[Bob]

I didn't think that you support it Bob. In fact I knew you wouldn't. You are rather presumptuous sometimes it seems.

I wanted to see how you respond to the notion that Israel is a loyal member, while you tell us that Canada should leave the UN.

Pot, meet kettle

I don't think you understand the pot and kettle analogy, considering that I think all civilized states should withdraw from the UN, Canada and Israel included.

You obviously thought you were putting me in some tough position, assuming that I support the Israeli government in a lock step manner. I have no problem condemning the Israeli government for weak and self-destructive policies.

Edited July 4, 2011 by Bob

[Sir Bandelot]

I have no problem condemning the Israeli government for weak and self-destructive policies.

Good. Good.

[jbg]

Really?

Israel is a member, as you know.

the Mission of Israel supports the purposes and principles of the UN, namely, as the UN charter eloquently states, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small. As such, the Mission of Israel actively engages at the United Nations on a wide range of security, human rights, humanitarian, social and economic development, and environment related issues.

http://israel-un.mfa.gov.il/

How do you respond to this?

Even Israel makes mistakes. To quote Joe Cocker's 1971 song "I think it's high time we went" (out of the U.N).

[Sir Bandelot]

Even Israel makes mistakes. To quote Joe Cocker's 1971 song "I think it's high time we went" (out of the U.N).

Yes we've been over that now, and I am satisfied with Bob's response. Although I disagree it is a strictly leftist phenom. Surely there are many leftists who also dislike the UN.

At least there is still some hope for Bob. Small, yes, but non-zero...

[jbg]

At least there is still some hope for Bob. Small, yes, but non-zero...

Wouldn't the resources we waste on the Horrorshow by the East River better be spent on direct relief?

[Sir Bandelot]

Wouldn't the resources we waste on the Horrorshow by the East River better be spent on direct relief?

"Direct relief", that sounds like a leftist concept to me. Is it just possible that direct relief is not always in the best interests of certain parties?

The UN has certainly benefited some groups, by deflecting, by postponing, by dragging things out. Its usefulness really depends on whose problems you're trying to solve.

[jbg]

The UN has certainly benefited some groups, by deflecting, by postponing, by dragging things out. Its usefulness really depends on whose problems you're trying to solve.

It has given delegates from countries such as Gabon and the Central African Republic nice places to live for extended time at our expense.