western Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 Should United Nations run by staff from primary donor countries? Top level UN staff are not from the top donor countries. Do you think top 20 staff from each UN agencies should be from top 10 donor countries? This is to make sure donor funds are spend wisely with no or less corruption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 There's a lot about the UN that is really dysfunctional and corrupt, which is sad. I imagine this is why Stephen Harper didn't seem to be much of a fan. When most countries in the world are 3rd world autocracies run by crooked dictators it makes things a lot harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 11 hours ago, western said: Should United Nations run by staff from primary donor countries? Top level UN staff are not from the top donor countries. Do you think top 20 staff from each UN agencies should be from top 10 donor countries? This is to make sure donor funds are spend wisely with no or less corruption. The UN should be eliminated. It's useless and a waste of money. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodad Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 12 hours ago, western said: Should United Nations run by staff from primary donor countries? Top level UN staff are not from the top donor countries. Do you think top 20 staff from each UN agencies should be from top 10 donor countries? This is to make sure donor funds are spend wisely with no or less corruption. I think not. The top donor countries are the countries that already dominate global politics. Do we really want, say, the US and China jockeying for position in the UN as well? It would make it sort of and extension of soft imperialism. The UN is meant to be a more egalitarian operating model. Help for the helpless and voice for the voiceless. And part of the stretch toward that goal is to have the nations and peoples of the world actively involved in shaping the organization. Not just the rich and powerful nations, but all, united. The UN isn't nearly perfect, but the idea and the attempt are both incredibly important. In a shrinking world, we need a sense of community and a way to act for the collective good without any perception of selfish purpose. When relief workers or peacekeepers show up under the UN flag it means something very different than if the US or China were to roll into a country under our own flags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 31 minutes ago, Hodad said: I think not. The top donor countries are the countries that already dominate global politics. Do we really want, say, the US and China jockeying for position in the UN as well? It would make it sort of and extension of soft imperialism. The UN is meant to be a more egalitarian operating model. Help for the helpless and voice for the voiceless. And part of the stretch toward that goal is to have the nations and peoples of the world actively involved in shaping the organization. Not just the rich and powerful nations, but all, united. The UN isn't nearly perfect, but the idea and the attempt are both incredibly important. In a shrinking world, we need a sense of community and a way to act for the collective good without any perception of selfish purpose. When relief workers or peacekeepers show up under the UN flag it means something very different than if the US or China were to roll into a country under our own flags. I agree with a lot of that but the problem I see is what constitutes the "collective good". I don't think we can ever completely remove the selfish purpose from our decisions. I don't think having a selfish purpose in necessarily bad. The difficulty is working together for the collective good while simultaneously meeting our legitimate self purposes. This is best exemplified in the global warming debate. People who are less dedicated let's say to the global warming cause are often referred to as climate "deniers". That fails to acknowledge the legitimate selfish purpose the so called "deniers" might have to the way some want to "address" climate change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, Yakuda said: The UN should be eliminated. It's useless and a waste of money. Okay! So, tell us: How should the U.S. and other nations reach agreements with other nations? Should we just tell Canada what to do or else we drop bombs on Ottawa? That’s one way. Peaceful negotiation is the other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 2 hours ago, Rebound said: Okay! So, tell us: How should the U.S. and other nations reach agreements with other nations? Should we just tell Canada what to do or else we drop bombs on Ottawa? That’s one way. Peaceful negotiation is the other way. Right peaceful negotiation. Your task now is to show how that can ONLY happen through the UN. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodad Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 6 hours ago, Yakuda said: I agree with a lot of that but the problem I see is what constitutes the "collective good". I don't think we can ever completely remove the selfish purpose from our decisions. I don't think having a selfish purpose in necessarily bad. The difficulty is working together for the collective good while simultaneously meeting our legitimate self purposes. This is best exemplified in the global warming debate. People who are less dedicated let's say to the global warming cause are often referred to as climate "deniers". That fails to acknowledge the legitimate selfish purpose the so called "deniers" might have to the way some want to "address" climate change. Yeah, like any topic, not everyone is going to agree about everything. They speak, they debate, they vote. But we need a place in the world where the President of Kiribati (a nation no one has ever heard of) can take the floor and tell--and show--the powerful nations of the world what their actions are doing to his people. That's why, in answer to the OP, I think it's very important that the thought and administration in that institution be democratized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 20 Report Share Posted February 20 4 hours ago, Yakuda said: Right peaceful negotiation. Your task now is to show how that can ONLY happen through the UN. The UN is a cliquey high school with a much higher percentage of bigots and less zits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 16 hours ago, Hodad said: Yeah, like any topic, not everyone is going to agree about everything. They speak, they debate, they vote. But we need a place in the world where the President of Kiribati (a nation no one has ever heard of) can take the floor and tell--and show--the powerful nations of the world what their actions are doing to his people. That's why, in answer to the OP, I think it's very important that the thought and administration in that institution be democratized. Democratizing it would do nothing. In one of the pirates of the Caribbean movies there's a scene where all the heads of the pirate gangs are going to vote on some issue. Each leader of each group votes for themself, very democratic but nothing happens. They even comment on how the vote is exactly the same every time they vote. People need a personal reason to do abandon their purposes to support someone else's purpose. 15 hours ago, WestCanMan said: The UN is a cliquey high school with a much higher percentage of bigots and less zits. Ive noticed that refers to a lot of organizations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 On 2/20/2024 at 1:05 PM, Yakuda said: Right peaceful negotiation. Your task now is to show how that can ONLY happen through the UN. Well GOSH…. Assemble a body with representatives of every national government in one place. THAT is the UN. What’s your thinking? Change its name? Move the building? How will that creare any change? Read a book on international relations sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Rebound said: Well GOSH…. Assemble a body with representatives of every national government in one place. THAT is the UN. What’s your thinking? Change its name? Move the building? How will that creare any change? Read a book on international relations sometime. So you can't tell us how the UN is the ONLY way to do it. Figured but it's always nice to have the low intelligence posters verify their low intelligence. Edited February 21 by Yakuda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 1 minute ago, Yakuda said: So you can't tell us how the UN is the ONLY way to do it. Figured but it's always nice to have the low intelligence posters verify their low intelligence. No, what I’m telling you is that your position is absurd. The UN is an organization composed of diplomatic representatives of each nation on Earth. Your criticism seems to be that there’s something corrupt about the organization itself, although you won’t say what that is. The actual problem with the UN is that different nations have very different perspectives, and indeed many of them, maybe all of them, have corrupt motivations. But those are the nations there are. There aren’t a set of “alternate nations.” If nations want to peacefully prevent war in, say, South America, the UN is the place they go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 1 minute ago, Rebound said: No, what I’m telling you is that your position is absurd. The UN is an organization composed of diplomatic representatives of each nation on Earth. Your criticism seems to be that there’s something corrupt about the organization itself, although you won’t say what that is. The actual problem with the UN is that different nations have very different perspectives, and indeed many of them, maybe all of them, have corrupt motivations. But those are the nations there are. There aren’t a set of “alternate nations.” If nations want to peacefully prevent war in, say, South America, the UN is the place they go. So you STILL can't show us how the UN is the ONLY way to do it. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 43 minutes ago, Yakuda said: So you STILL can't show us how the UN is the ONLY way to do it. Thanks. Thats because, the UN by any other name is still the UN. I’m the only person taking a part in this discussion. You have said absolutely nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 2 hours ago, Rebound said: Thats because, the UN by any other name is still the UN. I’m the only person taking a part in this discussion. You have said absolutely nothing. No the UN is a colossal waste of time and money and you havent offered one shred of evidence to prove me wrong. You being held captive and being forced to take part in the discussion? Send me your address and I'll send the cops over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 21 Report Share Posted February 21 29 minutes ago, Yakuda said: No the UN is a colossal waste of time and money and you havent offered one shred of evidence to prove me wrong. You being held captive and being forced to take part in the discussion? Send me your address and I'll send the cops over. You don’t understand international relations, and you probably don’t know the purpose of the UN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.