The UN

[jake williams]

What are people's general perceptions of the UN? Both in its current incarnation, and whatever you think it might have the potential to become.

My feelings, and I suppose I might say hopes, are mixed.

[Tatarin]

I think the UN seems to have some kind of "right idea" to stand on, but it has time and again showed that it is allied to imperialist interests. Also, it doesn't have any power to show, one example being the Iraq war, in which only five or so nations supported.

[Red_or_Dead]

I think that the UN today is really nothing more than a big charity organization. It lacks any power, authority, and above all independance to have any real impact. Idea is good, tho, but in practice... The superpowers dont give a shit about the UN has to say (Iraq war).

[SouthernBelle82]

Exactly. George Bush said he would go to the UN for a vote with Iraq and he didn't keep that promise. If you don't respect the UN you aren't going to help enforce anything they do. Look at the situation with Lebanon and Israel was it last year? Whenever recently Israel invaded Lebanon. The UN said to have a cease fire and Israel gave the UN the middle finger. One thing a professor of mine (a political scientist) has talked about is how the UN has no power to enforce anything such as cease fires. They don't have any type of military or anything like that. Only when EVERYONE respects the UN and their authority and works together will it even start to matter and have an impact on the world. You're totally right red.


I think that the UN today is really nothing more than a big charity organization. It lacks any power, authority, and above all independance to have any real impact. Idea is good, tho, but in practice... The superpowers dont give a shit about the UN has to say (Iraq war).

[bellyscratch]

i pretty much agree on what has been said already. maybe when the revolution comes, this can be built upon to actually work.

[RedAnarchist]

Its just another layer of government imposed on people, atlhough they have done a lot of good in some parts of the world.

[Dros]

The UN is the organ that is used to moderate imperialism and capitalist international anarchy. It is a creation of capitalism and is rooted in that system. After the revolution, it will be destroyed.

[( R )evolution]

Hahha the UN is a joke. A complete joke. In June 2006, in the Israeli-Leabaon-Hamas war. The UN called for a cease fire and Israeli bombed a UN outpost. Come on, the UN has absolutely no power to enforce anything it decrees. It does not keep world peace, it does not stop expotilation. It is more of a front stand for the world bourgeoisies powers

[Trystan]

It could be a positive force, if nations like the US, Israel and Britain would subscribe to international law and not ignore the U.N.'s resolutions regarding things like Palestinian rights.

[( R )evolution]

It could be a positive force, if nations like the US, Israel and Britain would subscribe to international law and not ignore the U.N.'s resolutions regarding things like Palestinian rights.

Sorry mate but the UN is very very far from ever being a positive force. Its basic structure would not allow a positive balance of rights and justice for the world. Those who participate in the hearings, discussion and resultions making process are representatives of the bourgeois. And even if the slim chance of something actually good and benfitual to the workers is created from the organization, there is no chance it will be enforced or will actually happen seeing as how the UN just doesn't have the ability or resources for such things.

[#FF0000]

There's a number of problems with it. For one, putting a bunch of world powers on the security council doesn't seem like a good way to run things. Secondly, all the people involved, as ( R )evolution said, are bourgeois politicians.

It's a good idea though. If only it dealt with... maybe... worker's collectives and such... and was organized to be something like, you know, "one big union". ;)

[MrRight]

The UN is totally useless..

The UN is not only useless but by giving some of the most criminal nations voices and votes and by allowing it to become merely a forum for politiking it has become criminally repungnant. I refuse to respect an organization in which Saudi Arabia and China not only have a seat on the Human Rights Committee, but they and their allies control it.

If aid organization is the major concern as Canada Rocks seems to believe, then why not disband its political functions. Or even better invest all the billions pumped into the UN into the Red Cross. With the Red Cross at least you have a better shot of petty little dictatorships embezzeling the supplies, and at getting it to where it needs to be. It also has I believe a larger staff, with nearly 100,000,000 volunteers and 300,000 full time staffers soley devoted to their human rights causes. Their private budget alone is in the billions, so why not just divest from the UN and reallocate all of that wasted money towards the International Red Cross?

[Guerrilla22]

the thing about the UN is, it is "united nations," but not all nations are included, indigeneous peoples are not given voting status and are only allowed to speak in one working group. technically, the UN should be called the united states, since only states can hold seats. The other thing is, the only relevant committee is the security council, but only six countries have permanent seats and veto power. So much for internationalism.