VAMatt said:
HylianSwordsman said:
Indeed, they aren't mutually exclusive. Though you must admit the timing is suspicious. That said, if you believe the UN Human Rights Council is a joke, what do you think is the solution for getting global collective action on human rights to happen? No institution in the world has the influence that the UN has, with every nation on earth buying into it, even collapsing ones like Venezuela and Syria, and thus no institution has the ability to put pressure on literally any nation the way the UN does. Sure it isn't perfect, and needs drastic reform, and won't see that reform until Russia and China democratize, but checking out of the system entirely can only hurt things by removing a leader from it that, even if by sheer size alone, still garners respect in the UN. Checking out of the UN Human Rights Council because you think it's corrupt would be like not voting in US elections because US politics is corrupt. Of course it is corrupt, but it's not so far gone that progress can't be made anymore. Suggesting that we give up voting is suggesting that democracy is dead in the US, and suggesting we give up in the UN is suggesting that global diplomacy is dead. In the case of the former, revolution would be the only option left. In the case of the latter, World War III would be the only option left. I don't care how unlikely it may seem to you that change is possible, I'd rather metaphorically "go down fighting" for democracy and diplomacy than literally go down fighting in a war, particularly the nuclear holocaust that would result from WWIII. I'll believe in the UN until the day it collapses and we all descend into global chaos or another diplomatic alternative miraculously appears and gains equivalent credibility and influence.
|
I suggest dissolving the UN altogether, and replacing it with nothing. The UN, in many respects, simply props up terrible governments all over the place, and lends credibility to others. There certainly have been some good things to come out of the UN. Possibly the most important is just getting adversarial governments in the same room with each other. But, I see the history of the organization as one of corruption, propping up of scumbag dictators, and lending of credibility to oppressive regimes much more so than being a force for good. It also wastes a shitload of money putting the blue helmet guys in war zones without any authorization to do anything while there. So, its a net-negative in my book.
As for the US leaving the HR council right now, I'm sure it is motivated by politics, rather than principle. Nevertheless, I support the result of that stunt.
|
