By the way I'm not arguing for or against those particular statements, just pointing out the error in what you said.
In general I think the UN is a flawed organization, but also one that is important and can do some good. For what it's worth, my father worked for the UN for 12-13 years as part of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Well maybe I should quote both your posts.
First of all, thank you for your response. It is pretty solid, standard stuff. I understand that most people who have any positive views about the UN don't see it as the threat some ultra constitutional loyalists do. Most people agree with you here. Hardly anyone really thinks it's either powerful or righteous. But a practical tool for managing things like trade, international disputes, whatever. I was pleased some twenty years ago when the WTO did some justice to the company I worked for and imposed a tariff on Chinese competitors who had government funding and perks to float them while doing a classic price war designed to put us out of business.
I also have a brother who served as a monitor for compliance on the Nuclear Treaty with Russia, and spent some years in Russia and the Ukraine. I never asked who was paying him, the UN or the United States.
I think you do a nice tap dance around the language I was quoting from the UN Declaration on Human Rights, but you did not find any assertion in that
that human beings have innate or intrinsic rights not derived from government. I hope the justices on the World Court will see it the way you do, and maybe they will. It depends on the level of humanity and integrity those judges will hold. I'm not counting on anything.
Reagan said "Trust but Verify". I say "Verify, then Trust if you can afford it." I don't think we do that good putting any business in the hands of government. In politics, my motto is "Throw the Bums Out, and then prepare to throw the next bums out too."
I want a reformed UN. Either fix it or dump it. It has to have absolute statements referring to the necessity for all governments and all forms of governance to be elected by the people, accountable to the people, and
honoring the power of people to reject what they find intolerable and replace it.
Sure there's a lot of good we can do with educated leadership and international cooperation. Most of the UN organizations are self-described as serving some good purpose, but the UN should embrace the basic principles of the US founding fathers and should be designed to have checks and balances and limits. We have never done so very well at following our Constitution, or we would not have done the Trail of Tears or the wars of extermination against the Indians, or put them on reservations where their populations dwindled. Yah, and slavery was never consistent with the principles of human rights either. And today we would tenaciously prosecute human trafficking and the clientele who go the tropical resorts that openly serve up child sex slaves.... you know, that certain percentage of the UN officials who get outta town to attend some world summit somewhere. I bet you've never been to one of those events, and if you did you probably remained unaware of the wild side of those events. Wish I could say I didn't know what I'm talking about. Yesterday I heard Tim Ballard speak, and saw some of his videos. I have seen things like that myself, but I was alone and had no way to do anything.
If the people who run the UN were moral people, perhaps we could place some confidence in the organization, which is where I go with saying perhaps you lack "street". But then again, considering, you'd do a lot better to just listen to someone who's "been there".
We had a little discussion a while back, I think I said something about the nature of Trump's support among working folks like Truckers and the employees who unload the trucks, and stock the shelves, and such. Practical people who just want a better economy, the health care packages they had before Obamacare made it cost 4X for half the care, and less regulation so they can start their own business someday, and get their own house. I think a lot of people voted for Trump who in other years either just don't vote or are soft democrats. Trump is not ideological enough to go after "Constitutional Principles" or socialism, he's just practical and will try to make things work better according to his sense of what that means. Conservatives will be as disappointed as Liberals will be unexpectedly pleased, and I bet he will win a second term. Well, I think the hard-core traditional Press is shooting itself in the foot, and losing credibility, so I don't think the Press can do him in. I just hope no one does. Just because he is his own man.
I know some folks like "established" authority, and consider it prudent to go with what is known, say, like a Romney sort of leader or "The Way Things Are". Lots of investments have been placed on that bet.
Seeing a leader who can clearly act independently, who can say what he thinks however stupid it may be, or outrageous, somehow just warms up a lot of folks, marginally hopeful but barely getting by, who would like to be that free themselves. Nope we did not elect Trump to be our Chief Saint. We really don't care to have one of those. We just want someone who can change things up and give us a fresh start on having a country, and affordable health care, and a job.