USA 2028

[crazy canuck]

I agree with BB. The modern UN is too subservient to the corrupt government of its membership.

I have a feeling that neither you nor BB have a good grasp on all the work the UN does.

[Grey Fox]

I agree with BB. The modern UN is too subservient to the corrupt government of its membership.

I have a feeling that neither you nor BB have a good grasp on all the work the UN does.

I don't. I just wish it would do those things without Russia's & China's corrupting influences.

[Norgy]

I didn't think that's such an outrageous position to take - at least clarifying that I'm not talking about the UN's specialized agencies.  I just don't see the benefit of having those organizations within the UN umbrella - they don't even all have common membership.

I can see your point, but I come from a small country. We need the UN. We were founding members and even had the first general secretary.

We have had these discussions numerous times here and on the old P'dox forum. The UN is far, far, far, very far from perfect. When the Saudi-Arabians got the chairmanship of the UN human rights council, it wasn't exactly a great moment.

The agencies work. Because they are not the general assembly or the security council. Those two institutions are often  what most associate with the UN.

Do you want to know how many Norwegians who have served in UN peace keeping missions? More than served during World War II.

Even neutral Sweden sent peacekeeping forces here and there.

We need the IIC. We need the UN. Although imperfect, it is what we have.

[Sheilbh]

I basically agree as I say if we didn't have it we'd be inventing it.

Although FWIW - again experience I've heard from friend and his friends who work in the international sector is very much that the agencies don't work. There are exceptions like the WFP but they are scathing of UNHCR, UNICEF etc. And from speaking to them, all of the agencies are absolutely riddled with nepotism.

For a lot of those "doing" bits of the UN I think we'd be better off supporting genuine NGOs (especially NGOs from countries impacted by a crisis).

Although fully get that's from people who are generally resentfully within the UN system or outside (on the other hand - there might be a reason why, after four years in a very dangerous posting his contacts are all people outside the UN - because except for WFP and one or two other agencies, they don't send people there).

[crazy canuck]

I agree with BB. The modern UN is too subservient to the corrupt government of its membership.

I have a feeling that neither you nor BB have a good grasp on all the work the UN does.

I don't. I just wish it would do those things without Russia's & China's corrupting influences.

It largely does.  Do you have any knowledge of the ICAO operating under the corrupting influence of China or Russia?

[Grey Fox]

I agree with BB. The modern UN is too subservient to the corrupt government of its membership.

I have a feeling that neither you nor BB have a good grasp on all the work the UN does.

I don't. I just wish it would do those things without Russia's & China's corrupting influences.

It largely does.  Do you have any knowledge of the ICAO operating under the corrupting influence of China or Russia?

Russia, no. China, it's continued refusal to let Taiwan in.

[Barrister]

I didn't think that's such an outrageous position to take - at least clarifying that I'm not talking about the UN's specialized agencies.  I just don't see the benefit of having those organizations within the UN umbrella - they don't even all have common membership.

I can see your point, but I come from a small country. We need the UN. We were founding members and even had the first general secretary.

We have had these discussions numerous times here and on the old P'dox forum. The UN is far, far, far, very far from perfect. When the Saudi-Arabians got the chairmanship of the UN human rights council, it wasn't exactly a great moment.

The agencies work. Because they are not the general assembly or the security council. Those two institutions are often  what most associate with the UN.

Do you want to know how many Norwegians who have served in UN peace keeping missions? More than served during World War II.

Even neutral Sweden sent peacekeeping forces here and there.

We need the IIC. We need the UN. Although imperfect, it is what we have.

You're talking to a Canadian.

Lester Pearson won the Nobel Peace Prize for getting involved in the Suez Crisis and (together with a Norwegian) inventing the idea of peacekeeping.  Canada has proudly sent peacekeepers to many crisis zones through the decades.

But that's exactly it - we're so caught up in that legacy and history we fail to see how toothless the UN is today.  See how the UN has said nothing about the invasion of Ukraine.  The UN has no role in the South China Sea.  The UN will pass resolution after resolution about Israel - but that too has been to no effect.  Not to mention the corruption and cronyism involved.

In my ideal world where the UN is abolished - the World Food Program, the IAEA, the ICAO, the World Bank, and countless others  - all would continue to exist.  I'm not against multilateralism.

[Sheilbh]

Russia, no. China, it's continued refusal to let Taiwan in.

Russia maybe wait and see for the ICAO's decision/findings on MH17 brought by the Netherlands.

Although I'm not on the anti-Russia/China corrupting the UN as my issue. I think it's important and useful to have an organisation that reflects the world which will involve Russia and China. I'd just maybe not rely on it to effectively do stuff as well.

[Zanza]

To come back to the thread: I predict that the United Nations including it's agencies will work less effectively after Trump's second term.

[viper37]

Nothing good.

Millions will have been deported, inflation will be record high for 4 continuous years. Red state national guards roam and spread terror in the street of Blue states. Outside of marriage sex and porn are illegal. Contraception is no more.

This is the worse timeline, nothing good happens anymore.

Outside of marriage sex

Republicans aren't that stupid to ban their favorite activity.

they will however ban same sex marriage and do their best to make life miserable for same sex couples.

[Barrister]

Nothing good.

Millions will have been deported, inflation will be record high for 4 continuous years. Red state national guards roam and spread terror in the street of Blue states. Outside of marriage sex and porn are illegal. Contraception is no more.

This is the worse timeline, nothing good happens anymore.

Outside of marriage sex

Republicans aren't that stupid to ban their favorite activity.

they will however ban same sex marriage and do their best to make life miserable for same sex couples.

I don't think people understand the GOP of 2024 (2025).

It's now very much a pro-porn, pro "grab 'em by the pussy" party.  It's the "Bro" party, led by Bro-in-Chief Donald Trump.

Maybe they take steps to ban gay marriage somehow - but only because it's now the anti-marriage party.  It's the "fuck who you want with no responsibilities" kind of party.

For historical reasons it's still going to be pro-life - but the Christian right is not in the drivers seat any more.  At least - not the religious Christian right.  Now it's all about "Christian nationalism" which is just code words for white nationalism.

[Zanza]

The CEO murder is making me even more pessimistic about the future under Trump.  The widespread cheering on for what is perceived to be justice through extrajudicial means makes it much more likely in my mind that societal norms are too weak to resist appeals to extrajudicial violence. 

Trump's entire game plan for installing authoritarianism seems to be to call the bluff of the legal system when inevitable road blocks pop up, and hope that enough of the masses follow him to make the legal system irrelevant as a check on his power.  Once the concept of doing illegal acts for the greater good gets enough acceptance in society, things can get very scary very quickly.

Trump is sympathetic to Rodrigo Duterte, former Philippine president, who oversaw extra judicial killings of drug dealers during his presidency.

[DGuller]

Definitely the right time to set the precedent that it's okay to shoot citizens in the street, as long as one can spin the narrative that they're bad people.

[Napoleon XIV]

So we can bet on "weirdify" being the word of the year in 2028.

I'm down for it.

My linguistic genius will be recognized!