103
submitted 1 week ago by Zapados@sh.itjust.works to c/world@quokk.au
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago

I expect that any such proposal would be vetoed upon reaching the Security Council.

Important to remember, nobody thought the Security Council was actually a good idea. We added it because it was necessary to prevent the UN from meeting the same fate as its predecessor the League of Nations--fizzling out due to not enough big countries joining something that would limit their power.

It's not a good system, it's just better than nothing, and nothing was basically the alternative that the UN arose from. In that regard it has been very successful.

[-] moth@anarchist.nexus 3 points 1 week ago

moth agrees, the system that is ignored or vetoed by member states whenever they want is better than nothing. there may not be any rules or human rights that everyone agrees to live by, but at least theater and the performative arts are flourishing!

for their next act, the UN will make these millions of dollars supposedly for fighting hunger disappear into the pockets of corporations!

[-] brave_lemmywinks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I'm not sure its better than nothing. Current security council member do as the want and will not impose their own decisions on each other. They would not act together on even the minor terms, and if there's a side to pick the other is in opposition.

[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

How many accomplishments/benefits of the UN are you aware of/can conveniently list?

[-] brave_lemmywinks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I'm sure there's many, I'm not against the UN.

[-] peathah@fedinsfw.app 1 points 1 week ago

There is one big country that disagrees most of the time.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It's sort of crazy that a country like the UK, which hasn't been globally relevant in nearly a century, continues to hold enormous sway over it's African, South American, and Pacific peers. Then you've got the real heavyweights - the US, Russia, and China - routinely aligning on policy that only ever seem to make the planet worse.

The UN cannot reliably function as a global organization if a handful of states hold such outsized influence. Especially when these countries are engaged in military and economic predation of their neighbors.

[-] bufalo1973@piefed.social 6 points 1 week ago

That moment when you find out you agree with a piece of shit.

[-] abc@suppo.fi 1 points 1 week ago

Fricking amazing idea and also never going to happen.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
103 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2483 readers
1133 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great News Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS