Friday, March 25, 2005

Just Say "NO" to the UN

New Sisyphus takes on the UN again in this excellent post, "UN Reform: We Are All Terrorists Now".

Therein lies the danger of the U.N., of course. Once created, it took on a life of its own and, like institutions everywhere, it has sought ever since to expand its power as widely as possible. For reasons we have discussed earlier, the U.N. currently finds itself at a crosswords with one of its founding members and largest financial contributors. The simple plain fact is that a huge majority of Americans have no confidence in the U.N and view it as nothing more than an anti-American talking shop. What Annan’s report aims to accomplish is enough reform to reconcile American decision-makers to the institution while, at the same time, strengthening its independence as an autonomous body.

That is a tall order, and one that the Secretary General fails miserably at. In fact, as we will see below, the report is nothing more than yet another attempt to frame “international law” in such a way as to make American action in the world “illegal.” Finally, and most ominously, it also contains a mechanism to lower the U.S.’ power in the Security Council and a legal code that would brand most of America’s military actions of the past forty years nothing more than “terrorism.”

You should read the whole piece. What's most interesting to me, of course, ist the psychology of all this. As you read the post, you realize--as New Sisyphus reminds us--how the entire UN document ( “In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights For All” “In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights For All” ) is cleverly written to appeal to the American Left. It discusses "Freedom from Want" and "Freedom from Fear" as universal goals, and seems to endorse the old socialist utopia idea:

In an era of global abundance, our world has the resources to reduce dramatically the massive divides that persist between rich and poor, if only those resources can be unleashed in the service of all peoples.

The real kicker, as others have pointed out, is that we (meaning the citizens of the United States) are the ones who are going to pay for this international socialist dream! The engine of productivity in the world is to be chained for the "good" of all peoples. And we are expected to go willingly to the slaughter.

Ayn Rand called this process "the sanction of the victim". I think it is an apt description. The UN cannot force its will on the US without our moral permission to do so. Morality is the most powerful weapon that evil wields in the war against good. Socialist morality is the morality of self-sacrifice. The self-sacrifice moral code allows the worthless to make outrageous demands of those who produce, counting on the fact that the producers will feel morally obligated to satisfy them. It is the duty of the producers to satisfy the needs of all and to embrace his status, all the while accepting sneers, abuse, and condemnation.

Liberal guilt--expressed through the Left's continual and relentlessly virulent public anti-Americanism--serves a "psychological need to reconcile a leftist's own life of largesse, through either cost-free disdain for what produced it or (safe) sympathy for those who hated it."

The UN is counting on this guilt to get its way. They are still the same corrupt organization, led by the same corrupt leader who brought us the oil-for-food scandal; the numerous sex scandals; and who hide a thirst for power behind their stated desire to help mankind. Today they are desperate to maintain that power and prestige in the world even as they see it sinking to new lows as their real motives are exposed. Over and over again, the US does most of the work, pays most of the money; and Kofi and his pals take all the credit.

Sometimes when I listen to a patient's neverending complaints about their situation; about how they feel constrained to do things so obviously bad for them, I have this fantasy where I get up and start shaking them, yelling, "Stop! Stop! Stop being a victim! You don't have to do this! You can choose to say no!" It's a fairly satisfying fantasy. Perhaps this essay is a variant on it.

When we deal with the UN, we have to learn to just say NO.

No comments: