UN In Charge
The World Council of Churches wants to place the UN in charge of all new technologies, requiring UN approval before we deploy any new ideas.
Oh yeah, where do I sign up for this brilliant plan?
6 Comments to “UN In Charge”
Leave a Reply
Contact Me
Lifestream
-
RT @jtLOL: Those darn Mormons are at it again: http://bit.ly/cjAysR Bloomberg is on his way to deliver bail money and hugs. [toddwiley]
-
SHAME! RT @williamkenyon: I really want to see Piranha 3-D. There. I said it. [toddwiley]
-
Testing. Sorry. [toddwiley]
-
RT @NathanFillion: Had a guy approach me on street. All he did was nod and say, "Captain." that's all he needed to say. [toddwiley]
-
RT @IMAO_: RT @jimgeraghty: Boy, there's a metaphor. Politico scoops Newsweek... on the news story of _the sale of Newsweek._ [toddwiley]
-
RT @jtLOL: Dear Obamacare fans: Please read this and explain why it can't happen here. http://j.mp/afnDkx [toddwiley]
-
RT @IMAO_: RT @iowahawkblog: NPR reporter on Journolist: "I never knew I had this much hate in me." NPR reporters: always the last to know. [toddwiley]
Recent Comments
- What Box? on A Question of Fairness
- Mark W on Update
- Todd W on New Writing Page
- Steven on New Writing Page
- EGT on links for 2009-11-09
Blogroll
Blogs of Writers
Welcome back, basement repairman guy.
It has been an ordeal! I have the bathroom framed, the floor has been leveled for the tile, and my dad and I ran the copper lines for the water feeds.
Now I’m just waiting on that midnight leak to fill the whole thing up with water….
Not sure how much, if any value, to put on any proclamation by the “World Council of Churches”. I had never heard of them (and I’m fairly well read) and a quick google search of the organization (eliminating any of their own material/links) leaves very little to find other then some conservative responses being negatively critical of the organization. They don’t appear to have any political connections and and stating that you ‘represent’ 500 million people from various denominations is just a number that could be pulled out of a hat. Their web site doesn’t even present support for this number. I think replacing “world council of churches” with my own name would have just as much meaning. I doubt that the UN would even consider such an issue raised by a non-governmental institution.
I’m not losing sleep over it, but my natural distrust of the UN roused itself at the very thought. Earlier this year there was a move for the UN to ‘take control’ of the Internet (how they would do that, I have no clue…). I don’t want to give them any ideas about where to meddle next.
It just astounds me to see people, even a minority, lining up behind the idea of putting the UN in charge of things, given the composition of that body. It isn’t the United Federation of Planets…
But, since we are on the topic, NGOs are having more and more of an impact on UN policy. I don’t think these kooks are going to get their way with technology, but the UN does draw upon NGOs to move policy debates. Not that I have a huge problem with that or anything – just pointing out their role.
My UN issues primarily come from the composition of the members. Most national governments are not freely elected, representative of their people, or even interested in the common good over their immediate benefit. I’m not comfortable with noted human rights violators sitting on the UN Council for Human Rights. So long as these situations remain, I’m not too comfortable with seeing the UN acquire any meaningful power.
But none of that really has anything to do with the post. I was just pointing out a kooky idea…
“It just astounds me to see people, even a minority, lining up behind the idea of putting the UN in charge of things, given the composition of that body. It isn’t the United Federation of Planets…”
Well, with Billions of people in the world, you’ll find a minority to back anything. That doesn’t bother me as it is part of the natural order of things. When the majority starts making kooky decisions…that’s when I get worried.
“But, since we are on the topic, NGOs are having more and more of an impact on UN policy. I don’t think these kooks are going to get their way with technology, but the UN does draw upon NGOs to move policy debates. Not that I have a huge problem with that or anything – just pointing out their role.”
First, I’m not a believer in lobbyists (which is essentially what the NGO’s are)however, it isn’t NGO’s moving UN policy debates – they can’t introduce these issues. It is their influence on the representatives from governments where in the problem lies. I think history will lead us inevitably to a single unified world organization (simliar to the previously mentioned UFP). I think the internet and global communication will make that inevitable – assuming we don’t self-destruct before then. Seeing as the UN is the closest structure to that – we should seek to create an organization that can function in an objective manner – that is the root of the problem as I see it.
Sure, they can’t take the floor and introduce ideas. But as you pointed out, they can get actual members to do it through influence. I don’t have too much of a problem with the lobby game, since in essence, lobbyists are exercising freedom to petition their cause, just like anyone else. True, there is a lot more money involved, but when the stakes are so high…
This is one of the reasons I would rather see de-centralized, weaker government. You wouldn’t have to spend a few million on buying a Congressmen if the Congressan didn’t have the ability to wreck your business or whatever. Corruption and money isn’t the problem so much as an indication of a larger problem.
But that’s another issue.
On one hand, I don’t think we are ready for a one world government because most nations are antagonistic to our way of life and our ideas of freedom. I think freedom will eventually become the norm (suspending the Islamic problem for a few minutes), and at some point it’ll work.
But today I can’t fathom the idea of China and India having the ability to tax us. I know you aren’t proposing that, but a central government would eventually gain the power to allocate and appropriate resources. While I’m all for seeking ways to modernize and improve impovrished areas of the globe, I’m not sure impovrished people are going to make the best of decisions when they could use sheer numbers to seize money from developed economies. Teach a man to fish and all of that.
What would you think about a UN alternative? A new organization that permits membership only to free nations who meet certain criteria for freedom of the press, freedom to assemble, freedom of religion, and so forth? I certainly wouldn’t have a problem with an affiliation with Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, Japan, and so forth. At least I would know that those nations at least share our common respect for freedom.