The Dreams Of The Past

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

When I first came to the US as an exchange student, during an otherwise unexceptionable trip into Pennsylvania I saw a sign on an hill side that shocked me to my core.

The sign said “US out of the UN. UN out of the US.”

You guys truly can’t imagine how much this shocked me. In Europe, growing up, it was all the UN this and the UN that, and the UN keeps us safe from another world war, and Unicef and Uni whatever.

I didn’t realize it, but I was living in a time capsule, or rather, a propaganda capsule. I didn’t know it but my view of the UN mirrored the great hopes with which it was created.

It has never, ever lived up to its imaginary wonders and benefits. Never. In the annals of ever.

It has neither promoted peace, nor helped the poorer nations, nor done anything — ANYTHING AT ALL — people thought it would do.

The UN was — from what I understand — supposed to be the precursor to a one-world government.

And it suffered from everything a one-world government would suffer from: too large, too cumbersome, too bureaucratic, too corrupt AND a handy instrument to every tin pot dictator and ideologue.

What was so amazing about my being shocked by that sign was that by that time I already knew that the UN had lent itself to such mendacious USSR propaganda coups as “The rights of man” or “the rights of children” half of those rights being either irrelevant or crazy, but giving totalitarian horrors the ability to say that the free countries were “also” failing.

Yes, the UN was supposed to be a deliberative body where nations could solve conflicts without having to war over them.

Only really? In what world does that make sense?

The US has had some authority to stop wars, because other nations know we’re the 800 lb gorilla and we’re willing to pound them into sand. UN peacekeepers are most notably dangerous to minors under the age of consent, which are the only thing they do in fact pound.

What they do, in fact, is lend unwarranted credence and consequence to a passel of sh*tty little nations who are self-inflected poor.

WHY are we in a deliberative body with and treating as equals nations that are still engaged in slavery, not to mention other, disgusting practices.

And while we’re at it, yes, there are attempts to “replace” the UN. This makes as much sense as replacing the League of Nations with the UN.

Look, here’s the thing: It was the fact that travel took a very long time and people had romantic ideas about other countries. Today, in the era of instant communication, we know what other countries are, how they live. And we don’t want — and shouldn’t want — them to have any say in how we live.

Take the boondoggle of carbon control and Climate Change. It’s mostly a Russian ploy to keep selling the only asset they have: oil. I say let them starve in the dark until they stop being crazy.

Certainly better than US dying in the dark by following their idiotic ploys.

And therefore….

I say US out of the UN, UN out of the US. And no replacements.

Sure, the UN will “fall to China” if we leave. Bull pocky. The Chinese won’t pay for the circus if they can’t use it to bully us. Also China won’t pay for it, because they can’t. In fact, no one but us can pay for that.

And ask yourself, is it a good use of our money?

Sure, the UN apparently has sub-groups that do things like set aviation standards. Cut those particular organizations loose and let them work on their own.

Keep such international organizations to the absolutely needed and what can be verified and tested. No more airy-fairy “world peace.”

Aviation standards, cool. Peace on the shipping lanes, cool

And yet, OTOH, think about it — who is going to be enforcing such standards? I.e. in ultimate instance, who is going to pay? Who is going to put boots on the ground? Why in fact does the US need “international organizations” more than a snake needs galoshes?

UN out of the US. US out of the UN.

Fumigate the building in NYC and sell it as luxury condos. Still an eyesore, but less malicious.

The UN is a dream whose time has passed.

It was always a nightmare, anyway.

208 thoughts on “The Dreams Of The Past”

  1. Given who will probably be the next mayor of NYC, I have to respectfully submit that there will be no demand for luxury condos. On the positive side, if they turn the building into homeless housing there will be no need to go to the expense of fumigation!

    Liked by 1 person

    2. The Reader suspects that there will be plenty of nomenklatura to occupy those condos.

      Like

        1. The movie “Heavy Metal” had the UN Building as low-rent housing, by implication favored by crooks. (“Harry Canyon” chapter)

          No real change, in other words.

          Liked by 1 person

      3. There is the biblical tradition that upon defeating the Phoenecians Jehu turned the temple of Ba’al into a public latrine. Perhaps turn the UN building into a set of giant restrooms?

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Actually as far as I can tell the waste was just left there with the bodies of the priests of Ba’al (2 Kings 10:25-28) in the ruins of the temple. I suppose we have to let the UN people leave unlike the priestsof Ba’al, we can’t have everything we want.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Oh yeah, those signs and billboards were scattered around rural areas (mostly) everywhere. I’m pretty sure the John Birch Society was responsible for most of them and for getting them started but not all.

    Funny how the JBS were always painted as a half-goose-step short of George Lincoln Rockwell and his merry band of American Austrian Painter Worshippers, yet now we see that they were right about a great many things. Wrong about some, yes, but right about a great many things.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. A band of those JBS loons were stalking my sister at one point. (OK, She did go out of her way to provoke them. But clearly “minor child”)

        Mom thus went after them, at their table at the post office parking lot.

        With an axe.

        Was able to disengage the combatants and arrange a detente.

        Like

    2. People used to mock the JBS because they warned about fluoride treatment being forced in public water systems. Turns out fluoride is a neurotoxin, especially in children, so many water systems are starting to discontinue it’s use. If people want fluoride in their systems, they can dose their own person/family with mouthwash or toothpaste.

      I think JBS got smeared by the “establishment” for pointing out the overreach of the government beyond the constitution. It got grouped with GLR the same way SPLC groups any entity right of Mao on their lists. Old tactic.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. All the well water out here has fluoride, naturally. That’s why natives have a slight tan tinge to their teeth. And not as many cavities, if they drink tap water from wells. I prefer it to bottled or reservoir water, because it is slightly sweet. YMMV.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. National Review and Buckley were PROUD of reading the John Birch Society out of the Conservative movement, and bragged about it nearly every fortnight.

        Until Yeltsin opened the archives, and proved the Birchers mostly correct. Then NR got real quiet about the issue. But never issued any sort of acknowledgement out apology.

        Putin sealed the archives, and they went right back to bragging about their role in driving the Birchers out of polite society.

        I think you’re looking at the pamphlets wrong. I don’t think they were so much meant to convert the general public, but to reassure each other that they weren’t alone, and that the crazy things they were witnessing really were happening. There was an awful lot of social pressure to just shut up and fit in, and knowing you weren’t alone was huge.

        Like

        3. It wasn’t just the KGB Archives released by Yeltsin. We already had the Mitrokhin archives hand written notes by Vasili Mitrokhin, that were boxes of notes and copies of documents that he had been keeping since the 30’s and got out as he defected. We also have the Venona decodes. The one thing the release did was let us absolutely verify some of the code names in the Venona decodes that had not had complete verification. Venona and the the Mitrokhin archives get mostly declassified after the fall of the USSR early in the Clinton period.

          Pretty much all the State Dept folks who were accused by McCarthy are in one of those three documents. In particular Alger Hiss was clearly a major source for the USSR.

          And Julius Rosenberg was a pass through for Manhattan Project data from his brother in law David Greenglass and although not directly involved Ethel was complicit. At their trial David Greenglass’s testimony was used to convict the Rosenbergs rather than expose the Venona decodes. For ratting out his sister, he got his own penalty limited, and his wife not charged. He lived until 2014 and I hope he was pained every day by knowing he’d sent his sister to the electric chair to save his sorry ass. If Dante has it right he likely now rests somewhere in the frozen lake of the 9th level, having betrayed both his family and his lords (US and USSR).

          When I learned of the McCarthy trials in the late 70’s these folks were viewed as martyrs to the liberal cause rather than the traitorous bastards (pardon my language) they were. Even by the late 2000’s and early 2010’s this was still the basic tilt of the history books my daughters learned from, even though the Decodes had been public for well nigh on 20 years.

          Liked by 1 person

    3. The JBS frustrates me, because– born in the early ’80s, so first wave millennial– I noticed there were no primary sources.

      Just the same old trick of a few words in quotes, and then they spent a paragraph telling you what they said. Mostly old stuff, doing the “reading it because it was there.” And most of it acted like everyone already knew everything there was to know, but they were repeating it. Or the conclusions, at least.

      And worse, they’d source it with things like “from a pamphlet.”

      …

      Dude. My dude. When, in the ever, has “there is a pamphlet” been a good universal basis for information on a big group?

      Contrast with things like– DNC. They do actually have official descriptions, every 4 years. Yeah, most folks don’t look there, but, they’re an organization. They HAVE official “this is who we are and what we do” statements, you need to get those so you can compare them to what happens.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The current JBS has their official “this is who we are and what we do” statements and such on their web site. Pretty clear actually where they stand and why. Decent site design compared to others.

        It’s 95% identical in political belief to much of the “America First” folks on the right without all the anarchy of “legalize drugs and support public nudity” of some of the Libertarian party fringes.

        Like

          1. You are comparing a organization that had the resources of a flea to that of “The Establishment” in the pre-Internet days.

            Outside of the mainstream media there wasn’t the reach for counter opinions back in the day. The Democrats and their Loyal Opposition controlling 95% of the media and information. And had the marketing skill to sell it to everyone.

            Even in the ’90s it was hard trying to find variety of opinions outside of a bookstore that had a decent selection of quirky quarterly periodicals, let alone a larger group of like minded people. And less so those on the “right”.

            It was a desert. And pamplets and quarterlies were all most of us had outside of word of mouth. Not counting a few early “crazy” radio personalities. And the writings of the Founding Fathers. And a handful of books that never seem to end up staying in the libraries.

            Until God blessed the open Internet to allow better ideas to be fruitful and multiple.

            So I’m not going to knock the JBS for the effort back in the day. Most of the “right” and the folks here are just now coming to the realization of facts that many of us “conspiracy theorists” had in the ’80s or ’90s.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. You are comparing a organization that had the resources of a flea to that of “The Establishment” in the pre-Internet days.

              You are misreading a report of the frustration from decades of “primary sources? What primary sources? Shut up and take this conclusion, you denier.”

              The only thing that ever showed up from them— and with adult eyes, I wouldn’t even trust that– was those billboards, usually with a story for “look how crazy these guys are” and more predigested rants.

              This BIG HUGE DEAL GROUP that… you only heard about in the third person, at the closest.

              Supposedly huge influence, per the folks who gave them devil’s tails and horns, and yet you couldn’t so much as find them at the fair. Actual Satanists at a state fair, and not these supposedly common boogiemen.

              But there would be lots of folks fighting against them!

              Liked by 1 person

              1. I didn’t see the billboards, but publications and flyers. They were never as big as some of the fraternal organizations like the Rotary or Loins clubs.

                I heard more about American Nazis and the Libertarian crazies than the Birchers. Probably because the former were more entertaining and harmless.

                The fact was JBS was demonized for quoting the  U.S. Constitution, the writings of the Founding Fathers, and questioning the growth government power, especially in the “good” times following WWII, turned many people off. Plus they were competing for mindshare.

                I asked a Bircher why they weren’t more popular. His answer was that people were too comfortable and didn’t want to dig for truths that had been buried by the mainstream.

                I spent thousands of hours researching everything interesting and come to the same conclusion.

                They have improved since then and have tried harder with their messaging since the ’90s. I think they needed new blood and a better generation of leadership.

                But the ’90s were when everything started becoming more obvious to the public and more people started looking for answers.

                And there are a lot of interesting things that are BIG DEALS that most individuals aren’t aware of. Maybe the time isn’t right or they aren’t ready.

                Liked by 1 person

            2. When I first got to know other libertarians, I heard the definition, “Libertarianism is five hundred people selling books to each other.”

              Liked by 1 person

              1. And gold. Or is that just the JBS adjacent?

                True about libertarians and books, though. Only people more into theory than the communists.

                Like

                  1. Waaaaaaay far left wing.

                    Those guys I actually enjoyed chatting with, they were out front of our post office in the Seattle Blob pretty often.

                    Utterly bugnuts insane, but pleasant company, especially for folks that think Obama is a far-right extremist.

                    Like

      3. WP delenda est

        For some reason, my response to Foxifier went above her post.

        (Which breaks causality. This may fracture space-time and doom us all!)

        Like

        1. (Which breaks causality. This may fracture space-time and doom us all!)

          Streams uncrossed, dogs and cats still living separate lives. I think we have dodged this catastrophe.

          Like

          1. Of course, being a temporal catastrophe, it could have happened far in the past, so this pre-reply post could be the real cause for the fall of the interstellar Dino civilization.

            Like

  4. Ah, UNICEF. As a third grader (so about 8) I did “Trick or Treat for UNICEF” in suburban Boston. It was for starving kids or, memory is dim, something to do with hungry poor people overseas. The teachers sold it as a bunch of happy people gladly forking over their change to support The Cause. In practice I got a funny look and then they scrambled for whatever coins they had.

    Well anyway, I turned in my canister with whatever was in it – a few bucks worth of coins. A week or so later the school had a party for the kids that had participated. They served donuts. Eight year old me looked at the donuts and thought “shouldn’t they have given this to the hungry people?”

    Liked by 1 person

    2. Yep remember that in grade school (K-4) so 1966-1971 roughly. Most kids stopped trick or treating 5th or 6th grade so once in Middle school we didn’t them although I know younger cousins were getting the boxes at grammar school well into the mid 70’s,

      Did the money do any good? Given the history of the UN and basically any fund like that I deeply doubt it.

      Like

  6. Yeah. Whenever I read a science fiction story in which there is one world government, I always think the story of how that came about has to be far more interesting than the story I’m actually reading. What kind of bloody world cleansing had to happen to get every dictator—as well as citizens the one-world-government thought were unhelpful to one world—to knuckle under?

    And the one world governments where nations still exist? I was never able to word it as well as Mark Steyn (“…if you take a quart of ice-cream and a quart of dog faeces and mix ‘em together the result will taste more like the latter than the former.”) but I always had the nagging feeling that mixing free nations with tyrannies would look a lot more like tyranny than freedom.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. One of my favorite Co-Dominion stories of Jerry Pournelles was King David’s starship where the back story is a monarch conquering a whole industrial world to gain entry into the larger stars congress instead of being a vassal colony. The actual story ignores the war, but it had fascinating implications where it collided with the main plot.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. When I see those Star Trek episodes where some “backward” world can’t be admitted to the Federation because they have multiple governments, I’ve often though that the correct solution would be for the more powerful group, the one who wants to join the Federation, to unleash a genocide on the other side.

        Yes, the Federation would be horrified by this. No, they wouldn’t admit the genociders. But the genociders great-grandchildren, who were remorseful about the crimes their ancestors had committed…well, every world has atrocities in their past, including Earth and Vulcan. And since their world is now united due to the fact that everyone who objected to the union had been dead for a century, there really wouldn’t be anything keeping the world from Federation membership…

        Liked by 1 person

        1. More interestingly is how long the Federation would last without being worse than the USSR.
          Look, I enjoyed TSO. I recently visited Kirk’s future birthplace. But… product of its time.

          Like

          1. They’ve already got the political officers in place, with command seats on the bridge, as “ship’s counselors.” Now they just need to put some additional muscle aboard, say, some “armed counselor’s aids”, and require the ship’s counselor to approve any orders given by the captain…

            Foxfier and I went a couple rounds on these thoughts a few years ago and I agree with her points, this evolution is not something I’d really be interested in seeing. I didn’t really much like “Blake’s Seven” with their eeeeeevul Federation. I prefer to have my Federation preserved in memory as aspirational, i.e. up through DS9, the last TNG-cast movie (okay, better yet second to last), and, mostly, Enterprise, thanks.

            But yes, it does seem the United Federation of Planets is balancing precariously atop multiple slippery slopes.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Indeed when Deana Troi showed up totally outside the Starfleet command structure in the first season I thought “Dang they’ve got Zampolit” and then “well at least the Zampolit are easy on the eye”.

              And yes as much as I loved Star Trek as a kid Rodenberry’s idea of the Federation is basically the UN or EU on steroids. Journey to Babel with the massive infighting of the various members is probably the most realistic of the bunch. And the first 3 seasons or so of The Next Generation average out to like maybe a dozen or so decent shows (mostly from late season 3 as Rodenberry is releasing control).

              Liked by 2 people

              1. Which is why I liked DS9 a lot. Never mind that the writing was a bit sharper and the characters a bit better, the overall theme was darker and more realistic. We got to see the Federation’s idealism unravel when they suddenly faced an existential threat and had to actually get bloody to fight it. See possibly the greatest episode of Trek ever, “In the Pale Moonlight.” But maybe that’s just because I’m so partial to Elim Garak.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. I never got into DS9. It was directly opposite Babylon 5 in my market for much of B5’s run and unlike DVR you could only record one thing at a time on a VCR. It was on near bedtime for my (then toddler aged) elder daughter. I ought to go back and look at it.

                  Like

                2. Notably Deep Space 9 lacked an assigned counselor, as did USS Voyager.

                  In real life I get the impression the ships counselor, sitting there on the bridge saying “I sense the Romulans are…hungry” was the result of a visit to Roddenberry by the Good Idea Fairy, and when he was spinning up TNG there was nobody to tell him “Gene, that’s stupid”.

                  Liked by 2 people

                  2. A space station like DS9 almost certainly would have had a mental health team. It’s safe to say that the lack of a Councilor was a casting decision. As for Voyager, one episode had The Doctor trying to recover repressed memories in 7 of 9. So it’s likely that the actual mental health people on both ships died in the incident that sent them across the galaxy.

                    And frankly, the only real reason to have Troi on the bridge to begin with is her empathic ability, which is an advantage when negotiating with others. Otherwise there’s no logical reason to have a mental health professional as part of the bridge crew.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. Since they had the Bajoran Temple aboard, and it’s implied they’re, ahem, touchy about that kind of stuff, given how much pushback Mrs. O’Brien got for starting a school even though no such thing was offered, it can be explained as Star Fleet doing their usually moron-nice shtick.

                      Like

        2. Yeah, well, “A Private Little War” also had them arming the natives, albeit just with flintlocks, which is more Stargate SG-1 than TNGs Noble Prime Directive Federation.

          As Sarah notes, it is product if it’s time.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I recently watched all of Enterprise, which I had never seen before. I can see why a certain type of Trekkie hated it. There were some… I guess they weren’t Easter eggs, but I don’t know if there’s a specific term. The part where a Vulcan was explaining that they had been on Earth since the early 20th century, but had sat back and watched Earth nuke itself halfway back to the Stone Age because their policy was to not get involved. The Federation people were pretty angry about that.

            “Hello, Prime Directive here!” Well, not yet, but it was only a matter of time…

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I liked Enterprise. Well, except for the song. And the unnecessary things they thought were trek-berries, and the canon-breaking drek like the stupid Ferengi episode – it’s clear in TNG that Picard & Co. was doing first contact with the Ferengi. All that stuff took it’s toll.

              The main thing in the early show that Did Not Work, which Rick Berman has stated was imposed by the studio, was the whole Temporal Cold War subplot. It really only jarred everything out of the early exploration era, dropping unnecessary future stuff into what should have been about humans getting out from under the Vulcan’s thumb and doing scary first exploration into the deep dark, into a galaxy where everyone else outclassed their tech, and nobody really cared about these Earthers.

              Then there’s The Xindi/Expanse thing. They had a perfectly good way to explore “post-war society goes to war” that was canonically right there in that era, the Romulan War, and they were foreshadowing Romulan stuff in early episodes (a bit too strongly, but okay), and then they blew it all out the airlock for the whole Xindi “you keeled my seester” stuff. It really broke the show. And as a result of that side quest they never addressed the elephant in the room from that era, the Romulan War itself.

              I quite liked the 4th season episode “Awakening” where Archer had the katra of Surak in his head, though they did not really let him use any insights he’d gained from the experience before the show was cancelled.

              And then there’s the final episode, universally hated and pretty much disavowed by Berman since. Enterprise deserved better than just being a video game that Riker played during TNG, and they really should not have killed Trip. It was the Bufffy era, and Joss Whedon really liked killing off main characters, so they felt they had to as well? No idea. Stupid choice. I vote for making his death a holodeck game edit glitch, and in reality Trip lived to supervise the NX-01 refit.

              Enterprise had promise, as I said I liked it a lot, but in the end the series was a sea of missed opportunities.

              Like

              1. No past tense about Whedon’s love of killing off characters. He apparently thinks it doesn’t really feel dangerous to the audience unless he kills off a character just to prove that “no one is safe”. And that’s presumably why Agent Colson was killed off in Avengers when his actor (from what I’d heard at the time) had a deal to appear in more movies.

                One of the problems with Enterprise was the arc plotting. There were all sorts of sub-plots and adversaries added to the series, but seemingly no idea where any of it was going to go. I still remember reading about an early mysterious adversary (unfortunately I can’t remember who off the top of my head), and an admission that the writers didn’t really have any idea who that individual was. That’s a problem.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. “…early mysterious adversary …”

                  “Future Guy”. Seen only in distorted holo-shadow talking from the future directing his current-day minions, who are never-seen-before-or-since aliens who can be invisible and crawl on the ceiling. Part of the “temporal Cold War” thing. “Future Guy” was first seen in season 1, I think in the pilot, and eventually just forgotten.

                  Yeah, no long term plans.

                  Like

      2. I seem to remember that part of the rational for “one government per planet” was that it was easier for the Empire to “manage” the member planets if there was only one government on a given planet.

        There may have also been an aspect of “only one nuclear power per planet” involved.

        Of course, in that novel the Imperial Navy was assisting the Monarch in united the planet.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “You’ve been running this planet like a piecework factory. We’re going to run it like a business. We’re going to put it under one roof!”

          Liked by 1 person

          1. MCCOY: I don’t know how serious this is, Jim, and I don’t quite know how to tell you 
            KIRK: Go ahead. 
            MCCOY: But in all the confusion I… 
            KIRK: Tell me. 
            MCCOY: I think I left it in Bela’s office. 
            KIRK: You left it? 
            MCCOY: Somewhere. I’m not certain. 
            KIRK: You’re not certain of what? 
            MCCOY: I left my communicator. 
            KIRK: In Bela’s office? 
            SPOCK: Captain. If the Iotians, who are very bright and imitative people, should take that communicator apart 
            KIRK: They will, they will. And they’ll find out how the transtator works. 
            SPOCK: The transtator is the basis for every important piece of equipment that we have. 
            KIRK: Everything. 
            MCCOY: You really think it’s that serious? 
            KIRK: Serious? Serious, Bones? It upsets the whole percentage. 
            MCCOY: How do you mean? 
            KIRK: Well, in a few years, the Iotians may demand a piece of our action.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. H. Beam Piper had that in his later Empire stories. Two conditions for joining the Empire – first, one government per system, they weren’t going to get into local political issues. Second, no legal chattel slavery.

          Beyond those, that government could be of any form the citizens would put up with – from the supposedly communist one that came about in “A Slave Is a Slave” to the absolute monarchies of the remnant Space Viking worlds.

          Like

          1. Piper’s writing was uneven, but the stories I liked, I generally liked a lot.

            And on the shelf by my desk, there’s a chambering reamer and die set for .235 Ultraspeed-Express. The barrel will probably wind up on a Mauser action instead of a 1937 Sharps, but those are hard to come by in this timeline.

            Like

        1. I like to sow confusion of the “Wait; what?!?” variety. Four bumper (actually, rear window) stickers:

          “I Will Not Comply”

          “We the People – Have Had Enough”

          “My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter”

          And for the confusion factor, as related to #3: “Who Is John Galt?”

          Now if I could find “Where Is Henry Bowman When We Need Him?” it would be complete…😉

          Liked by 1 person

      2. Well, when the purview of humanity expands, so do the polities. Planets in space opera take the place of nations and continents, and while there’s room for detail when the narrative dwells on a particular world, whatever multifarious distinctions might exist on all the others are a much finer degree of detail than the story needs.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. L. Neil Smith, had one book (research… research… must have been the first “Forge of the Elders” book, “Contact and Converse”, published in 1990 so a year before the fall of the Berlin Wall) that opened with the commies having won, and a couple of American Soviet Socialist Republics Party commissars trundling off in their cold-fusion powered spaceship to investigate something odd discovered outsystem, sitting around during the cruise expositing the plot backstory and in the process gloating to each other about the stupid capitalists fell for the commie discrediting of cold fusion research, their environmental scam, and all the other psyops that had ultimately collectively driven capitalism to defeat.

      I must have read the first one right when it came out and the USSR was still in business, and remember thinking that part was the only way the golden age of sci-fi “one world government” would ever possibly happen, as one world ultimately ruled from the Kremlin, a world spanning tyranny full of Kulaks and hoarders and wreckers and “four olds” to be hunted down and exterminated.

      Not exactly Star Trek’s United Earth.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Based on hints from ST:NG, the one world government from Star Trek resulted because of Vulcan contact on detection of Cochran’s initial warp drive test. Earth was still emerging from WWIII with pockets of survivors. Makes it a lot easier to believe “One World Government” emerging with that being the requirement to join the Federation in the stars. That didn’t happen immediately, given the first “Enterprise” was an Earth ship, not Federation.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. WWIII and somehow the City and County of San Francisco, including the Golden Gate Bridge, are largely intact.

          Like

          2. Golden Gate Bridge was intact, yes. The rest? Not clear. Star Fleet was build in San Francisco. Implying on the ruins of.

            What armed services are in San Francisco that would warrant that city metro getting a specific bomb? San Diego, makes sense. Sacramento, the state capital, okay. But LA or further north San Francisco? What do either of them have?

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Well, this is an AU where they had Khan when we got Dolly the Sheep, and San Fran does have some things that would make it interesting– we know from the time travel movie that they put in an aquarium large enough to hold blue whales.

              Like

            2. :double checks a map:

              Well, if someone took out the water going into California, San Fran would become the shipping center for all the food that could still be made.

              North (as you know) there are mountains in the way, as well as to the east; south you hit mountains and dry before you hit a sea port.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. Voyager established that an earthquake sank Los Angeles into the sea before WWIII, and if that happened Southern California would not need all that water anymore from up north, or from eastward sucking the Colorado dry.

                Liked by 1 person

            4. Well, various shots seem to show things like the ferry building and its clock tower, and the Transamerica Pyramid building, intact. Yeah they put Starlet Command over in Marin, pretty much right where the whale movie put the aquarium, but I am guessing that’s probably just because future Disney Lucasfilm would not give up their post-WWIII rights to the Presidio because Trek was CBS/Paramount..

              Like

              1. Hah! Starlet Command!! Good one, autocorrect!

                StarFLEET Command, and Starfleet Academy apparently, because you always put the cadets right next to the Generals. That’s why all three service academies are in the Pentagon. Oh, wait…

                Like

            5. Countervalue targeting by the Eastern Alliance genetically engineered newkewlar (antimatter?) targeteers would target population centers, and with LA previously sunk into the Pacific, for California that leaves the SF Bay Area and SAC, then Portland and Seattle plus Vancouver in the 51st state up northward.

              I have never seen any SF canon on San Diego in Federation times, but it would be an obvious counterforce target back in WWIII.

              Like

            6. “Because it was there.”

              In the “Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning” timeline, time travelers in Finland aquired alien technology to build the Starfleet, but not having the resources to do do the construction on its own, they did a coup in Russia to acquire its manufacturing capability. So the Russian Federation had a Starfleet…

              Like

    4. Next time you read “Starship Troopers”, pay attention to how the world government in Rico’s world was formed.

      For that matter, how the Lensmen took over all the governments in his Galactic Patrol series.

      They might not be the bad guys. But they’re definitely not the good guys.

      Liked by 2 people

    5. This got played with in one TTRPG I liked.

      Dream Pod 9 (DP9) is best known for their Heavy Gear setting (which just announced the release of a *third* video game, and had a really, really bad cartoon at one point). But they also had some other settings, most notably Jovian Chronicles. Jovian Chronicles is set in a future version of our own solar system.

      In the setting, Earth is dominated by the Central Earth Government Authority (CEGA). But when the CEGA sourcebook was released, it was revealed that the member states of CEGA barely got along, and the CEGA government was largely an attempt by the member states to present an “official” face for Earth against the other solar nations, and also so that they could claim the Earth seat in the United Solar Nations council.

      This had repercussions when their inwardly-focused squabbling caused them to miss the fact that the Venusians had effectively bought off one of CEGA’s fleets, and said fleet nearly started a war with the Jovian Confederacy, which is the most powerful of the Solar Nations.

      CEGA also quietly ignores the minor detail that at least half of the Earth’s surface is not under its control, but is instead filled with a large number of unaligned nations. On the other hand, CEGA is able to use its space navy to exercise unopposed control of the orbital colonies (which are thoroughly cowed), and the Lunar domes (not so much…).

      Like

  8. One of the books I am contracted to write in 2026 is about the Berlin Airlift. The UN played a role in that. It was so “successful” it prompted the creation of what would become NATO and the Common Market due to the UN’s impotence. (While we can argue NATO’s 21st century relevance and the ability of the EU to allow Europe to create a new form of 21st century totalitarianism, both NATO and the Common Market were invaluable in preserving Western European freedom in the late 1940s and in the 1950s.)

    In many ways watching the trajectory of the UN from 1945 through 1952 is kind of like watching one of those 1950s rocket launches where the booster fires, clears the launch tower and then pinwheels away unpredictably after that, never quite getting to orbit.

    Liked by 2 people

          1. Indeed the moment the rocket went sideways instead of up it was probably time for the RSO to hit the button. Of course that launch pad may be isolated so they may have prefered data to brotecting a clearly unmanned launch area.

            Like

  9. Tom Kratman did the “worst thing possible” to the UN in his novel Caliphate.

    He ignored it completely.

    IE We don’t know what the UN said/did in the backstory of the novel and we don’t know if it still exists. [Very Big Twisted Grin]

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Given that the world in Caliphate is essentially split into a very, very long shooting war between the Islamic groups and everyone else, the UN’s current official goals wouldn’t really fit.

      Also, it’s pretty much a guarantee that any president that went as far over the line as the reaction president in Caliphate would boot the UN out of the US. The Islamic countries make up a very large bloc in the UN (due to the sheer number of them, and the one country = one vote nature of the UN), and an organization like that would not be tolerated in the US that he was creating.

      Like

      1. While I don’t think you’re wrong, to me the point is that Kratman didn’t think what happens with the UN is worth mentioning. [Wink]

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yeah the Caliphate has taken most of the world outside the US and South America and perhaps Australia if I remember it correctly. So the UN was basically pointless (not that it is massively purposeful now). I ought to reread Caliphate sometime, Heavens to Betsy that is a seriously dark world line. No matter where you are it just is freaking awful. It’s just less awful in the section descended from the US.

        Like

        1. Most of Asia, as well. There’s a Chinese agent in the story.

          In the story, Islam controls the places where it’s made inroads historically, including Western and Central Europe (I don’t know if Eastern Europe, where the locals have experienced it before, is specifically mentioned). It’s notable that the Philippines is rooting out Islamics with US support because historically there have been Islamic troublemakers in the Philippines (the famed Moros of MILF). But historically that hasn’t spread, so Islam on the islands is in a limited area. And slowly being removed.

          So, yeah, China stands against the Caliphate. As, likely, would places like Japan, Korea, Thailand, etc… Indonesia, on the other hand…

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Thanks, it has been a while. I do remember the Philippines being an issue it plays a part in the opening of the story. I was unsure about china and Ex USSR, The Stans likely go with the caliphate, I wonder if the Uighurs do? Definityely need to reread at some point. I also wonder which variant of Islam won out. The Sunni and Shia mix almost as well as 16th century Catholics and Protestants. I’d put money (though not much mind you) on the Sunni, there’s more of them and the have better access to jannissary source material.

            Like

        2. The book managed to have a backstory antagonist in Pat Buckman.

          That book has some very memorable dead people, considering when the main plot happens.

          Like

      3. The USSR got three votes; the USA got one.

        Originally Stalin wanted all fifteen Soviet Socialist Republics to have their own vote; Truman countered with suggesting all 48 American states get their own vote. Then “compromised” by letting the Byelorussian and Ukraine SSRs get their own votes, while the US only got one.

        Of course we know now that the State Department was riddled with Soviet agents and sympathizers, from Alger Hiss on down. And while Truman had many fine qualities, dealing with the Soviets was not one of them. Stalin pulled Truman’s shorts up over his head and tied them in a knot every time they engaged in ‘negotiations.’

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Of course we know now that the State Department was riddled with Soviet agents and sympathizers, from Alger Hiss on down. And while Truman had many fine qualities, dealing with the Soviets was not one of them.

          Before you’re too hard on Harry, reflect that a) Roosevelt and his buddy Uncle Joe wrapped up a lot of those details at Yalta, and b) Harry was regarded as something of an “accidental Roosevelt stand-in”, and was subjected to a lot of “Harry, The President wouldn’t do it that way”, at least until he won for himself.

          Liked by 1 person

  10. Off Topic.

    Some people have been complaining about Amazon and the problems of using Epubor Ultimate to download/DeDrm Kindle ebooks.

    Epubor Ultimate has been updated to use a newer version of Kindle for the PC so it is now possible to download/DeDrm Kindle ebooks without using an older version of Kindle e-ink devices.

    I just downloaded the Newer Kindle for the PC and updated my Epubor Ultimate.

    I was able to download/DeDrm a newer Kindle ebook.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I’d rather that authors send me copies of their current books and FUTURE books. [Crazy Grin]

        More seriously, as crazy as Amazon is, it’s the best choice of the major eBook Stores for the authors. My post was about how readers can easily bypass the current Amazon craziness. [Smile]

        Liked by 1 person

              1. Sadly, it’s not possible for you to publish Books that you haven’t written yet. [Grin]

                Of course, I’m also one of these crazy people who want books from descended authors that they might have written if they hadn’t died.

                Like

                  1. I meant “died”. [Wink]

                    Of course, it is more like that those that were heaven-bound could continue to write than those that were hell-bound. [Very Big Grin]

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. You think there wouldn’t be writing in Hell? :-D

                      Of course there would. Under the most torturous conditions imaginable. Or, slightly worse than writing for Tor these days. Constant looming deadlines, demanding editors, abusive contract terms…

                      Liked by 2 people

                    2. Too far down the reply chain – this is to Imaginos. The plot of RAH’s “Job” was that the entire narrative was written (dictated, actually) in a luxury hotel in Hell.

                      (Definitely one of his stranger works…)

                      Liked by 1 person

                    3. [i]Constant looming deadlines, demanding editors, abusive contract terms…[/i]

                      A story swirling in your head, a blank page in front of you, and no words to put on it?

                      Liked by 1 person

                    1. oooooh. Since both husband and I write, and younger son who visits most often is collaborating with me on a book, I’m going to relabel Safe Harbor (This house) The Hoyt Home for the Rehabilitation of Fallen Authors. it makes us sound so…. respectable.

                      Liked by 1 person

  11. Speaking of lending unwarranted credence and consequence to nations that are self-inflicted poor and mired in slavery and barbarism, has there EVER been a UN secretary-general who wasn’t from some third-world craphole? Granted, I’ve only paid attention intermittently and only since the ’90s, but it does seem to be a pattern…

    You know it’s a bullshit organization when Russia and freaking China are permanent members of the Human Rights council. Foxes guarding the henhouse at every level.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Gladwyn Jebb, the first one, was from the UK. Trygvi Lie {“Lee”} was Norwegian, Dag Hammerskold, Kurt Waldheim. The current Sec Gen is from Portugal.

      After Waldheim, most came from “the global south”, aside from Ban Ki Moon, South Korea.

      Like

      1. IIRC Gladwyn Jebb was only “Acting Secretary General”.

        But it may be either a rule or custom that the Secretary General can’t be from the “Big Five” nations.

        Like

        1. Well, listen to a story about Gladwyn Jebb,
          Poor Baron from the sticks,
          barely kept his family fed.
          Then one day after heading the SOE,
          the telephone rang and
          Acting Secretary General he had to be.

          Swimmin’ pools,
          Fancy cars.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. And when even Iran gets a rotating Human Rights membership. At least when they aren’t chairing the Council on Women’s Rights or somesuch. (Not even going to check whether that is technically accurate. The truth might be somehow worse.)

      But there have been several UN Secretaires-General who weren’t from the Third World. Trygve Lie of Norway, Dag Hammerskjold of Sweden, and Austria’s Kurt Waldheim — who it turned out later had a bit of a Nazi background. Oopsie. Ban Ki Moon came from South Korea, after it had boosted itself to First World status.

      Plus, the person chairing the first provisional meeting of the UN in San Francisco in April 1945 was an American, and could plausibly be called the original chief of the United Nations. You may know the name: Alger Hiss.

      (I slipped that shiv in real smooth, didn’t I?)

      Liked by 2 people

  12. Unlike a lot of people, I do try to find primary sources on things like the JBS (and other things that sheeple have been conditioned to believe are bad without actually investigating them.) They did have a bad habit of throwing accusations of “communism” at people they didn’t like—Dwight David Eisenhower, a communist?—but they did make some very good points.

    Liked by 1 person

    2. Just want to say that I’m constantly — constantly — misreading your name as “Raven Law Cleric” instead of “Ravenclaw Eric”.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Joseph Commings titled his =The Glass Gravestone= after the UN building. As to re-using it: it’s a hazmat palace, with asbestos and other goodies throughout. It will have to be dismantled piecemeal and under an airtight wrap.

    Like

    1. Pretty much anything built pre 1970 is nightmare to deconstruct. PCBs, Asbestos, and likely Lead paint for white painted surfaces pre 1970. Although it probably has a fortune of copper between the electric and water services. The Chagall art is likely worth saving.

      Like

  15. I remember UN Security types having, and practicing with, H&K MP5 machine-guns in blatant violation of Federal and NY State and City laws. They were very arrogant about it because, you know, elitist bureaucrats lives matter, way more than yours. All while they scheme with Democrat administrations to restrict and remove Americans’ ability to own firearms. Plus the aforementioned abuse of underage children in Africa and Kosovo by UN “Security” troops.

    Letting homicidal muslim and tin-pot dictatorships sit on and head the UN Human Rights Council is just insulting to actual republican and democratic societies, and the constant anti-Israel “resolutions” by all of the muslim members and their associates is a joke. That there were UNRWA staff employees who took part in the Oct. 7th attack, and even held Israeli hostages in their homes, is a deal breaker right there. The UN is a totally corrupt institution which serves the interests of its Marxist and muslim members at the expense of the United States and its allies.

    Like

  16. I remember UN Security types having, and practicing with, H&K MP5 machine-guns in blatant violation of Federal and NY State and City laws. They were very arrogant about it because, you know, elitist bureaucrats lives matter, way more than yours. All while they scheme with Democrat administrations to restrict and remove Americans’ ability to own firearms. Plus the aforementioned abuse of underage children in Africa and Kosovo by UN “Security” troops.

    Letting homicidal muslim and tin-pot dictatorships sit on and head the UN Human Rights Council is just insulting to actual republican and democratic societies, and the constant anti-Israel “resolutions” by all of the muslim members and their associates is a joke. That there were UNRWA staff employees who took part in the Oct. 7th attack, and even held Israeli hostages in their homes, is a deal breaker right there. The UN is a totally corrupt institution which serves the interests of its Marxist and muslim members at the expense of the United States and its allies.

    Like

  17. Totally OT but interesting….

    Went to a, “Tea,” class today at Pennsic which involved tasting a dozen varieties (I can drink Chai. Who knew?) The last sample was Lapsang Suchon (?), favorite tea of Winston Churchill and Captain Sir Dominic Flandry. It’s smoked, and it really doesn’t taste very good as a tea.

    According to the teacher, a few centuries ago, a Chinese town was about to be invaded as part of a civil war/intramural fight, so they tried to preserve the tea harvest by hurriedly processing it and then burying it. After thr danger was past, they dug it up and found it awful. At which point, some enterprising Chinese said, “Let’s ship it down river to thr Europeans. They’ll drink anything!” So they shipped it down river and sold it to Portuguese merchants.

    Who came back the next year, asking for more of this type of tea. So the villagers started smoking part of the crop and selling to the Portuguese, who would drink anything…

    Like

    1. Interesting! I heard a variant of that, that the Russians drink smoky tea because the sacks of tea were downwind of campfires on the overland route from China, and so the tea absorbed the smoky taste.

      Like

    2. You might enjoy looking up smoking meat using tea.

      Another option, which I have done and quite enjoyed, is to poach chicken in a strong infusion of Lapsang Souchong tea. The result is tender and flavorful chicken meat which works well in chicken salad or on its own.

      Like

    3. Yeah, straight-up Lapsang Souchong is – overpowering – enough to be unpleasant, but I do enjoy a Russian Caravan-type tea that adds a touch of L-S to regular black tea which gives it a pleasant kick.

      I went to a tea class where I was introduced to Pu Erh tea – leaves which have been fermented before getting dried and packaged. The taste of the tea depends upon the particular biota of the environs in which the tea is processed. The variety I met ended up tasting like the juice from a tin of sardines; No, thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yep. The instructor passed around white, yellow, green (Chinese and Japanese), oolong, pu-er, black, jasmine, chai and Lapsang Souchon. I can do without oolong, pu-er and LS (though I might get some to use in the next batch of barbecue).

        Like

        1. Lapsang Souchon is lovely, as an occasional treat. Different companies offer different blends, though, so for some teas the brand can make a huge difference. In general, I’ve found the Twinings brand to be, ah, comfortably middle of the road when it comes to teas, but note that they recently had a LS difficulty: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lapsang-souchong-twinings-tea-replaced-b2325542.html

          I’ve found that I cannot stand hibiscus, which is unfortunate, as it is a common ingredient in fruit teas.

          Like

              1. At one point, I bought some loose leaf darjeeling tea at a tea store in Germany. It was the loveliest blend. The next time I bought it, it tasted nothing like the first.

                We figured some very expensive tea was misfiled in the system…thé perdu. The tea you know you will never find again…

                But really, English Breakfast is fine.

                Liked by 1 person

          2. I am with my fellow Yankee, I like Lapsnag Souchon as an occasional choice. Love Oolong and Darjeeling. Though most days I drink coffee.

            Like

  18. Wicked me would like to see the UN and the EU sites remodeled as they are in Mackey Chandler’s novels. But trying not to go there spiritually, I’d suggest putting the not-yet-deported criminals to work disassembling the UN infrastructure in the USA, quartering the remains, and shipping them to Geneva, the Hague, Vienna, and Nairobi.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. That’s not wicked; such remodeling comes under the heading of “civic improvement”. Or possibly “slum clearance”.

      April and her partners were (will be?) the personifications of FAFO.😈

      Liked by 1 person

  19. “UN peacekeepers are most notably dangerous to minors under the age of consent,”

    They’re also dangerous to Haiti, having apparently managed the difficult feat of making Haiti worse than it already is. This was done through the introduction of cholera.

    Incidentally, the guy who led the UN effort to raise support to combat cholera in Haiti passed away yesterday.

    Liked by 1 person

      2. Burkina Faso says “hold my beer” or whatever it is they drink there since beer is not Islamic.

        Like

  20. getting rid of the UN would certainly improve the parking and traffic around Turtle Bay. Might even cause some of the smaller countries to close their embassies and open up some prime real estate. That said, I’d hope that some (e.g., Poland and France) would hold onto theirs because unlike the crap in DC, they’re truly lovely buildings.

    Like

  21. The UN is nothing more than a gang of Kleptocrats trying to steal as much of the treasury as they can. In that they are Identical to the Modern Democrat Party. Once again democrats, you don’t like my assessment, then change your Party, don’t bitch about the messenger. Also to the rest of the world, you don’t like USA being the 800 lb. Gorilla on the planet, then step up, Compete, and stop whining.

    Like

        1. Where can we get targets printed with those blue plastic helmets at the bulls-eye?

          Just asking out of idle curiosity, of course. :-P

          I have seen skeet that are just about that same shade of blue.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. It’s actually a stretchy vinyl thing that goes over their issue combat helmets, kinda like the blue man group costumes. You can see the stretchy folds in the meme image.

            After all, they might get shelled when they get ignored and the fighting breaks out again, and as they are hiding from both sides in their foxholes before they can evacuate they need real head protection.

            I actually feel sorry for some of those guys – some places, like Fiji and some of the other island states in the Pacific, make a fair amount of foreign exchange sending their army off to be UN Peacekeepers. Other places that send troops send more of the dregs of their societies, and are the cause of the bad press, but some of them are just there so their governments can get paid.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. My stepson once wore the blue beret once. I am fairly sure he was not your stereotypical UN bully. Mind you, he used to jump out of perfectly good airplanes…..

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I admired the bulk of the UN folks in the Balkans, especially the Canadians and some Brits who did what they could, despite the RoEs, to protect people and keep all sides apart.

              Others? Yeah. *Kitty sigh* Fish (and peacekeeping and humanitarian missions) do indeed rot from the head down.

              Like

            2. Not UN, so no blue accoutrements, but note the MFO peacekeepers are still out there in the Sinai as a result of the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt. Top three troop contributors are the U.S. with 465 troops (I assume that includes the U.S. Colonel who is in command), then Columbia contributing 275, and Fiji contributing 170.

              Like

  23. I had to create a single government for the Earth in the upcoming Summervale series, for one simple reason.

    You have to keep magic under control and the Wizard Wars were bad enough without modern digital electronics, finite-state processors, and the Internet. Look, when you can replace a whole choir of loyal adepts chanting to their dark gods even though blood is coming out every possible orifice with a half dozen decent laptops running a neural net emulation package, high-end LED lights, and concert speakers you got off Craig’s List, there’s a problem.

    (Why? Well, you have bell, book, and candle right there, don’t you?)

    And you know some cunning sociopath is going to figure out how to make it work, because he’s smart enough to get away with it…

    To make this work, mind you, you have Empress Theodora-who has no problem at all with dealing with corruption with a headman’s axe. You have the Magos, which doesn’t have a problem with letting people stick their own heads into a hangman’s noose. And you have the entire Dawn Empire military/aristocratic caste, who for all of their eccentricates were chosen because they were responsible people. And the system tries it’s very best to rule as little as possible(1), because mission creep is a thing.

    But when something has to be done, something will be done.

    (1-I’m writing a snippet where the Empress Theodora is dealing with a credit card processing scandal involving legal adult content. Her solution is to expand the ability of the Imperial Credit Union to allow transactions and since it’s an Imperial institution…committing crimes against it such as not allowing legal transactions to be processed means you face Imperial justice. Which often involves beheading.)

    Liked by 1 person

  24. The only issues I have is that rescinding a treaty is pretty uncharted legal territory, the globalists will go to the mattresses to protect their precious, and the GOP Is… What it is.

    The UN is a blight, and it does need to die. We just can’t get there from here right now.

    I propose a different course that can actually be implemented. We simply use our veto. On Every. Single. Thing.

    Like

    1. Rescinding a treaty is easy and it has been done many times (never mind the legalities) – If the nation rescinding it is powerful enough. “The treaty no longer is in effect – what are you going to do about it”?

      Like

      1. Easy? What have you been smoking? Congress would have to vote on it. The screeching and howling would be epic. A marathon filibuster in the Senate, guaranteed. Fistfights and wedgies on the House floor, probable. Democrats predicting The End Of The World, for the 378th time.

        Like

        1. Somewhat reminiscent of a heated debate in the House around 1900. The only congressman not on his feet shouting was a tall Representative from Texas sitting calmly and whetting his Bowie knife on the side of his cowboy boot.

          Like

        2. Better idea. Just don’t pay the US dues to the UN (yes the usual suspects will screech. And? Let them.) Plus bill them rent for the UN building for the ground it is on. I think it is called “Property Taxes” for the US. NY gets a cut (ought to shut that branch of whiners up). Not that it’ll get paid.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Just withhold those taxes from the full US annual contribution to the UN, and send New York State and New York City their cuts, the same way my paychecks get abused. We should probably withhold Federal taxes as well.

            Though I’m not certain the UN building officially sits in New York State anymore – did they do something tricky when they gave the UN the land?

            But sending NY and NYC checks under the tax presumption would probably work to quiet some of the wailing.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Like they did something tricky when DC was formed as a 10-mile square from land donated by MD and VA, and then when VA lost the war they got their land back but MD, on the side that won the war, didn’t? Yeah, I’d call that “tricky”. If anyone knows the details of that particular parlor trick I’d like the info.

              Liked by 1 person

          2. Unfortunately, our dues are spelled out in the treaty, and are legally enforceable through our courts.

            When we withhold dues, our only real leverage is that the corrupt institution needs the money to pay off cronies, and that the legal system very slowly (especially if one party is trying to draw things out as long as possible).

            We CAN (and should, and sometimes have been) cut off a the spin offs, like UNICEF, the WHO, the Palestinian refugee fiasco, the commission on human rights, etc.

            Like

        3. If any of them are likely to a) actually set their hair on fire or b) throw themselves off the Rotunda roof in despair, one could probably make a lot of money streaming the chaos.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. Given my age, Payperview was also my first though for the idiom… but does it even exist anymore?

              Like

      2. Not so easy for us. The Constitution says that signed and ratified treaties become part of the Constitution, and thus the highest law in the land.
        FDR used this along with the threat of packing the court to get the Supreme Court to back down.

        And if a year can legally be deratified, it’s got to be by at least the same Senate supermajority that ratified it in the first place.

        The founding fathers made it difficult to enact treaties, and their infringement on sovereignty implicit, so they wouldn’t be entered into lightly. It didn’t work.

        Like

        1. IIRC treaties are part of the Law-Of-The-Land but the Constitution is still above treaties.

          In any case, I suspect that plenty of treaties are written such that the US can withdraw from the treaties.

          Liked by 1 person

          2. W*pedia (I know) says:

            Withdrawal from the United Nations by member states is not provided for in the United Nations Charter.

            Like

            1. There is, however, provision in the U.N. Charter for expulsion of a member nation, so maybe the U.S. could introduce a measure to expel itself. The Chinese and the Russians would probably veto it, though (heh).

              Like

              1. Be interesting to see Russia, China, and the US, all on the same page. All 3 vetoing the same items. Overkill. But whatever. UN notions need overkill.

                Liked by 1 person

              1. Which side is correct justified by Victory. Fundamental rule of such matters.

                Washington is a hero, not a villain, ultimately because of Yorktown.

                Yes, it really is that simple. (grin)

                Liked by 1 person

            3. If we erase all of the other member states, 1) we can adjust the rules so that we can withdraw 2) remaining within the UN would be less of a bad thing.

              The people the Eurolanders use for their diplomats are bad, and probably should be killed. Theoretically, it is possible to get the necessary changes made without fully erasing populations or even states/governments.

              Anyway, it is probably valid enough to void internatnional agreements after there is no other party signatory that remains extant.

              Costs versus benefits are another matter.

              Liked by 2 people

        2. On Treaties Becoming Part Of the Constitution, Tom Kratman pointed out that Amending the Constitution is much more harder to do than to approving a Treaty.

          A Treaty is approved by the President signing it and by a super-majority vote of the US Senate.

          An Amendment to the Constitution requires super-majority approval from the House & the Senate along with a super-majority of the States for it to become part of the Constitution.

          Thus, in Tom Kratman’s opinion, a Treaty doesn’t become part of the Constitution.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. The climate accords were never submitted for ratification.
              For the obvious reason that the attempt would fail.

              We were never obligated to follow the accords. Lots of people (and much of our government) just pretended that we were.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. In my opinion, our government’s executive branch making s#!t up and then enforcing it as if it is law is the number one problem of the past twenty years, longer though previously at lower levels.

                Liked by 1 person

              2. https://search.brave.com/search?q=list+of+ratified+treaties+the+US+has+withdrawn+from&summary=1&conversation=0ca8bb3f3e61a30007f5ca

                US Withdrawn Treaties List

                The United States has ratified several treaties but later withdrawn from them. Below is a list of such treaties:

                Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty

                Ratified in 1972, the United States withdrew in 2002 .

                Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

                Ratified in 1988, the United States withdrew in 2019 .

                Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

                Signed in 1998, the United States withdrew in 2002 .

                Kyoto Protocol

                Signed in 1997, the United States did not ratify it .

                Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

                The United States is a party to the treaty, but it has not withdrawn from it .

                Like

          2. It’s a valid opinion. And I agree with it.

            The question is if it would carry the day at the Supreme Court.

            Sadly, with the current court, I can only see it getting 2-3 votes.

            Like

          3. Thus, in Tom Kratman’s opinion, a Treaty doesn’t become part of the Constitution.

            It had better not. How many treaties are we in that would directly contradict the Constitution, if they were placed on the same level?

            Liked by 1 person

            1. You mean like the UN’s attempt to impose gun control?

              Kerry signed it for Obama in 2013, the Senate never ratified it, and Trump withdrew the signature in 2019. However, Obama attempted to carry out a lot via regulation.

              Like

        4. https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-2/16-treaties-as-law-of-the-land.html

          Slight qualification, it does not make it on par with the constitution.

          It makes it on par with other acts of Congress– that is, laws.

          So they can be changed in the same manner as laws, rather than requiring the level of ratification required for a constitutional amendment.

          This is also why unconstitutional treaties cannot be binding, because they do not modify the constitution.

          Liked by 1 person

  25. “The UN building. What a joke. They turned it into low-rent housing.” — Harry Canyon, the ‘Heavy Metal’ movie

    “New York. Big deal. Scum center of the world. Now they’re talkin’ about lettin’ in lowlifes from other planets.”

    Liked by 2 people

  26. I like staying in the UN because we keep our Security Council veto, which has allowed us to kill a number of very problematic items. Mind you, that’s the only reason why. And some of our recent administrations haven’t used the veto power when it ought to have been used…

    On the other hand, as noted, the US pays 22% of the total amount of money given to the UN. They could still keep the lights on if the US pulled out (and iirc, there have been times when the US withheld its money over complaints about things like corruption). But it would make a definite impact.

    Interestingly, despite all of its bluster about being a new superpower, China is not #2. #2 is Japan, which pays about 9%. China is at #3, with a little over 7%.

    Like

  27. From Wiki

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause#Repeal_of_treaties

    Quote

    Repeal of treaties
    James Madison contended that Congress had the constitutional right and duty to modify or repeal treaties based on its own determination of what is expedient for the national interest.[32] Beginning with the 1884 Head Money Cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that Congress can abrogate a treaty through subsequent legislative action, even if this amounts to a violation of the treaty under international law.[33] The court has also maintained that the judiciary “have nothing to do and can give no redress” with respect to the international consequences and controversies arising from such Congressional action, since it is a political question beyond judicial review. Subsequently, Congressional modifications of a treaty will be enforced by U.S. courts regardless of whether foreign actors still consider the old treaty obligations binding upon the U.S.[11]

    Additionally, the Supreme Court has consistently held that an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void, as would be case with any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution.[34] This principle was most clearly established in the 1957 case Reid v. Covert, which held that “no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution”.[35] Consequently, the Supreme Court could theoretically rule an Article II treaty unconstitutional and void under domestic law, although it has not yet done so.[36]

    In Goldwater v. Carter, Congress challenged the constitutionality of President Jimmy Carter’s unilateral termination of a defense treaty with Taiwan.[37] The case went before the Supreme Court but was dismissed without hearing an oral argument by a majority of six Justices, on the grounds that “The issue at hand … was essentially a political question and could not be reviewed by the court, as Congress had not issued a formal opposition”; Justice Brennan dissented, arguing that the “issue of decision-making authority must be resolved as a matter of constitutional law, not political discretion” and therefore was subject to judicial review.

    Presently, there is no Supreme Court ruling on whether the President has the power to break a treaty without the approval of Congress; it remains unclear which branch of government is empowered by the Constitution to terminate a treaty, much less the procedure for doing so.[38] In practice, a president may terminate a treaty unilaterally if permitted by said treaty’s terms.[39] President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the United States from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, six months after giving the required notice of intent,[40] but faced no judicial interference nor legal action.[39]

    End Quote

    Apparently, Treaties don’t become part of the US Constitution.

    Like

  28. To give a sliver of credit where credit is due. Back in the 50s-early 70s, the WHO did a decent job of coordinating other groups and smoothing the way for vaccination programs and work on river blindness. The actual work was done by NGOs, groups like Rotary International, the Lions Club, and others, but the WHO handled a chunk of the politics so that the medical folks could get in and help.

    Note that this was also when Western countries still had a very strong presence in that part of the UN.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Well, the pre-charter “United Nations” won World War II.

      But what has it done for us lately?

      Like

Comments are closed.