Posted by Roland's response to my old friend Christian Schol (126.96.36.199) on April 16, 2004 at 20:12:13:
In Reply to: As an Australian observer posted by Roland on April 15, 2004 at 18:40:41:
Hi again Christian Scholar,
Yes it is good to catch up with you again, albeit under extremely distressing world circumstances.
I may have been unclear in my argument to you about the importance of the United Nations and its function in the World; for that I apologise. Please let me try again.
My point was that corruption is integral to human institutions – unavoidable. That does not mean we should disband them so readily. Usually the corruption elements can be surgically removed through resignation or incarceration (or in the case of the US and other Third World views of human life, maybe even assassination). If one believes in the institution with sufficient conviction then every effort will be made to buoy it up and improve it and keep it functioning. Pedophilia in the Church for example is a case at hand; no-one in their right mind would see any advantage to disbanding the Church. As I said in my last note to you, there have been many “IranGates” in US politics over the years. I will leave it up to you to decide whether the US has therefore relinquished the right to self govern. Just remember, whatever you apply to that situation you should also apply to the UN, which was established to act as an umpire and a point of appeal on the world stage - a place where every member can have a voice and vote (although I have difficulty with the non-democratic veto powers concept). Sure, corruption exists in the UN (I cited an example to you in my previous note), but devaluing its role is hardly applying common sense or evenhandedness to both cases. It is here that I see you employing a double standard. As far as I am concerned I see the UN as the most important arbiter in world affairs.
I believe this is vital and despite any peripheral corrupting elements, we have, as I see it, no alternative to that of the UN. Bear in mind that the UN may not reach a resolution that all parties agree with, but it is democratic and an open forum for decision making. It is not a
Post a Followup