Great post by William Sjostrom reprising his convincing argument against the UN for Trinity College Historical Society's debate:
The UN’s founders proclaimed that they wanted an end to war between sovereign states and a proclamation of human rights. An end to war was to be established by a defense of state sovereignty. Human rights were to be defended by proclamation... The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is fundamentally at odds with protection of state sovereignty. For example, Article 4 prohibits slavery, and Article 5 prohibits torture. The Sudan practices slavery. Iraq under Saddam was famous for torture. If a regime is monstrous, it violates human rights, but the principle of state sovereignty says the UN can do nothing..Even if the idea of the UN were a good one, it is an illusion to think it matters. Living by illusions is not humane; it is murderous.
Comments