So this is something ive thought about a little bit and never really see it talked about much. Im curious to hear what others here think.
Basically the premise is this. We had the league of nations and that failed. Now we have the UN and while arguably more effective in some ways atleast its still pretty bad at reigning in rogue states like the US and Israel for example.
So thinking about the future how should we change the structure of something like the UN to make it more ideal for a world post-US Empire. Im also curious to hear if you all would even support an organization like this or if you prefer to allow nations to engage in diplomatic talks one on one and not have an international community butting in.
What level of control should a “UN” have, and what mechanisms should it have access to for putting pressure on member nations if any?
The UN was ironically created because the League of Nations failed and was considered ineffective. But the UN relies almost entirely on the Security Council and the 5 permanent seats will always veto themselves. There is literally no way, for example, to suspend the US from the UN as the Security Council has to make a recommendation to the general assembly… which the US can veto as soon as the proposition is raised.
The UN is a vestige from a bygone era; the 5 permanent seats were given to the victors of World War 2 (why?) and I’m thankful we at least have China and Russia in it because imagine how much worse it would be if the permanent seats were all occupied by US satellites. You can’t make any changes to the UN because if a permanent member doesn’t like it they will veto it.
To dismantle the UN, it’s necessary to build dual power – a competing structure, maybe BRICS? Maybe something else, that will eventually become more interesting to the world than the UN is. And this happens through the imperialized periphery, as they represent over 80% of the world population with one thing that unites them: that of being imperialized.
Maybe WW3 and its aftermath would give China and it’s allies a chance to restructure the UN to make it less west centric and if so what changes should they even make and is it worth salvaging at all?
My 2 cents while not a fully formed idea is maybe incorporate international unions in the process. All members must allow workers to join and those unions can organize mass walkouts strikes etc in nations that break international law. Could be an effective way to apply pressure.
What you’re suggesting seems to me something akin to the former communist internationale? Why not straight to something that has historical evidence of working, such as the Warsaw pact?
The Warsaw Pact is kinda a different thing isnt it? Its an agreement between specific nations not a worldwide international body.
Thing is, all western powers and their vassal states will be diametrically opposed to it. I don’t think there’s much possibility for international cooperation of workers in states while there are imperialist powers like the US or Western European states.
Im thinking post WW3 with the US empire collapsed but not a worldwide revoltion yet. There are plenty of non socialist anti imperialiat nations now too.
Also im talking about a time period here before we have socialism globally. Like something that could host nations in it that are ideologically opposed like the UN does now but just actually function in its most important jobs like stopping genocides. So not really the internationale either since thats just socialist nations. The Warsaw Pact and Internationale are both like very ideologically pure. Its a lot harder to have an international organization between all nations where they have a lot of disagreements i think.
I don’t think any international framework after the UN should have the ability to “reign in” rogue nations. We should not build some kind of world police, the US international order shows the pitfalls of this. The more powerful and influential nations will exploit punitive measures.
Instead, we should strive to create a world where rogue nations can easily circumvent economic and political pressures, at least if they enough allies, even if the majority is against them. Basically, a kind of global anarchism (horizontal order). I would be very skeptical of a one world state, or something that tries to be like that if it was bourgeois led, or consisted primarily of bourgeois members.
