Politicians

[KRSESQ]

Face it: people in general are scum and you don't dare turn your back on anyone, whether politician, priest, or anything in between.

Cynical? Maybe. But at least you know what to expect and maybe sometimes find yourself pleasantly surprised by an unexpected act of altruism.

Kevin

[Marshmallowman]

The problem is by the time anyone gets into a responsible psotion they have either sold their soul or never had one to begin with....

It will probably be a lot better place when "democracies" have more than 3 major parties

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by Marshmallowman
It will probably be a lot better place when "democracies" have more than 3 major parties

There are many countries with 6 or even 12 major parties. Things work no better there. Take France, for instance, a country with nearly 50 million political parties The only advantage of polypartisan systems is that coalitions become a de facto reality, so there may be a slight moderating factor, but corruption may be just as rife. This country is a prime example.

Are you including those in the UN in that definition? Maybe even those who are working as "scientists" but push their own agenda's under that lable in order to get a measure of credibility for bad science?

The UN is an apolitical functionary organisation. It has many problems (and I know many of them first hand, as I have been working, as a scientist and consultant, for the UN since 1989). Yes, of course, there are corrupt employees and consultants (and I could actually name some in at least three agencies). However, these are relatively few in number, especially compared with the functionaries who simply do not wish to rock the boat by whistle-blowing. Like many large organisations, it is largely peopled with employees who are content to do their work conscientiously but without using an overdose of initiative, until such time as they can retire gracefully with a reasonable pension. This includes most of the scientific personnel.

In all my work, I have met just one UN Agency employee who had an "agenda" and, believe me, he is the cause of many problems and his case has been reviewed at an international level on at least two occasions. However, the problems he causes are not to his employing agency but to others with which he interacts and his employer is therefore content with his performance. No one can do anything to alleviate the situation other than his Agency, short of a hint from the SG and this is too minor to warrant his intervention.

The REAL problem with the UN is a constant shortage of funding because many large countries are in arrears with their dues, sometimes by several years. If these member-states respected their commitments, the UN would operate much better and be able to provide timely aid to those that need it.

However, I suspect that your intervention was a snide reference to Hans Blix et al. I have no idea of his terms of reference other than what has been published in the media, so I am in no position to judge how he fulfilled his mandate, but I have no reason to believe that he was corrupt or had an "agenda". He was given a thankless task, the results of which did not please some politicians in a number of countries, because it did not suit their agendas, some of which are now under sub judice examination..

[mutz]

The point I am getting at is that the whole game is played by human beings, and the closer you look at the human being, the more you see and understand why people are the way they are and do, or not do, what they do or abdicate.

If you just listen to and intellectualize over what is said, it's the old story of bullshit baffles brains.

Every political system was created and ratified by whom?

Every tyrant or public office holder was put in office by whom?

Take a look at your hand when you are pointing your finger, and you will discover four fingers pointing back at yourself.

All those who want someone else to tell them what to do are responsible for what they get. All those who abdicate their responsiblities in life, look for a Papa or Mama to care for them get what they have chosen. There are always those who will jump into the role for their own benefit, while purporting whatever the abdicators want to hear.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Saddam, and all the rest were put in the saddle by the masses who wanted someone to tell them what to do.

Don't look at the systems, the "leaders", look at the followers.

[Gurm]

The UN is apolitical? ROFLMAO.

*ahem*

I'm sorry. I'm sure you've met lots of non-biased folks at the UN. However, given their track record in supporting terrorism, nurturing mass murderers as "world leaders", and the support of Palestinian groups among other things...

I mean, this is an organization that appointed CHINA as the head of the "Human Rights Commission"! GOOD GOD! CHINA! What... the... fudge?

Gpar_

[Brian Ellis]

Yes, it is apolitical. It welcomes member-states of ALL types of political set-up and each has as much say as its neighbour. I can't remember the exact count, somewhere over 192 states, I believe. The only one that remains outside, as an observer, is the Vatican! These include kingdoms, totalitarian, republican, democratic, communist, liberal and conservative plus all shades in between. Furthermore, the UN treats all its members equally.

In my work, I have dealt with government bodies in totalitarian and democratic states, in all shades of religious belief, such as Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Maoist, Animist and officially Atheist. There has been no discrimination because one country was politically allied or opposed to another. I have done work concerning the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, for example, in exactly the same way as I have for countries more aligned to Western standards.

My work, as I said, is scientific and includes inspections in developing nations, so my governmental interlocutors are not the political rulers, although I have discussed things at ministerial levels, but these talks were essentially short courtesy visits. I cannot say that I have ever had pressure to bear on me for political reasons.

"Terrorism", "Mass Murderers" etc. are all relative. The UN has never condoned these things, even if it accepts member-states that may not conform to your obviously very high standards. But beware, terrorism etc. may take many forms and very few states can state that they have never conducted -- and still conduct -- some form of terrorism or denial of human rights and that includes many so-called civilised nations. So let he who is without sin cast the first stone, but ask Amnesty International whether any given country is without sin, first. I, for one, don't know of any, do you?

[Dr Mordrid]

Sorry Brian, but if you really think the UN is apolitical it sounds like you're in the position of not seeing the forest for the trees.

The proper terminology is that the UN is multi-political, and as a result is parylized in its actions by eyebrow deep diplomatic BS. Result: you end up with atrocities to common sense like terrorist nations chairing the Human Rights Commission, among other things.

Also: if you can honestly say that it's OK to apply relativism to terrorism and mass murder that says something about the value system you've been exposed to, and I don't mean anything positive.

At some point you have to apply a standard that says this is wrong and this is right and put some teeth into how you respond to it. Otherwise you're not solving problems; you're perpetuating them.

This kind of inability to call a spade a spade and act on it is what killed the League of Nations and IMO the UN is heading down the same path. If this keeps up I'd say either disband its non-charitable parts or move them to Paris where such nonsensical circular thinking is the norm, but without the US funding that keeps it afloat.

Maybe then they can hold their diplomatic meetings where they belong: in some tavern on the left bank.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

The UN recognizes that Palestine should exist.

For 25+ years, the RECOGNIZED leader of Palestine, as officially endorsed by the UN, has been one Yassir Arafat.

Mr. Arafat is STILL on the CIA and FBI's ten most wanted lists (or has only recently been bumped due to inactivity) due to being one of the most prolific killers of American citizens in the past half a century.

China, whose idea of human rights is to run down and shoot protesting unarmed teenagers with tanks, chairs the human rights commission.

There are more absurdities, but I've made my point, and Doc has helped. It's just friggin' ridiculous.

Gpar_

[Dr Mordrid]

There is already a Palestinian state; it's called Jordan, which has a population that is already majority Palestinian. Problem is that Jordan and the other Arab states don't want the Palestinians any more than the Israelis do

Before Jordan stupidly got involved in the 6 day war (where by the way they were one of the agressors) it owned the West Bank and provided a homeland for Palestinians, but nooooo....they had to have it all; both starting Holocaust II and getting rid of their Palestinian population by sending them to what would have been the former Israel.

Oops; didn't work out quite as expected, so of course now they're blaming everyone else for their problems.

The actions of the Palestinian leadership since have been stupid and tactically inept at best. They'd have served their people better by putting their efforts towards improving their economical situation instead of destroying it and everything around it.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

No, didn't you know? Israel has started all the wars. It's THEIR FAULT, and therefore THEY should provide a Palestinian homeland!

I mean, c'mon! Do you believe the Zionist lies?

Gpar_

[mutz]

Brian, forgive me for being so insistent, but perhaps you are pinning the tail on the wrong donkey.

As unfortunate as it may be, you are just confirming the state of man. If you just shift your perspective a bit, remove yourself from the fray and observe from a nearby hilltop, things look much different.

The whole concept that all men are born equal is a political invention. Every man is born an individual, as different as his fingerprints and DNA. If you take all the individuals and try to force them to fit a norm and to fit together, you get what we have today. It starts in the cradle and results in sickness, resignation or rebellion. The few that manage to escape want no part of the whole game.

Government means being governed, which nobody really wants. As governing has transitioned from "off with your head" to "give the buggers something to keep them quiet", things have gotten complex. We have transitioned from king and slaves to politicians and slaves having the illusion of self determination. Politicians polish the illusions while carving out for themselves what they can get away with.

The day the tribal chief started delegating, the politician was born. This is not an evolution, but a transition to accomodate the population explosion.

The Czar just wanted to be a family man, Marx and Engels were just philosophers, and the people were cold and starving. Lenin was a politician who saw the opportunity in the philosophy, in the situation, and put it on the market. Bingo, new power structure.

The political system is just the sales pitch. Sounds good, people buy it. People stop buying, make up a new one. Doesn't matter if it works or not so long as people keep buying.

Where there is an opportunity, especially in conditions of need, fear and greed, somebody will grab it. The politician is a product of society which everybody accepts, or he wouldn't be there.

National governments govern through power. They have been given the authority, one way or another, by the people. Whether they use their authority responsibly or not is another matter.

The UN is structured as an administration. It has been given some responsibilities, but its authority is in the hands of its member states. You can't delegate responsibility without equal authority. Sheriff wears the star, but the deputies, who don't work for him, carry the guns and do what suits them.

What are you going to do about it? If you are a voter or a decider, it's in your hands.

I have relatives and friends in government and the UN, so I hear this stuff all the time. They may hate the politicians for their dishonesty and connivance, but they blame the voters for their willing ignorance, abdication and greed. It will only change when the people wake up and change themselves.

[Gurm]

And which system would you propose as superior? ROFL.

Gpar_

[mutz]

Ha!

...forget it. I'm not interested in politics.

Let god do it.

Whoever he is...

[Dr Mordrid]

Or she

Dr. Mordrid

[The PIT]

Or it.