United Nations a sinister precursor of a unified world government

Evict the United Nations

- Andrew K. Dart
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
many links on this post

Let me be clear at the outset that I don’t believe the existence of the United Nations accomplishes any good thing, and has always seemed to me to be a sinister precursor of a unified world government. The U.N. is famous for providing a forum for world leaders to pontificate at length about what’s wrong with the world today. Usually that means that the United States isn’t throwing enough money at their pet projects. Behind the scenes, meanwhile, it is entangled in Oil-for-Food, Agenda 21, the Law of the Sea Treaty, UNESCO, an occasional Earth Summit or Climate Change Conference, and other activities that are rarely mentioned in the national news media, but always come with a huge price tag.

And now, the U.N. is about to expand its headquarters building at a cost of about $475 million. Naturally, if they’re building in New York, the cost will greatly exceed the estimates. But before the new building goes up, let us test the assumption that the United States must host this party indefinitely.

The U.S. has been the largest financial contributor to the United Nations every year since its creation in 1945. It is time for another country to have the honor and the burden of hosting the U.N. headquarters. In my opinion, the construction of the building and maintenance of the U.N. headquarters should be paid by every country in the world except the country where the headquarters building is located. I think that’s only fair, since the host country will have to provide security, transportation and caviar.

Since the U.N. has fostered anti-American rhetoric since shortly after it opened, the visiting dignitaries will understand if we suggest they find facilities in another country. About five years ago, Carlos Alberto Montaner put forth the same idea in his article, “Send Out the Clownsâ€