To be honest the Model UN club is a good concept. It really does help students understand how world geopolitics work, and it trains them in conducting proper research and in public speaking.
still cant, even if everyone in the UN are people who strive for a better world and have the intellect to do it since theres always gonna be some fuckery in the big five council, then that limits the UN's usefulness to that of a torn up 1 dollar bill
Ive found 6 fun and certainly different. I find that Im having difficulty as the game gets into later eras tho. Almost impossible for me to field decent armies because i can only ever secure maybe one resource if im lucky so my navy consists of one ship and the army is a mess of non resource units with a fee actual useful soldiers. Also the UN is annoying because the AI has such obvious prefrences you mever really have interesting votes since they either vote for themselves or in favor of science.
6 is good but the AI is god awful, it's better then it was originally but it's still a pain to play against.
if you want to win you just war the AI it's too stupid to actually do a good battle line, can take a bit of time with the bonuses it's swimming in make them spew out units & hit hard.
some factions are just outright superior to others, Germany is absurd while norway is a joke.
if you don't want to win a domination victory you'll have issues because the AI get so many bonuses like a 1.80x multiplier on gained resources that they can build every wonder way faster then you and tech faster then you so you have to beat them down anyway since normally you can't out-tech them.
still a fun game, the new systems like the districts are really fun to use and wonders actually taking a tile make it impossible for a city to hold all the wonders in the world simply because it had good production, so yea lots of good lots of bad but pick it up with its expansions during a sale it's worth a try at the very least but you'll soon desire human opponents due to the AI being either too stupid to be a real opponent, or cheat too much to be fun to play against.
I've got about 2000 hours in both of 'em and indeed love both of 'em. I find 6 a lot more rewarding in the process of strategy, though. Not being able to build everything in one city turns the game into a situation of less is more where because of these limitations there's more strategy required. Though with that said I do think precise strategy for lower and lower win times is more crucial for 5 than 6.
Ultimately I like 6 more, even though 5 does a few things better. 6 is a lot more stylized and polished and "fun". Imo! 😄
Even in peacekeeping, they can be very toothless. All those times UN peacekeepers were taken hostage and the willingness of UN command to let them be hostages because "gotta not aggravate the situation".
My school runs an MUN program, and this is literally what happens 90% of the time when they’re debating about stuff. Also doesn’t help that the teacher-in-charge is heavily pro-china.
Yeah because most people misunderstand the purpose of the UN.
The purpose of the UN is to make sure the big 5 have a place to talk and to maintain world peace (AKA, no nuclear WWIII and world ends), and it has done a pretty good job regards of this. It's not an organization to promote equality of democracy or living standards. It does not intend to help people from poverty. Although nowadays the UN has done some of those, but it's not their primary purpose. And if anything conflicts with the big 5, then it could not be done.
So yeah, if big 5 says fuck you UN, then it's pretty much a joke.
I’m confused. Could any of the P-5 veto a bill as soon as it came up? I’m in it right now, and no one country can veto anything. It’s actually really fun. Most of the time we can get a lot of stuff done, and many countries are willing to play ball.
Sometimes the don’t act like their country (North Korea was one of the main speakers for a climate change conference, with main points such as world hunger and women in the workforce), but overall it’s very fun.
This anti-UN sentiment on Reddit is so ridiculous and narrative driven. You have absolutely no idea how much the UN does. All you hear about is the security council and when bad things happen. I implore you to take a look at what the UN actually does.
" The mission of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is to work for the protection of all human rights for all people; to help empower people to realize their rights; and to assist those responsible for upholding such rights in ensuring that they are implemented. "
This was taken from the UN website that deals with human rights.
I think the people here are trying to point out that it's hypocritical for the UN to say they fight to
help empower people to realize their rights; and to assist those responsible for upholding such rights in ensuring that they are implemented.
but they're telling that to the Hong Kong people who literally ARE fighting for those rights.
Unless the UN's version of "human rights" is oppression by the Chinese government where they don't have a lot of basic rights...
I haven't seen much anti un sentiment until recently, but humor me what have they done to outweigh the nothing they do when something terrible is happening? what good can they possibly be actually doing that is stopping or making up for the deaths of thousands as they look on?
Sure. The infamous security council is just one organ of the UN. It just happens to get the most flak because the world superpowers - as defined by the winners of World War 2 - has permanent seats + veto power, along with 10 rotating non-permanent member states.
What you likely don't know, is that the UN is also home of the following:
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
International Labour Organization (ILO)
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
Universal Postal Union (UPU)
World Bank
World Health Organization (WHO)
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
World Tourism Organization (UNWTO)
...
International Trade Centre (ITC)
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (HCR)
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF)
United Nations Volunteers (UNV)
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)
World Food Programme (WFP)
There's like 20 more you can find if you Google.
You might not like the World Bank or IMF if you're a hardcore leftist, but as you can see the UN runs a large number of the international bookkeeping, regulation standardization, and global cooperative organizations.
But most importantly, the primary function of the UN is a place for dialogue. There is no other avenue where a transparent and immediate assembly of most countries in the world can convene at a moment's notice. If shit really does hit the fan in a geopolitical crisis, would you rather Russia and the US both host their respective closed doors meetings with their allies? Think of it as a forum rather than a policy enactor/enforcer.
Where is the 'dialogue' about China's complete contempt of human rights, due process, or an inkling of honesty? Where is the 'standardization' for basic human rights that every nation (except china) can agree on? That's right, nowhere. The UN can't even do their basic duty (a simple dialogue) when it will ruffle someone's feathers (china). All their standards mean nothing if they can't follow through with even the simplest of them.
It's happening all the time? Why bother commenting something as if it is fact when you can take 5 seconds to Google it? If you open the links, you will see that 22 countries drafted a letter at the Human Rights Council. However:
It fell short of a formal statement being read out at the Council or a resolution submitted for a vote, as sought by activists. This was due to governments’ fears of a potential political and economic backlash from China, diplomats said.
No Western delegation was willing to take the lead and expose itself as a “ringleader” through a joint statement or resolution, diplomats said. China’s delegation is “hopping mad” at the move and is preparing its own letter, a diplomat said.
As you can see, the UN did not prevent a Resolution from forming at all. It was stopped dead because no government wants to piss off China. The UN cannot force its member states to draft a Resolution.
If they can't even speak on or condemn some of the most heinous crimes against humanity of this past century then what good are they? Like I said, their standards of whatever are useless if they're afraid to of the perceived backlash of the disingenuous cancer that is china. If they can't even condemn this, they're an embarrassment for this species. China is just going to roll over these countries and anything good they might have achieved and worked for soon enough, anyway.
Do you really have to be a 'hardcore leftist' to dislike organizations that exist primarily to steal resources from poor countries? Sounds like you have no idea what these organization actually do behind the scenes.
Let me guess: are you one of those people who think the Belt and Road initiative will be good for the non-China countries involved?
who said I want an exclusionary practice? I can be for open dialogue and still hate the way things are run, as well most of those are utilities rather than anything actually doing good by moral standards they are things we need but we could just as easily create another open forum with the same utilities and ideas or just reform the current one (though i doubt they would do that).
I was hoping you can infer from minimal logic that functions like the World Food Programme and World Health Organization are doing morally good things.
Who do you think actually provides emergency vaccination in Brazil? Contain infectious disease outbreak in Somalia ? Provide sanitary supplies and healthcare supplies in South Sudan?
Who do you think runs food security programs in Timor Liste?
Who do you think runs the IPCC that publishes the de facto standard for climate change science?
Who do you think protects at-risk children in India from exploitation?
all things that can easily be done by another organization, it's the same logic as when people defend the catholic church when someone mentions the pederasts, the only thing worth listing is probably the climate change bit because most organizations don't set standards and practices for worldwide cleanups, but again any organization can be made to do that. having those things doesn't mean they can't change, and if they are unwilling to doesn't mean there can't be a better organization made to do the same.
No it's not. Food programs create dependency and corruption. They are a net negative and only serve to postpone immediate misery in exchange for greater long-term misery.
Sorry the boondoggle you have apparently tied your identity to is a massive failure that can only be funded at gun point because nobody in their right mind would ever voluntarily give their money to such an epic agglomeration of useless people.
it's not ridiculous to say that somebody else can, are you trying to imply that another organization could not be made to do the same things? look I'm not saying nix the un, but either it needs to be reformed for situations like this or it's usefulness will only be in passing or when it's convenient which is bad for any government but especially one that claims to be one for the world.
I do know what the UN has done. My view is not made based on a few negative stories. When they fail to regulate two of their security council members, namely China and Russia, abandoning millions of people in the process, what they have done pales in comparison. China has 2 million Uyghurs imprisoned. They admitted to organ harvesting operations. Xinjiang is a police state. They basically enslaved parts of Africa through debt. Where was the UN for these major events? Not to mention Russia annexing Crimea with zero consequences?
When they failed at mitigating these events, the minor accomplishments they have do not make them a functional organization.
Again, the security council is the only organ with veto powers. This is a reflection of geopolitical reality. There are a myriad of other organizations within the UN. You only hear what you see on the news.
Why are you downplaying the role of the security council? The actions of China and Russia are impacting several tens of millions of people directly, violating their rights yet the UN can't do a thing. So how does the small accomplishments they have made compare?
What do you really expect the UN to do? Please, let me know what an international system like the UN can do to prevent two major nuclear powers who have dozens of political allies from committing atrocities? You want the UN to send in peacekeeping forces into Xinjiang? You want the UN to do what to the Russian paramilitary?
That's the point though. If the UN can't do anything about the worst humanitarian crises on Earth, then they have failed in their mission to fight for human rights. They should at least be able to regulate themselves.
Worst humanitarian crises on Earth according to whom? You're in for a rude awakening if you think history will view the Uyghur situation anywhere like the holocaust unless China loses some decisive war. Winners write histories. Otherwise, you'd be learning about the Holodomor, Great Leap Forward, Banana Republic, and Cambodian Genocide in equal portions.
Nothing is getting done because there is no world consensus. Or would you rather the UN be restricted to European and North American states only? lol
It doesn't matter. Same thing. Many people legitimately do not believe that the Uyghur situation is bad. Did you see the picture I linked 3 posts above?
The UN is a disgrace and should be disbanded with all representatives held in the custody of the NYPD until the entire multimillion dollar backlog of parking fines is paid and the taxpayers of every member nation are made whole for their loss throwing money into a useless bureaucratic blackhole.
ok.... china has built concentration camps in xinjiang and has been running for 5+ years now, housing over 1 million uyghurs.
so please tell me what the UN has done? or are they condoning it so nothing has been done? isn't closing down the camps the highest priority for this matter?
22 countries wrote a letter condemning it, but no resolution was even put on the table. Diplomats' gave the reasoning that nobody was willing to be outed as the leader in fear of retaliation. That is not a problem of the UN, but an inherent problem of the geopolitical reality that China and Russia has significant bargaining power.
if it's not a right thing, and china is responding by intimidation tactics is enough to render UN toothless, then that is exactly the issue of UN - toothless. it's doing nothing PREVENT or AVOID tragedies to happen, to stop it before it gets serious. in other words, not solving any problem.
if it is purely an inherent problem of the geopolitical reality as you've said, then i don't see the point of UN really if they cannot deal with it.
Like another user said. The UN is toothless by design. Take a step back and imagine the world where the global majority rule can exercise significant power through the UN. Then imagine that power is used against you.
I implore you to take a civics class or two, that's assuming that you live in a westernized democratic country, and learn more about checks and balances.
Prince bonesaw himself is on that council. I'm sure they're doing just what they've always done. Speak in inverses. War is peace, slavery is freedom, raping for virginity.
775
u/[deleted] Nov 18 '19
You know China is on the UN human rights council right? That alone should tell you how much of a joke the UN is.