Replacing the UN with a new sans-China organization

[Thermodolia]

As I understand, PR China was seated by a General Assembly resolution, not a Security Council one. Why would it be different now?

Yes. Normally, membership of a new nation is granted by a nomination of the Security Council, voted on by the General Assembly. However, in the case of China, no new member was admitted. The People's Republic was chosen to be the new representative of the State of China. So, China remained a member, just represented by a different entity.

Now, it was supported because the majority of the General Assembly saw the logic behind recognising the PRC, it being a nuclear power in control of the Chinese mainland. However, the reverse would be inconceivable.

We should however admit Taiwan as Taiwan and not the ROC

[Couray]

-snip-

Their army couldn't even project force into Vietnam successfully and they lacked the ability to deliver their nuclear weapons.

You're being anachronistic, the US only adopted the Sino-Soviet split into its diplomacy after the resolution passed.

To be fair, the US, an undeniable world power, couldn't exactly project there either.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Economically, yes. China really only picked up economical speed in the 90s, which is why you can see all those pictures of large Chinese cities in 1990 and 2010 and see the incredible difference 20 years has made. It was only in the 90s that China tried to participate in international trade, and it boomed.

However, politically, of course, it has always had a very large army capable of exerting force throughout Asia, and in the 70s it had nukes. The combination of the large army and the nukes, as well as its falling out with the USSR, made it an important puzzle piece in the Cold War. Hence, it was given the task to represent China.

The reason the Korean War resolution passed through the Security Council was simply because the USSR was testing its theory that the veto could be cast by abstaining (it could not) and China was represented by US puppet Taiwan.

Their army couldn't even project force into Vietnam successfully and they lacked the ability to deliver their nuclear weapons.

You're being anachronistic, the US only adopted the Sino-Soviet split into its diplomacy after the resolution passed.

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.

Because that would defeat the purpose of the United Nations.

The UN already defeats the purpose of the UN

The UN is not perfect, but it does very important work and we would certainly be worse off without them. It has many faults, but they mostly stem from countries not cooperating with the UN, which cannot really be blamed on the UN as a body.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Their army couldn't even project force into Vietnam successfully and they lacked the ability to deliver their nuclear weapons.

You're being anachronistic, the US only adopted the Sino-Soviet split into its diplomacy after the resolution passed.

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.

The UN already defeats the purpose of the UN

The UN is not perfect, but it does very important work and we would certainly be worse off without them. It has many faults, but they mostly stem from countries not cooperating with the UN, which cannot really be blamed on the UN as a body.

Nonsense. If a body legitimizes a role for creepy secretive dictatorships, instead of uniting free and open societies against their slavemasters, said body's very existence was a mistake.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Their army couldn't even project force into Vietnam successfully and they lacked the ability to deliver their nuclear weapons.

You're being anachronistic, the US only adopted the Sino-Soviet split into its diplomacy after the resolution passed.

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.

It's less relevant than you think because coalition forces were not that much better armed in that war.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.


The UN is not perfect, but it does very important work and we would certainly be worse off without them. It has many faults, but they mostly stem from countries not cooperating with the UN, which cannot really be blamed on the UN as a body.

Nonsense. If a body legitimizes a role for creepy secretive dictatorships, instead of uniting free and open societies against their slavemasters, said body's very existence was a mistake.

The responsibility of the UN is twofold. It has been tasked with both maintaining world peace and protecting human rights across the globe.

Now, these two require sacrifices, on both sides. If you want to have peace, then the UN cannot be a crusading body against non-democratic States. However, it cannot just enforce peace regardless of any calls for democracy. That's why, historically, it has accepted as lawful wars of decolonisation.

However, it is a mistake to think that the sole task of the UN is to protect democracy. You are expecting it to be something it was never envisioned, something that it does not try to be, and something that it should not be. Like it or not, the world is helped more by the UN facilitating dialogue than it is by the UN declaring interventionists wars everywhere.

One example is accepting Saudi Arabia as part of the Human Rights Council. Of course, first of all, that was not a decision of the Secretariat, but of the nations that elected Saudi Arabia. However, this is a good thing. Countries see their membership of these bodies as prestigious, and many try to improve their human rights record once they are elected. For example, while there are still horrific things happening in Saudi Arabia, it has been steadily improving over the past few years, in part because it has the eyes of the world on it now. The same goes for other nations in the region.

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.

It's less relevant than you think because coalition forces were not that much better armed in that war.

Sure. Still, while not as powerful as today, and certainly not very powerful compared to other nations at the time, it's more than militarily worthless.

[Lord Dominator]

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.


The UN is not perfect, but it does very important work and we would certainly be worse off without them. It has many faults, but they mostly stem from countries not cooperating with the UN, which cannot really be blamed on the UN as a body.

Nonsense. If a body legitimizes a role for creepy secretive dictatorships, instead of uniting free and open societies against their slavemasters, said body's very existence was a mistake.

Excluding a significant chunk of the world for their government type isn't a great idea for a body trying to promote peace & various other good things. That, and then you have great fun of deciding who is a democracy and who isn't, which would be difficult in its own right.

[US-SSR]

As I understand, PR China was seated by a General Assembly resolution, not a Security Council one. Why would it be different now?

Yes. Normally, membership of a new nation is granted by a nomination of the Security Council, voted on by the General Assembly. However, in the case of China, no new member was admitted. The People's Republic was chosen to be the new representative of the State of China. So, China remained a member, just represented by a different entity.

Now, it was supported because the majority of the General Assembly saw the logic behind recognising the PRC, it being a nuclear power in control of the Chinese mainland. However, the reverse would be inconceivable.

One fine point, it took a two-thirds majority to "restore the rights of the PRC in the UN" as the resolution was called.

The idea of expelling a permanent member of the UNSC because it was the first nation affected by a global pandemic is, in a word, asinine. It would make more sense to expel the US for the crime of planning offensive war against Iraq; something that is clearly not about to happen.

[Grahnol]

I looked at this thread and it's a pretty stupid and asinine idea. Then I see the discussion and go 'The actual fuck are you all on? '

We can't just dismantle the UN, all the Great Powers will protest against that because it maintains their place in international politics and we can't just remove China because it's literally impossible to remove a potential superpower from an organisation especially one that is actively domineering. Honestly, the best we could do is make a collective agreement in the UN, not necessarily a General Assembly resolution (and definitely not a Security Council resolution since it would just get vetoed), a collective agreement amongst multiple different UN members to form a bloc against China and start actively hurting China economically, politically, etc. Bomb them occasionally if they get pissy.

If they don't stop their abhorrent human rights violations and blatant internal meddling and domineering of influential non-government entities such as corporations, I would honestly all be in favour of a complete war against China and maybe put China in some kind of international occupation zone although such occupation would be expensive as fuck. Liberate the Uyghurs, Tibetans, maybe the Manchus and reverse all the abhorrent shit Communist China has committed and fuck the CCP pest over and then rebuilt China to actually be sane and serve the Chinese people properly with what they want and deserve.

I'm not saying we should absolutely do something like this, but I think it's one of the better things we could do if China starts getting a massive amount of control in the world to their own selfish interests and we can't convince China to stop puppeting everything its plushy Pooh bear claws could get their hands-on. Honestly, all of this might not even be necessary because I honestly believe and guarantee you that shortly after becoming a superpower, China would crumble under its own inefficient bureaucratic weight and fall into civil unrest, in which case it should be our job to mediate it. Of course, one might argue it's better to take preventative measures than wait for the inevitable.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I looked at this thread and it's a pretty stupid and asinine idea. Then I see the discussion and go 'The actual fuck are you all on? '

We can't just dismantle the UN,

I agree with you up there, but don't want to give the thread any more time. We can't dismantle the UN because at least one of the Security Council members would refuse.

[Ifreann]

The entire point of the UN is to provide a structured venue for the nations of the world to communicate and resolve grievances diplomatically, and only when all peaceful diplomacy has failed to legitimise military action to end oppression and uphold the universal rights of all mankind. Trying to do that, but excluding a hugely powerful nuclear armed nation is just pants on head stupid. You may as well ask why the whole world doesn't just nuke Beijing.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

The Security Council would never agree to nominating Taiwan for membership.

As I understand, PR China was seated by a General Assembly resolution, not a Security Council one. Why would it be different now?

In fact, the people's Republic of China has inherited the legal principles of the Republic of China.Now Taiwan is a remnant of the Republic of China.The Taiwan regime still has the claims of China as a whole (including Mongolia).Just as Russia inherited the Soviet seat.I've seen people talk about whether India can inherit the title of the British Empire to get a permanent seat.But it's a fantasy

[Shanghai industrial complex]

I looked at this thread and it's a pretty stupid and asinine idea. Then I see the discussion and go 'The actual fuck are you all on? '

We can't just dismantle the UN, all the Great Powers will protest against that because it maintains their place in international politics and we can't just remove China because it's literally impossible to remove a potential superpower from an organisation especially one that is actively domineering. Honestly, the best we could do is make a collective agreement in the UN, not necessarily a General Assembly resolution (and definitely not a Security Council resolution since it would just get vetoed), a collective agreement amongst multiple different UN members to form a bloc against China and start actively hurting China economically, politically, etc. Bomb them occasionally if they get pissy.

If they don't stop their abhorrent human rights violations and blatant internal meddling and domineering of influential non-government entities such as corporations, I would honestly all be in favour of a complete war against China and maybe put China in some kind of international occupation zone although such occupation would be expensive as fuck. Liberate the Uyghurs, Tibetans, maybe the Manchus and reverse all the abhorrent shit Communist China has committed and fuck the CCP pest over and then rebuilt China to actually be sane and serve the Chinese people properly with what they want and deserve.

I'm not saying we should absolutely do something like this, but I think it's one of the better things we could do if China starts getting a massive amount of control in the world to their own selfish interests and we can't convince China to stop puppeting everything its plushy Pooh bear claws could get their hands-on. Honestly, all of this might not even be necessary because I honestly believe and guarantee you that shortly after becoming a superpower, China would crumble under its own inefficient bureaucratic weight and fall into civil unrest, in which case it should be our job to mediate it. Of course, one might argue it's better to take preventative measures than wait for the inevitable.

The role of the United Nations is to prevent wars among the world's great powers.On major issues, small countries do not actually have much say

Do you suggest another Korean war or a nuclear war?

[Infected Mushroom]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmsqeFAlSGA

So there's increasing reason to suspect that China's involvement in the W.H.O. played a key role in why they were praising China's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

ANY time is a terrible time to be beholden to a government known for shooting their own citizens for protesting or getting citizens who didn't even protest killed through industrial recklessness. But the world has paid for its complacency by the fact that now it's no longer just the Chinese under threat from their government, but all of us. Every one of us now has far more reason to stand up to the Chinese government; and less reason not to.

So why not abolish the UN; and in turn, its sub-branch of the W.H.O.; and replace them with a new organization beholden to everyone but the Chinese government, such that it could represent the world's interests more, and the Chinese government's interests less?

(Image)

Oh my God!

Are you serious?

[Skeckoa]

No organization is a global organization if it doesn't include China. What you are proposing is NATO-style alliance in the Pacific Ocean B) USA, Vietnam, Thailand, India, Japan, Australia, maybe Rep. of Korea, too? We all know that the Phillippines is a lost cause of Chinese imperialism.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

Vietnam is a bit problematic, because the infrastructure between China and Vietnam has always been shit, and the poor economic record of China was not going to mend that. However, they did supply the Viet Cong with a lot of weaponry.

The Korean War is far more relevant, since China managed to beat back coalition forces there. Sure, its army was not world class by a long shot, but it was certainly capable of throwing its weight around.

It's less relevant than you think because coalition forces were not that much better armed in that war.

I think you belittled the significance of the Korean War.
First, this is the beginning of the cold war in East Asia. A hot war makes the two camps completely opposed.
Second, the political goals of the United States and the Soviet Union have not been achieved.Imagine if China doesn't fight or loses the war, then the Korean Peninsula and Japan are completely controlled by the United States.At the same time, the Soviet Union could take full control of the Chinese government.Or if the US doesn't, the Soviet Union will control the Korean Peninsula. America lost its bridgehead on the mainland.China was not included in their original plan. Neither the U.S. nor the Soviet Union expected China to send troops.The Korean War made China an independent power that could be opposed to the Soviet Union and the United States.In contrast, the war prevented the CCP from unifying Taiwan.
Third, the large number of orders in the Korean War made the United States give up its sanctions against Japan. Japan began to rise again. In terms of economy, Japan's primary key has grown into a major force that can compete with the United States

By contrast, the reunification of Vietnam has kept the United States from exercising strong control over Southeast Asia in the Cold War era.You can see from the map that from the Middle East to the Far East in the Cold War era, the United States has only one stronghold in North Korea on the Asian continent.That's why the Soviet Union wanted to fight for the Middle East.Because that would deprive the United States of its foothold on the continent.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

No organization is a global organization if it doesn't include China. What you are proposing is NATO-style alliance in the Pacific Ocean B) USA, Vietnam, Thailand, India, Japan, Australia, maybe Rep. of Korea, too? We all know that the Phillippines is a lost cause of Chinese imperialism.

Are you serious?Is the Philippines not a former colony or a semi colony of the United States?

[Shanghai industrial complex]

Economically, yes. China really only picked up economical speed in the 90s, which is why you can see all those pictures of large Chinese cities in 1990 and 2010 and see the incredible difference 20 years has made. It was only in the 90s that China tried to participate in international trade, and it boomed.

However, politically, of course, it has always had a very large army capable of exerting force throughout Asia, and in the 70s it had nukes. The combination of the large army and the nukes, as well as its falling out with the USSR, made it an important puzzle piece in the Cold War. Hence, it was given the task to represent China.

The reason the Korean War resolution passed through the Security Council was simply because the USSR was testing its theory that the veto could be cast by abstaining (it could not) and China was represented by US puppet Taiwan.

Their army couldn't even project force into Vietnam successfully and they lacked the ability to deliver their nuclear weapons.

You're being anachronistic, the US only adopted the Sino-Soviet split into its diplomacy after the resolution passed.

China's nuclear weapons program is carried out at the same time as its rocket program.They launched their first satellite in 1970. That means they also have the ability to send nuclear bombs into space.
I think the Sino Soviet split started with the Cuban missile crisis.1971 was actually the beginning of the second phase. China is on the US side and an ally against the Soviet Union.Before that, China was outside the two camps of the United States and the Soviet Union

[Diahon]

No organization is a global organization if it doesn't include China. What you are proposing is NATO-style alliance in the Pacific Ocean B) USA, Vietnam, Thailand, India, Japan, Australia, maybe Rep. of Korea, too? We all know that the Phillippines is a lost cause of Chinese imperialism.

no, we ain't a lost cause
duts may be indebted to xi
we're not

[Jinwoy]

Watching the video you linked, it's so insanely dumb I think I lost a significant portion of my higher functioning arrogant and pandering:

- The channel is literally called "China Uncensored"

- The rod of Asclepius has been used as a medical symbol as far back as 3rd Century London, it isn't a "Cult of Snakes".

- WHO organization failing to meet requirements because of issues relating to administration, as if that wasn't a recurring meme for any UN institution.

- "The US gives 500 million to the WHO every year" - No it doesn't. It contributes the most by about 60 million, an almost absurdist comparison to 500 million or half a billion dollars.

- Not even UN member states recognise Taiwan..

- Also not to forget to mention that Taiwan also claims the entirety of the PRC as well. And that Taiwan claims an outlandish stretch of land including Mongolia and stretches from Russia in the north to India and Indochina in the South.

- Also the WHO doesn't "recognize" countries individually. This is just blatant forgery, imagine the chaos that would occur if individual departments of the UN could legally recognise the sovereignty of other nations. Its bloody laughable.

- As such, asking Bruce Aylward why he won't accept Taiwan's membership into the WHO is like asking a store manager why the executives chose to do business in that area; its redundant, and as the map linked above clearly shows, the UN doesn't have much interest in recognising Taiwan by popular international consensus. He doesn't have that power, and the political pandering done by the RTHNK reporter doesn't serve much outside a distinct political purpose. I wonder why the running administrator of a global health agency isn't interested in answering absolutely charged political questions?

- For this next point, I was gonna pass it off and say that the WHO doesn't share Taiwan pandemic statistics because, and get with the allegory here, it's a cartographer's choice whether he includes misrepresentative information. Wanna know who's stats also don't get shared through the WHO? Greenland. That's because it's pandemic statistics gets fed through Danish channels. The information around getting statistics out of Greenland is a noted phenomenon but I'm getting off track here. I've caught this video straight out lying about the facts to me a few times, so I decided to do further research into this as well. It turns out, Taiwan's statistics do get published, just under compiled together with the PRC's. Primary trawling through the WHO archives doesn't immediately reveal anything specific to Taiwan, but region/country-level reports are pretty hard to come by on that site anyway. And the numbers are more than likely to be there. John Hopkins University has the numbers separated already!

- As a direct spit on my face, he then claims that youtube has been unsubbing people from him, and then expects me to believe him. Youtube will often unsub channels connected to spam bots (like sub 4 sub) who sub to boost channel numbers, so to actually admit that you're losing subscribers is pretty indicative of using the
system for cheating. Weak.

The whole video just has this weird undertone of modern anti-communists that are sad that they couldn't live out their fantasies acquired from rewatching Red Dawn on the VCR until the tape reels snap from pure and desperate sexual tension from the world's worst army of balding backseat pilotboiis.

Git gud scrub.

[Deacarsia]

The United Nations is a joke. It should be dismantled.

[Gormwood]

If that's what you're seeking, why can't/shouldn't the UN (etc.) just strip PR China of its membership and hand it to Taiwan instead - like it used to before Nixon's olive branch? Or is this a matter of waning Taiwanese recognition among world governments?

That would require all the other permanent members stripping China as well, and not even Russia wants to do that. Plus if it did then China would be completely off the geopolitical grid with no obligation to let others know what it's doing.

[Ayro Va]

If you're removing China, kick the U.S. out, too.

[HypErcApitAl]

Watching the video you linked, it's so insanely dumb I think I lost a significant portion of my higher functioning arrogant and pandering:

- The channel is literally called "China Uncensored"

- The rod of Asclepius has been used as a medical symbol as far back as 3rd Century London, it isn't a "Cult of Snakes".

- WHO organization failing to meet requirements because of issues relating to administration, as if that wasn't a recurring meme for any UN institution.

- "The US gives 500 million to the WHO every year" - No it doesn't. It contributes the most by about 60 million, an almost absurdist comparison to 500 million or half a billion dollars.

- Not even UN member states recognise Taiwan..

- Also not to forget to mention that Taiwan also claims the entirety of the PRC as well. And that Taiwan claims an outlandish stretch of land including Mongolia and stretches from Russia in the north to India and Indochina in the South.

- Also the WHO doesn't "recognize" countries individually. This is just blatant forgery, imagine the chaos that would occur if individual departments of the UN could legally recognise the sovereignty of other nations. Its bloody laughable.

- As such, asking Bruce Aylward why he won't accept Taiwan's membership into the WHO is like asking a store manager why the executives chose to do business in that area; its redundant, and as the map linked above clearly shows, the UN doesn't have much interest in recognising Taiwan by popular international consensus. He doesn't have that power, and the political pandering done by the RTHNK reporter doesn't serve much outside a distinct political purpose. I wonder why the running administrator of a global health agency isn't interested in answering absolutely charged political questions?

- For this next point, I was gonna pass it off and say that the WHO doesn't share Taiwan pandemic statistics because, and get with the allegory here, it's a cartographer's choice whether he includes misrepresentative information. Wanna know who's stats also don't get shared through the WHO? Greenland. That's because it's pandemic statistics gets fed through Danish channels. The information around getting statistics out of Greenland is a noted phenomenon but I'm getting off track here. I've caught this video straight out lying about the facts to me a few times, so I decided to do further research into this as well. It turns out, Taiwan's statistics do get published, just under compiled together with the PRC's. Primary trawling through the WHO archives doesn't immediately reveal anything specific to Taiwan, but region/country-level reports are pretty hard to come by on that site anyway. And the numbers are more than likely to be there. John Hopkins University has the numbers separated already!

- As a direct spit on my face, he then claims that youtube has been unsubbing people from him, and then expects me to believe him. Youtube will often unsub channels connected to spam bots (like sub 4 sub) who sub to boost channel numbers, so to actually admit that you're losing subscribers is pretty indicative of using the
system for cheating. Weak.

The whole video just has this weird undertone of modern anti-communists that are sad that they couldn't live out their fantasies acquired from rewatching Red Dawn on the VCR until the tape reels snap from pure and desperate sexual tension from the world's worst army of balding backseat pilotboiis.

Git gud scrub.

Y'all are just a buncha Pro-Communist, Pro-CCP scumbags that hate Freedom.


Also, what did South Africa ever do to deserve being kicked out? Takeout the DPRK and only recognize South Korea and Taiwan as the only and valid China and Korea. I'd suggest also kicking out Pakistan, Turkey, Iran, and Mexico. I'm sick and tired of these shithole nations and dictatorships plaguing the world.

[HypErcApitAl]

The United Nations is a joke. It should be dismantled.

Agreed. Globalism and European Leftism are cancers, also.