Post #2432263
2026-05-02 14:30 UTC
@mikro2nd@indieweb.social
1/2 I think the effectiveness in networking, research/public documentation, funding specific actions of most of the specific UN organs [5] is well established: e.g. IAEA, IPCC, UNHCR, UNHRC, UNESCO, ILO, UNDP, and of court decisions: ICJ, is only significantly disputed by authoritarians. They're far from perfect, but highly likely to be beneficial to the global peace/armed conflict ecosystem [6]. They're all part of the UN.
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:United_Nations
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system_approach_to_peace_and_armed_conflict
Replies (1)
-
@boud@framapiaf.org 2026-05-02 14:39
@mikro2nd@indieweb.social 2/2 "Voicing concern" in itself only plays a small role in public debate. It's the detailed reports from UN agencies based on proper investigations that are much more useful in information space. It's up to the rest of society (NGOs, activist networks, political parties, media, social networks) to curate that information and use it to get decisions made. *Some* UN agencies, like the IMF, WB, WIPO are likely more destructive than constructive, and corporations will oppose any reform.