In praise of the United Nations
Anything as ambitious as the UN will inevitably be imperfect, but we should be rooting for it anyway.
Just before the holiday break, I had the honor of speaking before the General Assembly of the United Nations. I was there for the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) which they hold every year to discuss how digital technology, the Internet, social media, and now of course, AI, can be a good thing for the 8 some billion people alive today.
The other day, I posted a video of my speech, and it’s been heart-warming to see so much encouragement and support from you all out there. At the same time, there were a number of folks in the comments who expressed a real disappointment and even distrust for the United Nations as an institution.
I’m certainly not going to sit here and say that the UN is without flaws—even perhaps deep flaws. I’m sure there are many very valid reasons to harbor negative feelings towards the UN.
But at its core, this is a place where people from all over the globe come together with the shared goals of world peace and universal human rights. It’s kind of a miracle that such a place even exists. And is it surprising that it hasn’t succeeded yet? At achieving world peace and universal human rights? Could you pick any two harder things to achieve? And shouldn’t we keep trying anyway?
Perhaps optimism is naive, but perhaps it’s just the opposite. Perhaps pessimism and cynicism are for dupes—for swallowers of the divisive stories peddled by the bullies and war-lords who don’t want international law, who don’t want a global community, who would prefer we all play every-man-for-himself because that’s how tyranny wins. It’s when we all unite—that’s when we stand a chance. Is the United Nations doing a perfect or even a good job? That’s debatable. But do we have any other better shot at sincere global unity? I don’t think so.
I found it deeply moving to walk the halls of the UN headquarters in New York City. I met a lot of people there, and I really did sense a pervasive and genuine care for humanity—especially for the most vulnerable amongst us.
To be clear, I don’t fault anyone for expressing negative feelings towards the UN. That’s what democracy looks like. It’s messy. It moves slowly. Often it’s two steps forward and one step back. But it’s the least bad version of cooperation we have.
Thanks to everyone who commented. I look forward to continuing this slow, messy conversation with all of you 🔴
« Don’t criticise unless you offer a potential solution. » This used to be a standard in the places I worked. Maybe you don’t know the best solution, but having to come up with an idea forces you to articulate just what you have a problem with. We should apply this standard to civil discourse. Don’t like the UN? What’s a better solution? The answer will likely disclose whether the critique is serious or not about achieving the mission. If it’s just a disagreement on the means, not the goals, then it’s possible to have a meaningful discussion. Otherwise, fruitful discussion is a lost cause.
I think, in These Times, choosing optimism is an act of defiance & hope.
Thank you for showing up as you do, Joe. We're so lucky that nuance is embraced here.