What if the good guys had their own UN?
What would be so terrible about giving those good nations someplace else to meet? And by good, I mean democratic. A league, or concert, of democracies wouldn’t replace the U.N., but it would offer some much-needed competition.
We’ve had to go around the U.N. before, and usually we go to NATO. That’s what President Clinton did in the Balkans and what President Obama did in Libya. Now Hillary Clinton wants an ad hoc “friends of a democratic Syria” similar to the coalition that helped topple Moammar Kadafi (and Saddam Hussein).
That’s all fine, but there are problems with making these things up as you go. NATO is a military alliance. Many friends of a democratic Syria are not, themselves, democratic.
A permanent global clubhouse for democracies based on shared principles would make aiding growing movements easier and offer a nice incentive for nations to earn membership in a club with loftier standards than mere existence.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Nothing would still get done.
RickB on February 7, 2012 at 6:44 PM
Russia is democratic – theoretically.
OldEnglish on February 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM
Ask Gingrich.
The Nerve on February 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM
This exact concept occurred to me yesterday after reading about the idea of a coalition to sanction Syria. Not sure it would ever really work, but beats the hell out of the the UN.
peski on February 7, 2012 at 6:53 PM
Members would be free to establish their own criteria for “democratic”, or just vote to allow/disallow entry – theoretically.
peski on February 7, 2012 at 6:54 PM
So are we — theoretically.
cthulhu on February 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM
Democracy by itself is mob rule. How about making a commitment to natural rights and limited government the criterion? Of course, then we wouldn’t be eligible to join.
PersonFromPorlock on February 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM
America is a representative republic – not allowed./Russia
OldEnglish on February 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM
The main problem is that our leaders (and voters) are too ignorant of political philosophy to get it right. The values we want to support and spread are liberty and rule of law. It should be a “League of Free Republics”, not a “League of Democracies”. It would need to enforce, or at least reward somehow, its fundamental principles… or otherwise would degenerate into something like the present UN by coming down to the lowest common denominator. The problem is that no country today has citizens philosophical enough to think about the benefits of an outside force helping them achieve greater freedom and better justice. They would simply see it as an outside group that disagrees with them (it would oppose abortion, for example) and reject its influence.
joe_doufu on February 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM
Ochlocracy FTW – or something.
OldEnglish on February 7, 2012 at 6:59 PM
Heck, I wouldn’t want most of the “democracies” in our little league. How ever did we survive before the UN?
aryeung on February 7, 2012 at 7:00 PM
I don’t want to pay for it.
Dack Thrombosis on February 7, 2012 at 7:03 PM
How about we have the UN on the moon?
Warner Todd Huston on February 7, 2012 at 7:04 PM
League of Nations and Captain America.
OldEnglish on February 7, 2012 at 7:05 PM
Candidate McCain put forth this outstanding idea 4 yrs ago.
If, say, all 76 members of the League of Free Nations voted to ban trade with Syria, it would have a far bigger impact than what we have now. Which is nothing.
itsnotaboutme on February 7, 2012 at 7:05 PM
I think it’s called the G-20 (ex China).
macnorfin on February 7, 2012 at 7:06 PM
Old idea, worth pursuing, at least informally. How about a Restoration Weekend, featuring fine men who admire America like Mikheil Saakashvili, the President of Georgia?
Speaking of Syria, I’m horrified by what I’m seeing on the streets, and mystified why the Left is not issuing their hourly petitions demanding justice – as they did for the rebels in Tahir Square.
Actually, never mind. I’m not mystified at all. No American ally to demonize, nothing to protest.
Buy Danish on February 7, 2012 at 7:13 PM
Democracy is analog, not digital.
JohnGalt23 on February 7, 2012 at 7:15 PM
You mean like the “Justice League”?
yubley on February 7, 2012 at 7:15 PM
We kicked the crap out of miscreant countries. Notice since the UN our only clear “victories” have been by beating up little sisters (Grenada). The Korean Conflict still hasn’t been resolved. The Vietnam War failed because of micromanagement by our politicians. Interspersed with all this were the bombing of our personnel, taking of our embassies, bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. All we did in Operation Desert Storm was kick Iraq out of Kuwait (our U.N. coalition didn’t authorize going after Saddam once they were out of Kuwait).
Mitoch55 on February 7, 2012 at 7:21 PM
And takes in a very wide signal.
OldEnglish on February 7, 2012 at 7:22 PM
Best club ever invented.
batterup on February 7, 2012 at 7:23 PM
I proposed something like this years ago on the Jihadwatch comments section:
The Haramintern International.
A coalition of nations who throughout history have had clashes with Islam and are once again in the thick of it. I don’t think we’re ready to implement this yet, as there’s still too many goobers running around trying to make a distinction between “Moderate” and “Radical” Islma.
sartana on February 7, 2012 at 7:32 PM
This is not a bad idea.
The problem is we would have to worry about the organization being infiltrated and hollowed out by leftists. We kind of already do a lot of what is suggested via NATO, and NATO these days is also ineffectual.
Ultimately international organizations will not be able to function well unless the core members are able to throw off the socialist rot devouring their innards.
Doomberg on February 7, 2012 at 7:46 PM
Ugh. Yes, we have plenty of money to waste on more overseas commitments. Want to solve a problem… just create another government bureacracy.
That’s the new National Review for you.
sauldalinsky on February 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM
I promoted this foolish idea here or on FR a few years ago. But as PersonFromPorlock pointed out, we may not even qualify. When our economy forces social collapse, maybe we’ll rebuild in a way that’s worthy of world leadership.
elfman on February 7, 2012 at 8:26 PM
…like a ‘Coalition of the Willing’?
lexhamfox on February 7, 2012 at 8:28 PM
I think Wilson envisioned the League that way.
AshleyTKing on February 7, 2012 at 9:03 PM
The UN sucks billions from America, the last thing we need to do is join another one. We need to get out from under the theives at the UN. It’s time to end it.
Dollayo on February 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM