Helen Clarke has reported that the UN is under threat as the US has cut some funding. We need to ask why it has cut funding, and if that is because the UN has moved on from its initial function, which was to promote world peace.

From an outsider's perspective it seems that the UN, established after WW2 as a replacement for the league of nations, has decided to control more and more global activity, dictating to sovereign nations how they must behave, what beliefs they must accept, and even what policies they must introduce.

This is a far cry from being a meeting place for sovereign nations to discuss differences and avoid another catastrophic war. New Conservative unashamedly upholds our national sovereignty and vehemently opposes any encroachment on it from the UN or elsewhere.

We have not had another world war since 1945, we have avoided a nuclear holocaust up until now and the UN must be credited for some of that. There is a possibility that the US withdrawing from the league of nations allowed Germany, Italy, and Japan to go their own way with the resulting massive waste of life in WW2, so having as many nations around the meeting table is a good thing.

What we are seeing now though is a moving away from nations having their own identity and flavour as the UN tries to enforce its values and beliefs on sovereign nations.

Whether this is demanding abortion rights on Catholic nations, insisting on open borders, or dictating who must pay whom for Carbon, the UN now sees itself as the world’s globalist power, with the nations of the world its super-socialist-state.

There are a few issues with this scenario, the biggest being socialist states don't succeed. They provide no freedom for their populace and generally citizens within them are poorer. Socialist states are guilty of the biggest genocides in the world's history with the majority of their victims their own citizens. Think Pol Pot in Cambodia, Stalin in Russia, Mao in China and you get the idea.

As John Dalberg-acton said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.“

“It used to frustrate me how often the veto was used by the permanent members of the security council so that very little seemed to be achieved. Now I see the veto as an absolute must so that no one group or person has too much power, too much control,” notes Leighton Baker, New Conservative Leader.

“The US has every right to withhold funds from an organisation it sees as dictatorial and wasteful. After all, it is asked to provide approximately 22% of the total annual budget for the UN, or 10 Billion US dollars. We need to ask what benefit New Zealand receives for its annual contribution of over $200,000,000 too, and whether we could do more good with it ourselves, rather than funding yet one more bloated bureaucracy.

“In its original format as mediator between nations and a place to discuss with words rather than force, the UN had a measure of success, however...

“An unchecked, unrestrained UN is one monster the world cannot afford to see unleashed, ”concludes Baker.

© Scoop Media