FUCK THE UN

And I said that, I said regardless of its effectiveness, a flaw design doesn't change the intent behinds its existence. They told me that upholding the charter of human rights was up to the state, and the enforcement of it, again, was up to the state. The Charter was a document, states either uphold it or they do not, UN has no capacity to enforce or punish (which seems to be true).

There is something about signatories and parties.

The TA actually chastised me on this one.

"And I said that, I said regardless of its effectiveness,"

This is when you should have pulled out your penis and raped that stupid bitch for taking her eyes off you. What a whore.

If i knew I was going to spill my spaghetti and really embarrass myself, I would have done that.

I'm hoping I can recover this week since the topic will include the EU and EU clearly erodes sovereignty. I don't know if NGO or IGO (IMF, world bank) does. One of the readings says that IMF does if you accept IMF loans.

tell me what a "tutorial" is and i will give you the one thing you need to fuck them right in the head.

The UN isn't eroding our sovereignty, retard. It IS a tool for certain powerful nations (and they're oligarchic backers) to gain power over others. For instance, the IMF is basically one big scam to allow multinationals to exploit the fuck out of developing economies. But the UN has no real tangible political power

Read this entire debate between Putin's mastermind, Aleksander Dugin, and the Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho. You will find everything you need to know.

debateolavodugin.blogspot.com.br/

In university, you have lectures which is a class where there are like 2000 students and the prof who just speaks for 2 hours. the lectures are one part of the course, the other is tutorial where you discuss the readings and topics with the teaching assistant, its smaller in size (15 in mine) and you are encouraged to speak and participate.

I said it was the globalist elites that uses the UN for their own aims. She said, nations use the UN for their aims, and if it doesn't meet their aims, the nation simply doesn't participate. But on the IMF, there seems to be a stronger link, even the readings acknowledge it, that if you take an IMF loan, you erode your sovereignty. I'm going to say my wires crossed last week and I confused UN with IGOs and the EU.

>debateolavodugin.blogspot.com.br/
this wont lead to me sperg again, right? I'm fine being told I am wrong by the TA (she is indoctrinated by cultural marxism) but having fellow students bait me and like take stabs showing how wrong I am, that is pretty fucking painful.

first, research agenda 21.
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21

>I said it was the globalist elites that uses the UN for their own aims

Not true. Globalist elites often dominate nations, and may indirectly influence the UN in this manner, but they have relatively no power over the actual proceedings of the UN. The people involved are already very powerful, and it is much more difficult to "buy" and UN representative, than it is to buy a congressman.

IMF is a tool used in collaboration with the leading neoliberal globalist multinationals to effectively exploit undeveloped nations.

UN is simply too fractured and rife with rival national interests to exercise any real political power over developed nations.

then research 2030 agenda
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

I work at the UN and I'm laughing at your dumbass

Ok I trust it. I have to read Fukuyama the week after this

Mentioned it, TA said look up Montreal Protocol. Nations only agree and become signatories if they benefit, apparently. This is why a lot of UN shit is, as another user stated: with no real tangible power.

I think this week I can drop red pills about central banking, mass immigration because we will talk about IGOs and supranational organizations (the EU)
Mention something specific like that too, and some classmate joked how successful UN agendas are (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Development_Goals#United_States)

fuck off.

aren t UN humanitarian actions intensively used as cover for CIA operations?

i think in the case of the montreal protocol, signing nations are the ones who enfore the protocol, not the un directly.

yeah the fucked up on that agenda. maybe they will get the next one right.

the key word in this debate is "whittle"

the UN is like a pseudo EU oligarchy

i think it was your classmates and TA that jumped the gun at total sovereignty takeover

You won't regret it. Dugin is pretty based and Olavo de Carvalho is great at framing the red pills in a way that they are easily accepted by normies.

Also, it may be helpful to research about the ongoing debate on the undemocratic implications of global governance.

No, they asked me to show how the un at all was whittling away sovereignty. I mentioned climate change, human rights, mention iran inviting zoe quinn, "water is a human right". They kept mentioning how its all signatories and parties. If someone isn't a party to it, it doesn't matter and nations don't become parties to anything unless it benefits them thus not losing sovereignty?

from my readings: the EU is an actual supranational organization whereas the UN is just a place for nations to talk and they execute those actions on a per nation basis if they so wish it. Am i correct?

They said the ONLY UN success was the un convention on the law of the sea.

I'll focus on implications, instead of arguing that it is really the case (which I don't have knowledge of, and likely will be baited again if I try to improvise).

Reading it, thanks.

I signed up for int relations. Fucken tutor was Muslim. First day he prefaces entire course with terrorism is the result of globalisation. Thought is stopped. Every student now knows this is what to regurgitate. Can't bring myself to do it just for the grade. Drop out.

I think my school is better than yours, sorry user. I was shown I was wrong and humiliated thoroughly for it.

>The multilateralists are more cautious and insist on the necessity to invite the other regional powers to share with the USA the burden of the planetary rule. It is obvious that only similar (regarding the USA) societies can be partners, so the success of promoting democracy becomes here the essential care. The multilateralists act not only in the name of USA but also in the name of the West, considered as something universal. The image of the future World Order is foggier. The fate of the global democracy is misty and not so clearly defined as the image of American Empire.

So is Trump a multilateralist and the neo-cons were the ones that wanted to cemented the US into the center of a global order? This doesn't seem red pill.

you might as well off yourself user

I work at the American Embassy in Brasília and I'm laughing at your dumb ass.

The ideology, institutions and forces of what IR scholars call Global Governance poses a real challenge to the legitimacy and authority of the nation state and traditional regimes. It is known. For the world's elites the key project of the current century is developing international regimes that allow for an improved global governance (not "world government") by basically establishing supranational laws, regulations and institutions whose authority goes beyond and within nation-states. Even though the UN was designed for an international world, aiming at reducing external frictions between states, the reality is that we don't live in an "international" world anymore, we now live in a global transnational world -- and it makes a huge difference, as you can learn by reading leading IR theorists such as John Ruggie.

Nation states still exist, of course, but they are gradually and increasingly being subordinated to transnational authority, i.e, by what scholars call “evolving norms” of international law, of which a good example would be the hundreds of UN conventions that establish new global norms, particularly in the area of (((human rights))) and other shit under PNUD's Millennium project.

The leaf is right and his professors and colleagues are blue-pilled stupid fags.

My school was shit. Good uni, but absolute trash course designed purely for profit. I'm glad I pulled out before the cut off and copped the debt.

We are doing terrorism in november. One of the readings is on Sayyid Qutb.

My prof said the UN faults can be traced back to the problems it was trying to solve with the league of nations, which is reduce conflict amongst nations.

Thank you, senpai. I'm noticing the difference between an international world order and what you said is the intent of a supranational world order now. the EU is supranational proper, because, as you said, it doesn't care about reducing friction amongst members (like the UN does) but rather it focuses on imposing order.

Can you tell me who should I read?

they will forget it in 3 days

The TA said this was going to be a fun term for her.

You have to keep in mind that you're reading a top Russian official who was responsible for designing Putin's own strategy to play global power politics. I prefer the take of his adversary in the debate, but your conclusion isn't incorrect: neo-cons are globalists subscribed to the idea (or ideology) that Western liberal values have to be spread around the world. It doesn't really help the US as much as it helps the global elites. As for Trump, he is not really a multilateralist, although his Americanism will force him to invite other global powers to share the burden of global challenges while he tries to rebuild American sovereignty.

I also expanded a little bit on how I see the UN and transnational regime here:

Spot on. You're on the right track.

so fucking what. as soon as you get to the next subject they will forget about it, people have short attention span and selective memory, as soon as their minds get busy with something different.

Reminder that FEMA holds authority over the UN

What the fuck is this shit?

ITT: alt-right neckbeards figure out their bullshit ideas are bullshit

Then you're doing your job properly.
youtu.be/SJzRa7HWVqs?t=45s
Keep researching, keep pushing it but dont sperg over it.

this.
look into the UN agenda 21 / 2030.
I find it quite striking how similar the UN's documents are to the actual laws and regulations that end up at the local governments all over. Some of the governments in their FAQs explicitly reference the UN agenda 21. I remember reading a California government FAQ that had the question if these regulations are from agenda 21 and they said why its not.
Surely its all just a coincidence, right?

You can read:

"Global Governance and the UN" by Thomas G. Weiss, and Ramesh Chandra Thakur;

"Constructing the World Polity" by John Ruggie;

"Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization" by Ernst B. Haas;

"After Hegemony: Power and Discord in the World Political Economy" by Robert Keohane.

They are not red-pilled at all, but they lay the grounds for a serious discussion.

>neo-cons are globalists subscribed to the idea (or ideology) that Western liberal values have to be spread around the world.

This is Fukuyama view point also right?

>multilateralist
is it correct to say he needs multilateralism because the globalists right now are the ones who are benefiting from how the american state exist right now as the core of the world?

I am just starting to read that site you linked but I will read it all.

>un transational
i see that argument: laws become norms, and by design they erode sovereignty.

pee in grade 6 once in your life
you are forever known for it. its uni, so after this course I'd likely not see the people ever again.

i fucked up dearly fellow user. I was humiliated in class because I thought my red pills about the UN was right, but I wasn't also wrong just wrong about the UN. The UN was designed

I was wrong about the UN. Even said so. the UN is not a supranational organization. The EU is by definition a supranational organization. I was humiliated because I thought it was. There is real differences between NGO, IGO and supranational organization.

The TA rebutted those claims and they seem valid. The g8 leaders didn't even attend rio20, and the UN agendas are toothless, dead. The UN isn't the EU, the EU has executive power. this seems to matter a lot.

thanks senpai. srsly, all I had before was red pills i found on here. this seems to be a tier above that.

>Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
>I find it quite striking how similar the UN's documents are to the actual laws and regulations that end up at the local governments all over.

you don't say...

It's an organization that many actors are trying to piece into a nation.
There's no arguing these people without making them think that you're crazy.
The UN is just another piece on the board.
The fact that it hasn't stepped into its intended purpose yet means that they won't believe you.

Then why is the stuff in the un agenda 21 exactly the same as what ends up being laws and regulations at the local government level in many cases using the exact same wording?
It may be soft power not hard power.

That's what I thought, ineffective design doesn't negate intent of the design. A bad bomb doesn't change the fact a bomb was made to blow someone. But they told me that the UN wasn't even designed according to what I believed. The UN doesn't enforce anything, agreements happen only when nation states agree to it, when they become signatories.

the IR senpai in this thread made the distinction between the international world order where, the UN by design and intent, the goal was to smooth interactions with nation states to a world order where there is an organization that seeks to impose. The UN by intent doesn't seek to impose, but provide a forum. Supranational organizations (EU) look more like states with power.

I think this difference is important to know in order to properly think about the UN and the EU.

breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/02/obama-administration-and-un-announce-global-police-force-to-fight-extremism-in-u-s/

Red pill them on this. The attacks in New York will only strengthen their position to put UN troops in American cities. They will not care about us as they will not be American citizens and will tend to act more brutal to us because of it.

Interesting thread.

Daily reminder that what means to be "redpilled" by other Cred Forumsacks will actually make you sound retarded anywhere outside this autistic echo-chamber .

It's not your fault you're a dumbass

Agenda 21.

Oh look, a moron confronted with reality. Too bad you left your echo chamber of stupidity.

Now, after obsessively reading onto things, states agree to it when they benefit from it, they are signatories to it. No one can force them to become signatories to it. The montreal protocol was effective, and so is the law of the seas. Most states willfully followed it because it benefited them, they want to sign to it. my ta point was that states agree to agendas/protocols/agreements when it benefits them.

They made fun of me because of rwanda. No government volunteered their troops to a UN mission.

What don't you understand about not revealing your power level? Are you retarded?

>This is Fukuyama view point also right?
>>multilateralist
>is it correct to say he needs multilateralism because the globalists right now are the ones who are benefiting from how the american state exist right now as the core of the world?
>I am just starting to read that site you linked but I will read it all.
>>un transational
>This is Fukuyama view point also right?

Right, specially in his last book.

>is it correct to say he needs multilateralism because the globalists right now are the ones who are benefiting from how the american state exist right now as the core of the world?
I'm not sure if that is right, but I would put it this way: right now the burden of acting like the world's police is not working for America's national interest. It is actually being used to erode American sovereignty and put its resources to serve not the American people but the global elites. That's why Trump is insisting on "America first" and "Americanism" in the same time he shows willingness towards working with Russia to solve the mess caused by the globalists.

>i see that argument: laws become norms, and by design they erode sovereignty.
Correct.

>i was wrong about the UN
Actually, you were not. The UN was designed for an international world, but it's been reshaped as a transnational organization.

>thanks senpai
Hopefully, you will crush the TA before the end of the year.

You seem alright OP. If you're in Winnipeg wanna hang out and do hoodrat shit together?

>tutorial
I thought tutorials were only in the UK
The college my friend's sister went to (Williams) had them but I thought they were all at Cambridge or Oxford.

Itsk I got kicked out of my tutorial for saying Iranians are literal Arabs that are pretending to be Persian and my TA lost his chance at a Masters since he lost his TAship because I called him a racist for kicking me out. Just claim racism and your ta will probably drop everything because he doesn't want to end up on the street with 30k in osap loans.

You are speaking about leafland, former colony to the brits.

Toronto.

Thanks for the encouragement. I want to be red pilled but also not autistic.

>Trump, russia
that makes a lot of sense. I also know that Canada has for decades benefited greatly from the world order we are in in terms of security, and we never really meet our fair share with NATO ever. I think the highest to spending 1% of GPD was the afghan war, i remember at my mom's church group they were saying we was paying for bush's war.

This. Who the fuck actually shows their power level in school or college??? Strong autism.

In all honesty the UN is pretty cucked man.
It really can't/won't do shit anywhere other than setting up refugee camps, and helping with disaster areas.

However it does act as an "arbiter" between countries and in some of those situations it can pretty much fuck us, or any other country; that is if the situation is right.

>ex: UN's arbitration of the US/Iran nuke deal. Look up the shit that was done behind our back on that deal man.

pajeet, you from ontario?

pajeet, imm white.

I thought what our red pills are mean something outside of here. like, i was severely wrong about what was the differences with the EU and UN.

I love it when I see this.

>be this red pilled super guy on the interwebs among other red pilled imbeciles
>go out, enter college
>spill pasta all the time because your red pills are just bullshit you lapped up from mentally ill people

8^)

>Going to uni
>In a western country
>Current year
Fucking shitholes i saw "Safe Schools LGBTI+" Friendly stickers at my local in nsw and i walked out of campus never to return the next day FUCK that place

Dumb women everywhere, all numales and hardly any male teachers either.

trips don't lie bro

>pajeet, you from ontario?

Yes, but indias cheap as fuck and there's weed everywhere so I stay here until October since midterms start.

>pajeet, imm white.
RIP

No kid, you're just a gullible moron. Maybe college will teach you something after all though and you come out less retarded. Then again, your first reflex seems to have been to come to the echo chamber seeking comfort and an article on infowars, lol. Pathetic.

I don't trust trips anymore. I was humiliated severely.

You can do that? How do you catch up? Friends?

ALSO do you go to school in toronto?

If youre gonna redpill then it has to be a normie or two isolated throughout time. You cant just start uni and start dropping truth, they will all do what they did to you. Also dont get into debates on things you are not 100% certain about.

You should have ask the jq, opie

Fuck you antifa.

The media lies.
Pol at least attempts to combat those lies.
Without pol, i would be blue pilled, swallowing up the lies of the media. You cannot save islam is compatible with the west, nor can you say mass immigration is great.

I think I am sane enough to accept that I was wrong about the UN.

>You are speaking about leafland, former colony to the brits.
Yeah, I'm asking why you are talking about tutorials if they are only in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Williams College. From what I have read, Canadian universities don't offer tutorials, regardless of their history as a colony of Britain. I guess I'm wrong but I can't find anything now that I've looked online.

Your arrogance was your downfall, OP.

make sure you aim the gun at your brain, and not the back of the throat.

Yeah, globalists need to destroy American Sovereignty as the US is the only real nation state that could stand in their way. Overwhelming the US with literally every minor problem around the world while calling on "American imperialism" seems like a great way of doing just that.

>red pilled but also not autistic
You have to master the subject and be very careful with the language and the framing you will use. At the most abstract level the advocates of global governance loudly proclaim support for peace, human rights, liberty, tolerance, diversity, justice, and democratic values. Most of them actually believe these bullshit. So it's not about an evil plan as much as it is about arrogance of a small elite who think they can solve all the problems of the world by concentrating the decision-making process in their hands. The supranational institutions they favor and the causes and equality-of-condition policies they promote could be described as “post-democratic” in process and “post-communitarian” in substance, since it doesn't respect the local policy development and it doesn't respect local heritage and culture.

Anti-intellectualism is a cornerstone feature of Cred Forums and "red-pill" "knowledge".

What else did you expect when faced with people who are actually interested in a subject and spend the majority of their time studying it instead of browsing an image board and eating up sensationalist conspiracy theories?

The real world is much more complex and boring than the childlike cartoonish version purported by Cred Forums and redpill-isms. If you don't realize this, then you aren't actually interested in the truth, you are interested in novelty.

I'm in mathematics and comp Sci so I just study whatever I need to on the Internet. Nope I study at Mac,in Hamilton.

Aaaand more incoherent spaghetti falls. You must have looked like a total spastic to your TA and the others.

Without pol you'd be less retarded. It combats lies? Don't make me laugh. They make up shit all the time.

Where did you get your moronic factless opinions on the UN, huh?

Yeah that's right.

Muslim brotherhood? Good.

The irony is my entire course was for counterterrorism. Most people were there to end up in think tanks and ASIO and to change policy. Instead they've been taught not to mention Islam and to just be good borderland security officers at the airport who help find dried unicorn balls in Chinese carry-on luggage. .

It's like how Obama and the Muslim brotherhood forced the agencies to stop researching Islam. Stephen Coughlin (catastrophic failure) used to do red pill seminars but he got pushed out. Now they can't even name the problem, let alone develop ways to solve it.

counterjihadreport.com/2015/06/21/stephen-coughlins-red-pill-brief/

Keep us posted, user. Be interested to see if they discuss religion as the problem openly or cuck themselves and say the west caused it.

Good luck in your course.

All ontario universities have the lecture/tutorial structure as far as I know.

Sorry, leaf. I think an ai gf is your only hope

Cool. I wish we had them. It's crazy how students can go through college here by merely attending lectures and staying in their dorm room for the remainder of the day. What's the point of university if you're not challenged?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_governance#Agenda_21
americanpolicy.org/agenda21/
theblaze.com/stories/2011/06/21/does-the-new-white-house-rural-council-uns-agenda-21/
freedomoutpost.com/private-property-encroached-in-conservation-easements/
activistpost.com/2015/07/wilderness-corridors-agenda-21-under.html
activistpost.com/2011/05/property-rights-under-attack-in-nj-re.html
crossroad.to/text/articles/la21_198.html
wnd.com/2012/03/agenda-21-fact-not-conspiracy/print/
gawtp.com/elimination-of-private-land-ownership-united-nations-agenda-21-here-at-the-local-level/
citizenreviewonline.org/oct_2006/10/regulations.html
postsustainabilityinstitute.org/what-is-un-agenda-21.html
osnetdaily.com/2014/03/agenda-21-rockefeller-builds-human-settlement-zones-in-connecticut/
agenda21news.com/2014/09/agenda-21-influences-bcc-2035-joint-strategic-plan/
whatisagenda21.net/landuse.htm
agenda21course.com/the-dark-side-of-conservation-easements-continuation-of-martha-bonetas-saga/
climatism.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/shock-news-un-wants-to-ban-private-property-and-create-human-habitat-settlement-zones/

"The questions are two: who are the actors in the world scene and what is the position of the United States in it?

As for the first question: aside from Catholic and Protestant Christianity, of which I shall speak later on, the historic forces that today fight for power in the world arrange themselves into three projects of global dominance, which I will provisionally call the 'Russian-Chinese', the 'Western' (sometimes mistakenly called 'Anglo-American') and the 'Islamic' one. Each of them has a well documented history, which shows their remote origins, the transformations they have gone through in the course of time and the present state of their implementation. The agents that personify these projects today are respectively:

1. The ruling elite of Russia and China, especially the secret services of those two countries.

2. The Western finance elite, as represented especially in the Bilderberg Club, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Chamber of Commerce and the Trilateral Commission.

3. The Muslim Brotherhood, the religious leaders of several Islamic countries and the some Muslim countries governments.

Of these three agents, only the first one can be conceived of in strictly geopolitical terms, since its plans and actions correspond to well-defined national and regional interests. The second one, which is more advanced in the implementation of its plans for global governance, places itself explicitly above any national interests, including those of the countries where it originated and which serve as its basis for operations. In the third one, conflicts of interests between national governments and the overarching goal of a Universal Caliphate end up always being resolved in favor of the latter, which, though currently existing only as an ideal, enjoys a symbolic authority founded upon Koranic commandments that no Islamic government would dare to overtly challenge."

if they don't have any authority why then are rape and murders being committed by UN security forces and extortion of the locals?

>seems like they are gangsters to me user.

Your full of shit OP. This is a fucking slide thread. I'm your fake story, you and the TA AGREE that the UN is dictated by outside donors and have little control, yet somehow you "make yourself out to be a retard".

If on the off chance this is a real story, then you come off as a smug cunt among a bunch of other smug cunts at your Uni, so congrats on that, you're a normie now

The conceptions of global power that these three agents strive to implement are very different from one another because they stem from heterogeneous and sometimes incompatible inspirations. Therefore, they are not similar forces, species of the same genus. They do not fight for the same goals and, when they occasionally resort to the same weapons (for example, economic warfare) they do so in different strategic contexts, where employing such weapons does not necessarily serve the same objectives. Although nominally the relations among them are of competition and dispute, sometimes even of military nature, there are vast zones of fusion and collaboration, as flexible and changing as they may be. This phenomenon disorients the observers, producing all sorts of misguided and fabulous interpretations, some under the form of 'conspiracy theories', others as self-proclaimed 'realistic' and 'scientific' refutations of those theories. A good deal of the nebulosity in the world scene is produced by a more or less constant factor: each one of the three agents tends to interpret in its own terms the plans and actions of the other two, partly for deliberate propaganda purposes, partly due to genuine misunderstanding of the situation. The strategic analyses from all involved reflect, each of them, the ideological bias that is proper to it. Even though they attempt to take into account the totality of available factors, the Russian-Chinese scheme stresses the geopolitical and military viewpoint, the Western scheme the economic, and the Islamic scheme the dispute among religions.

kys user

kek has willed it.thanks

This difference reflects, on its turn, the sociological composition of the ruling classes in the respective geographical areas:

1) Stemming from the communist Nomenklatura, the Russian-Chinese ruling class is essentially made up of bureaucrats, intelligence service agents and military officers.

2) The preponderance of financiers and international bankers in the Western establishment is too well known and it is not necessary to insist on it.

3) In the various countries of the Islamic complex, the authority of the ruler depends substantially on the approval of the umma – the multitudinous community of authoritative interpreters of the traditional religion. Even though these countries display great variety in their domestic situations, it is not an exaggeration to describe the structure of their ruling power as 'theocratic'.

Thus, for the first time in the history of the world, the three essential modalities of power – politico-military, economic and religious – find themselves personified in distinct supranational blocks, each of them with its own plans for world dominance and its peculiar mode of action. This does not mean that they do not act in all fronts, but only that their respective historical views and strategies are ultimately delimited by the modality of power they represent. It’s not far-fetched to say that the world today is the object of a dispute among the military, bankers and preachers.

Even though in current debates these three blocks are almost invariably designated by names of nations, States and governments, to depict their interactions as a dispute among nations or national interests is a residual habit of the old geopolitics that does not help us at all to understand the present situation.

Read , , and with all your attention. Those underlying concepts will help you navigate the subject as you read the books that were suggested and dig deeper into the subject.

what do you think of redefininggod.com

This is really resonating with me. I feel less disoriented already. You should make youtube videos if you can. I am sure many of us on here would watch/subscribe.

UN doesnt really have much power but political elite is trying hard to change. International law is above national laws though and that is reducing the sovereignity of the nation states. So you were right in some sense but you took the wrong turn when you started to speak about the rich elite. Mostly socialist love UN, rich elite loves trade agreements.

They come up with useful info from time to time, but I don't believe they have the philosophical skills to understand the big picture. Olavo's "three schemes" is the best theory I came across so far. This debate is a true must read:

As I said, I work for the American Embassy in Brazil and my job requires at least some discretion. But I'm developing a Mater's thesis on the subject and will try to have it published once it's done.

user read what the brazilbro wrote. he will red pill you. the UN represents a collection of international norms, but the UN is designed to facilitate an international order. international order is one of multiple nations, nations still have soveriegnty but the future is not that, its of a supranational world order and the UN isn't designed for that.

what's designed for that is
>the financial elite institutions that exist and govern the real economic sectors. these institutions, they are private firms, already govern economic activity for societies that are liberal (western world).

>the old soviet divide of bureaucrats

>islamic society

your picture seems very valid. a lot of us on here really want answers to what we see, and the media wont give us clues, and i think that's why we grasp at straws.

Thanks I'll check it out.
Any other stuff I should check out?

Thats the thing what I meant when I said that international law is above national law. The objective is that national laws are gradually replaced by the international ones and nation states only exist to execute these international laws. This is what EU is currently about.

one thing i learnt from my ordeal is that language is important and being specific is important, otherwise things wont have any meaning.

the brazil user said that international world order is different from transnational. I know what you mean, but the EU isn't international, its supranational and I know the terms confuse you and you probably have no reason to use them, but they are important if you want to maintain clarity.

I think the debate will lead you to other stuff, but you may also want to read "Sovereignty or Submission: Will Americans Rule Themselves or be Ruled by Others?" by John Fonte from the Hudson Institute. Fonte is a traditional conservative, but he is pretty based and will be more helpful to read than a lot of red pilled yet clueless bloggers.

You may also want to follow Olavo on Kikebook. He writes in Portuguese, but the translation tool will serve you fine and he will take English questiones from time to time: fb.com/carvalho.olavo/posts/700274396791304

So, how do we stop this process?

The whole world tells the UN to fuck off every fucking time and still you guys are convinced there is some form of subversion at play

sheit, this is not redpill, it's bullshit pill. The kraut is right, you don't give a shit about the truth, just the novelty.

And for the other brazilian, stop forcing the professor. He's senile and crazy and the only time he's right is when he's talking shit about PT, because he's actually right about it.

>They will not care about us as they will not be American citizens and will tend to act more brutal to us because of it.

Are you familiar with how UN polices stuff they are ordered to police? Where have they ever been brutal towards anyone? If UN troops(no such thing) Were to suddenly start policing the US they would simply patrol your biggest cities once a week with local armed police escort since the UN forces would not be allowed to have ammunition for their personal weapons since its so provoking and makes locals feel bad.

Burgers elect Trump.

Cringe for your stupidity.

Your TA was right, but you weren't really wrong. The UN doesn't actually have a lot of power, all they do is being "concerned". They're a paper tiger.

>spent the remainder of the week googling UN stuff
So you accumulated some knowledge that apparently proves your TA right? Okay. You could tell him after your lesson that you've learned a lot through that argument, but being singled out and laughed at like that didn't feel so good.

>I don't want to go back. Please help.
If you fold, then you're a cuck. Keep going there. You may have to begrudgingly admit defeat this time, but you will keep going.

knock him out

>Swallowed Cred Forums NEETs fantasy ramblings about sovruntee, freedumz, globalists
>Try to meme your way through serious conversations with adults
>Get laughed at by everyone who reads actual books, not just youube videos and autist-logic greentext about niggers and jews

Youve taken the first step OP. Welcome to the real world.

...

The UN sets initiatives and invites world leaders to create secret pacts and anti-democratic schemes. It's a club for the powerful and corrupt to collude voluntarily, not a power into itself.

You fucked up user. Get your conspiracies straight

Bump people need to see this.

Prepare yourself before revealing your power level otherwise you will end up like a dickhead

It's as true today as it was eight or so years ago: newfags can't greentext

...