• EABOD25@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because nato and the UN are the first sign internationally cooperation, but people want to shit on it because they don’t have a good argument of why the structure doesn’t work, so instead of creating a good argument about the current structure, they just shit on it and say “NATO BAD”.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      There is a reason why it is obvious to some people why NATO and the UN are bad and not to others. There are obvious good reasons to hate those organizations if you are the kind of person or nation who wants to do horrible things to other people or nations for your own benefit.

      • EABOD25@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not saying any of those people are wrong or right. What I’m saying is is people put forth the energy to criticize those organizations and countries involved without coming up with solutions to improve said organizations. Instead people just say that those orgs are evil or bad. Both organizations are international coops, so how is that a bad thing? It shows a great chance, but instead of trying to find solutions, they want to chastise it.

        So with that being said, what would be your solution to improve NATO and the UN?

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          Both organizations are international coops, so how is that a bad thing?

          What I am saying is that that is a bad thing if you are the bully everyone else is cooperating to protect themselves from.

          • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s interesting to think about “NATO vs Russia” framing.

            When we think like that, of seems like there are these two similar entities opposed to each other. Not even close to true!

            NATO = THIRTY TWO distinct governments representing many hundreds of millions of people who voted for them

            Russia = One government that doesn’t properly represent its people and heavily relies on propaganda to survive

        • HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          3 months ago

          Legit multipolarization?

          NATO, in particular, is highly coupled to the American/anti-Russian agenda. How much chance did Europe get to discuss the pros and cons of bankrolling a long-term conflict in Ukraine vs getting railroaded into it with the insinuations of being the next Chamberlain?

          Even Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin don’t wake up every morning asking “how can I be evil today?” They may have a different agenda than the West, but it still comes from a place of caring for their country, legacy, and position. These are not wholesale foreign concepts. They can be understood and worked with. But I suspect the sort of organizations that would get the best out of them would require certain countries to acknowledge their place among equals and be willing to comptomise their sphere of influence.

          • EABOD25@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Then do something about the problem! For fuck’s sake. If you see a problem and choose not to do anything about the problem beside complain about the problem, then you’re part of the problem.