I am writing a 4000 word paper critical of the United Nations. It will argue that the UN is nothing but a vacuous talkfest that is harmful, rather than beneficial, to international security. It will critique the notion of collective security. If you know of any useful readings relevant to my subject, please let me know.
Just some thoughts that may or may not be helpful:
As Mises says (Human Action p. 680-684), the United Nations is based on the idea that one man’s gain is another’s loss (amongst other socialistic doctrines). If people understood that trade is mutually beneficial, war could only be viewed as destructive and there would be no need for such an organisation. Now, since the UN promotes such socialistic doctrines, it itself creates part of the supposed need for its own existence in perpetuating the Montaigne dogma.
The United Nations promotes democracy. Now, if this means that each member nation has an equal vote and that motions require the support of the majority, the fact that most of the member nations are representative of anti-democratic states means that the UN is therefore anti-democratic. If, on the other hand, each member does not have an equal vote and motions do not require the support of the majority, the UN is still anti-democratic. The UN is therefore self-contradictory on one of its most fundamental principles, regardless of whether democracy is beneficial (which I would argue it is not).
You could bring up some examples of how the UN in fact creates conflict, oppression, and poverty. See how the League of Nations carved up Austria-Hungary, resulting in civil wars, the erection of trade barriers, and generally repressive government. This is a key reason for the backwardness of these parts of Eastern Europe. You could use this as but one example of the unintended consequences of UN ‘planning’.
Perhaps you could look at the relations of the UN with a specific member nation (Australia?) in recent times. Compare the cost of the relations (massive) with the achievements (none). You could show how these government transfers of wealth cannot by their very nature prove their value and are of course unaccountable to the people these governments supposedly represent.
