Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
I'm saying if you removed one nation one vote, and just went with some kind of proportional representation. The states wouldn't exist, so they wouldn't have leaders. Hypothetically, of course.
There's more disfunctional your country is, the more likely it is that regions will try to leave, the more power your region gets in the UN. How crazy is that?
If Canada wasn't such a great place to be a minority in, Quebec would've left ages ago and we'd collectively be twice as influentional in the GA. The fact that we're still one country (and without coercion, just bribery) should make us count for more (because it shows we know how to make coexistence work), but in fact it makes us count less.
|
Proportional representation would be a horrible idea. That is unless you want international policy dictated by China and their oil suppliers.
As much as the current system is flawed, you do need the veto. Without it, everything would just break down into a mob of dictators constantly furthering their own agenda. The veto also stops a lot of fairly serious wars from occuring. If the General Assembly was allowed to dictate terms to the major veto countries: USA, Russia, and China, then you'd end up with a constant source of conflict between these countries.