I think the problem of the #UN is its permanent "security" council. It has too much power and wasn't even in the spirit of its Charter, lately. It's the obsolete part, I guess.

Yes, that's what FA is referring to cf GA

But, no, if you read and listen to her, you'll see she's saying the colonial west created the charter to serve colonial interests. The un & its charter were intentionally racist from the start.

And more specifically, the US has used its veto to give Israel immunity for 75 years.

And it is the member states that must police the law using BDS.

The un and courts have no police force.

Ok. But if they wanted to change that in the interest of all, they could do that kind of changes, instead of rejecting the whole thing. They know where the problem is, knowing the theoretical "#UN" idea in itself wasn't aimed to go that way. That they made it "racist" from start doesn't change the necessity of that kind of globally thought peaceful organization. & even with this Charter, the manner they veto as they do isn't right on course, they take liberties even with this one.

Who is "They"?

The un and its sc were created by and for western racist powers.

It still is.

Which "they" is gonna change that?

"They" is general...the world, I guess ? If it has a conscious of itself ? By "the theoretical UN" I mean an organization where everyone is on the table with humanity & peace as a compass. The actual UN is what's the nearest. Yes it was created by racist powers and "this" (the racism, the "power" control) is to reject but "that" (the globalization, the conscious of a whole) is to keep, in my mind.

Well, the only thing we, the people of the world, can do is protest, bds and strike, etc. Our leaders & ngos refuse to stop israel.

Your idea can only be brought about by a new organisation, eg, the hague group, with democratic, not racist intent.

And we the people.

If the politicians could be more like the Albanese / Guterres & co than like what they actually tend to be these days (ie without great conscience of anything), that would help...

Did you listen to Albanese? She said the un leadership is the main problem. Apart from the US, et al.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVxvrGVxuis

I didn't (I will maybe, not now so, it's a long video). If it's about Guterres, I just found him listenable (as far as most people on the international scene weren't). If it's hypocrisy, obviously, forget.

She said "the leadership" meaning as a group. Just not prepared to take all the action they could take. She said "out of fear". Meaning the US, I guess.