The US Should Exit The UN

Authored by Wendy McElroy via The Brownstone Institute,

The future of the United Nations (UN) is in play, largely because of its refusal to censure Iran—a member nation.

In May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio reprimanded the UN:

“If you’re telling me that the international community and hundreds of countries cannot rally behind that, then I don’t know what the utility of the UN system is.” 

Severing all ties to the UN could require an act of Congress, but the US is moving in this direction. On February 4, 2025, Executive Order 14199 directed the US to withdraw from 31 UN organisations. A great deal hinges on how highly Rubio still prizes America’s permanent seat on the UN Security Council which comes with a veto.

The UN is often viewed as an ineffectual bureaucracy that occasionally does some good. It is nothing so benevolent. Its origins may have been well-meaning, but the current UN has become what it claims to oppose. The US should leave the UN altogether and immediately, especially since its unjust policies are likely to get worse…and soon.

The UN’s Original Mission

The UN Charter (1945) opens,

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED…to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women…  

The Preamble of its Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states, 

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Article 2 of the Declaration provides, 

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex…

‘All human beings are equal’ is the basis of Western justice, whether the equality is under nature, God, or law. Instead of pursuing equality, however, the UN is now a woke and corrupt actor that creates inequality and division. The UN’s financial malfeasance, the sexual abuse by field personnel, its demonization of the West…are well documented in the 104-page report From Watchdogs to Ideologues: How Politicized UN Rapporteurs Are Subverting Human Rights by the Geneva-based NGO UN Watch. 

The UN’s demonstrated commitment is to social justice or a wokeness rooted in equity, not equality. Equity seeks the redistribution of wealth and power to those who are considered oppressed from those who are considered oppressors. Equity is the opposite of equality under the law.

Consider its treatment of men who clearly are not viewed as equal to women, as the UN’s mission claims. An obvious example is the prominent presence of the UN Women commission that claims to be “the global champion for gender equality.” The commission identifies its goal as ensuring “every woman and girl lives up to her full potential.” No mention of men or boys. No comparable UN Men agency, although males are included peripherally by recognizing a need to train them to oppose patriarchy. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) explains, 

UNFPA works with men and boys around the world to advance gender equality and end violence. These programmes are encouraging men and boys to abandon harmful stereotypes, embrace respectful, healthy relationships, and support the human rights of all people, everywhere.

Men face many of the same global problems as women, however, including poverty, lack of education, violence, disease and harmful stereotypes. Men also face unique problems, including male-only conscription, paternity fraud, false rape accusations, and longer sentences for the same crimes. Nevertheless, compared to the UN’s emphasis on women, men are virtually ignored. And deliberately so.

The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is considered by many to be the international bill of rights for women. Again, no comparable agency exists for men. The FAQ of one CEDAW branch speaks of substantive justice for women. 

Substantive justice judges fairness by results rather than a process; it favors the equitable distribution of rights, not equal rights. CEDAW states, “The concept of substantive equality arose out of the recognition that formal equality may not be sufficient to ensure that women enjoy the same rights as men. An ostensibly gender-neutral policy, while not excluding women per se, may result in a de facto discrimination against women.” 

Instead, in the name of equality, the UN discriminates against men. It denounces the “poison of patriarchy,” decries the manosphere, and discusses the anti-gender movement. The anti-gender movement is defined as groups with an agenda of harming radical feminist and LGBTQIA+ policies. Even questioning these policies or advocating parallel ones for men seems to be anti-gender. 

Earlier, I stated the UN’s policies are likely to get worse and soon. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres steps down on December 31, 2026. The leading contender as his replacement is the aggressively woke Michelle Bachelet, who launched UN Women and served as its Executive Director from 2010 to 2013. After this, she acted as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2018 to 2022).

In between stints at the UN, Bachelet served two terms as President of Chile. A prominent member of the Socialist Party of Chile, she mandated 50% female representation in her Cabinet and instituted political quotas to boost women’s presence in government, as well as establishing a Ministry of Women and Gender Equality; again, no comparable Ministry of Men exists.

And, again, the equality pursued was equity because it applied privileges to women. 

While at the UN, some of the global initiatives championed by Bachelet included: 

• Safe Cities Free of Violence Against Women and Girls to address sexual violence in public spaces. The word “sexual” is key. Even the U.N. admits men experience more physical violence in public (81%) compared to women (19%). It is not clear the rate at which men experience sexual violence, however, as men report such abuse at a far lower rate than women.

• Fund for Gender Equality to provide money exclusively to women to empower them at the grassroots level. Males can access other U.N. gender funds but only in order to dismantle gender inequality, not to empower themselves. Men are to act as gender allies and “agents of change.”

• Increasing Women’s Access to Justice in Post-Conflict Societies to support transitional justice and women’s human rights in conflict and post-conflict zones. 

Everyone has the right to discriminate peacefully on his own time and dime. But the UN is primarily funded by mandatory assessed and voluntary contributions from its member nations; that is, by tax dollars extracted from individuals, half of whom are men and many who are dissenting women, like me. 

The good news: there are rumors of the UN’s financial collapse since some member states—most prominently the US—are withholding their contributions. The US alone owes $2.196 billion to the regular budget and $1.8 billion to separate peacekeeping operations, which amounts to about one-quarter of UN funding. Without it, the UN will be sorely diminished in status.

Good. And if the UN does collapse, then better.