On This Day: January 10th, 1946 – The Birth of the United Nations General Assembly

Image

On this day 80 years ago, the United Nations General Assembly convened for its very first session at Westminster Central Hall (also known as Methodist Central Hall) in London, England. Delegates from 51 nations gathered in the aftermath of World War II, marking the official launch of an organisation designed to foster international peace, security, and cooperation.

This historic meeting set the stage for the UN’s foundational work, including the election of Paul-Henri Spaak of Belgium as the first President of the General Assembly and the appointment of Trygve Lie as the first Secretary-General.

Image

Origins of the United Nations

The UN’s roots trace back to the horrors of two world wars and the failure of the League of Nations, which lacked the authority to prevent global conflict. In 1944, Allied powers met at Dumbarton Oaks in Washington, D.C., to outline a new international body with stronger enforcement mechanisms, including a Security Council with veto powers for major powers. This blueprint was refined in April 1945 at the San Francisco Conference, where 50 nations drafted the UN Charter. Signed on June 26th, 1945, and ratified on October 24th, the Charter emphasised preventing war, promoting human rights, and advancing social and economic development. The first General Assembly session in 1946 formalised these ideals into action, with the UN initially operating from temporary sites before settling in New York.

The original intent was noble: a forum where nations could resolve disputes peacefully, uphold sovereignty, and collaborate on global challenges like poverty and disease. It represented hope rising from the ashes of WWII, with 51 founding members committed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.”

How Far We’ve Strayed: The UN Under the Current Regime

Fast-forward to 2026, and the UN has grown to 193 member states, achieving successes like peacekeeping missions, eradicating smallpox, and advancing the Sustainable Development Goals. However, it has deviated from its founding principles in several ways. The “current regime” referring to the UN’s leadership and structure under Secretary-General António Guterres, faces accusations of bureaucratic inefficiency, politicisation, and failure to enforce resolutions amid geopolitical divides.

However, it has deviated profoundly from its founding principles, not primarily due to vetoes by permanent members protecting their interests, but through deep-seated corruption, particularly tied to Islamist influence, persistent child exploitation scandals, unchecked overreach approaching totalitarianism, pervasive antisemitism, and a vile stance on gender and trans issues that promotes child harm and indoctrination. The core rot stems from undue influence by Ideological (but harmful) agendas and failures in accountability.

For example, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has pushed for special treatment, including resolutions that prioritise Islamic sensitivities over universal human rights, such as demands for global blasphemy laws restricting criticism of Islam. This influence has contributed to perceptions of bias, particularly in bodies like the Human Rights Council. Meanwhile, UN peacekeepers have been implicated in widespread child rape and sexual exploitation, with nearly 2,000 allegations over 12 years, with over 100 allegations in 2024 alone, including child sex rings in Haiti and abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Central African Republic. Prosecutions remain rare, highlighting systemic impunity.

Adding to this, the UN’s Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is advancing a draft General Comment No. 27 that embeds gender ideology, treating “gender identity” as a basis for children’s rights to access justice, including “safe abortion services for adolescent girls” and potentially gender transitions without parental consent. This redefines children’s rights to strip parents of authority, handing power to states, schools, and health authorities for decisions on abortion and affirming self-declared genders, ideologies that promote indoctrination and irreversible harm to children, as there is no such thing as being “trans”; it’s a fabricated concept leading to child mutilation and sterilisation. This draft, criticised by Argentina for using “gender” over “sex” and violating sovereignty and parental rights, exemplifies how the UN pushes leftist policies that destroy family units and expose minors to lifelong damage.

The UN’s expansion into climate, migration, and health has fuelled accusations of totalitarian overreach, promoting a “global socialism” that erodes national sovereignty. Recent U.S. withdrawals from 31 UN entities under President Trump, including those on climate (UNFCCC), population (UNFPA), and women’s rights (UN Women), reflect disillusionment with wasted funds and agendas contrary to U.S. interests, such as not recognising the U.S. stance against granting statehood to terrorist entities in Gaza. This has exacerbated the UN’s financial woes, as the U.S. is its largest contributor.

Image

How Good Intentions Can Warp: The UN as a Case Study

The UN exemplifies how well-meaning institutions can become distorted. From preventing atrocities to enabling exploitation, ideological capture, and bias. Born to prevent atrocities, it now faces scandals like:

Peacekeeper child abuse, these abuses have eroded trust, corruption (e.g., Oil-for-Food), and biased resolutions. Islamist influence via the OIC has grown, demanding exceptional status and pushing Sharia-compliant norms, prioritising religious sensitivities over free expression. Antisemitism undermines credibility. The promotion of gender ideology through drafts like General Comment No. 27 indoctrinates children into believing in fluid genders, pushing for abortions and transitions that harm them physically and mentally, overriding parents and cultural values in favour of state control; a clear betrayal of child protection for ideological agendas. Mission creep fosters authoritarian-like globalism, all turning the UN into a platform for ideological agendas rather than neutral arbitration. In 2026, ongoing crises expose these failures, compounded by financial strains and divisions.

Good intentions warp through:

  • Islamist Influence: OIC states have secured resolutions protecting Islam from criticism, fostering a culture where universal rights yield to religious sensitivities.
  • Child Exploitation Scandals: Peacekeepers’ abuses, including rape and survival sex, persist with minimal accountability, affecting thousands.
  • Overreach and Totalitarianism: Bureaucratic bloat and mission creep promote globalist ideologies, eroding sovereignty and enabling authoritarian tendencies.
  • Antisemitism: Numerous accusations highlight bias, from disproportionate Israel condemnations to reports ignoring abuses elsewhere.
  • Promotion of Gender Ideology and Trans Agendas: Embedding “gender identity” in children’s rights, promoting abortion and transitions without parents, leading to indoctrination and harm.
  • Financial/Operational Strain: Crises and liquidity threats from unpaid dues and U.S. withdrawals.

In 2026, crises like aid in Sudan, and Rohingya refugees underscore these failures, exacerbated by funding cuts and rifts.

Why It’s Hard to Leave – But Should We?

Today’s UN is too powerful and unwieldy, facing profound challenges. Leaving is hard due to:

  • Legal Ties: Membership in laws/treaties; complex exits.
  • Interdependence: Reliance on platforms for trade, health, security.
  • Global Norms: Sets standards; exit isolates from legitimacy/aid.
  • Benefits: Access to funds, support, voice.

We should leave, and rethink global treaties entirely, to honour the original 1946 intent of genuine peace and cooperation without corruption. The current structure has betrayed that vision through Islamism, exploitation, antisemitism, overreach, and the vile promotion of gender ideologies that indoctrinate and harm children by pushing non-existent “trans” concepts and side-lining parents. Withdrawal, as pursued by the U.S. in recent actions, allows nations to rebuild sovereignty and explore principled alternatives that truly prevent war and uphold rights, rather than perpetuate a warped institution. True fidelity to the founders’ dream demands starting anew.

References and Sources of information: