3 ms·

This is a multinational organization, funded by member states, built around consensus that we're talking about here. It seems unreasonable to expect internatio

by ethbr0 5y ago

This is a multinational organization, funded by member states, built around consensus that we're talking about here. It seems unreasonable to expect international organizations to be simultaneously accepted by multiple parties with divergent and conflicting interests... and somehow not be subject to politics.

_djo_ 5y ago
It’s disturbing how poor the civics knowledge regarding multinational organisations remains in much of the world. The relations between countries in general are dysfunctional, driven by politics and selfish interests, often corrupt, and dependent on power, why are we surprised when those same factors affect shared multinational organisations?
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  Even though there are good reasons for it to be the case, I do agree with the OP that it undermines the trust in them. Politics should not override science IMO.
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    Granted, but unfortunately some problems (war, global climate, trade baselines) can only be tackled in a multinational forum, because agreement between multiple parties is required for any truly optimal solution. And the only feasible solutions to creating those forums are points somewhere between "completely political" and "apolitical." So it's constructive to say "I wish the WHO were less political" or "The WHO should appease its members by doing X, so that it could be more neutral in Y," but it's pretty trite to comment that it's political. Yes, and what alternatives are possible?
TechBro8615 5y ago
And yet, their representatives do things like disconnect from Skype when asked about Taiwan, and they skipped naming a mutation the Xi variant. So how much can you trust them? Probably about as much as you can trust who they’re loyal to.
- vinay427 5y ago
  Those actions are precisely what one might expect of a multinational organization aiming to build consensus. It sounds like you’re implying some sort of behind-the-scenes loyalties, whereas I would suggest they’re more of a necessary feature given this mission.

by ethbr0 5y ago

_djo_ 5y ago

It’s disturbing how poor the civics knowledge regarding multinational organisations remains in much of the world. The relations between countries in general are dysfunctional, driven by politics and selfish interests, often corrupt, and dependent on power, why are we surprised when those same factors affect shared multinational organisations?

GekkePrutser 5y ago
Even though there are good reasons for it to be the case, I do agree with the OP that it undermines the trust in them. Politics should not override science IMO.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  Granted, but unfortunately some problems (war, global climate, trade baselines) can only be tackled in a multinational forum, because agreement between multiple parties is required for any truly optimal solution. And the only feasible solutions to creating those forums are points somewhere between "completely political" and "apolitical." So it's constructive to say "I wish the WHO were less political" or "The WHO should appease its members by doing X, so that it could be more neutral in Y," but it's pretty trite to comment that it's political. Yes, and what alternatives are possible?

TechBro8615 5y ago

And yet, their representatives do things like disconnect from Skype when asked about Taiwan, and they skipped naming a mutation the Xi variant. So how much can you trust them? Probably about as much as you can trust who they’re loyal to.

vinay427 5y ago
Those actions are precisely what one might expect of a multinational organization aiming to build consensus. It sounds like you’re implying some sort of behind-the-scenes loyalties, whereas I would suggest they’re more of a necessary feature given this mission.