Why Do We Fund UNESCO?
April 18, 2005
At the end of 2002 President Bush announced that the United States would rejoin UNESCO, an educational agency of the United Nations. One year later the First Lady was dispatched to Paris for a ceremony marking the end of our 20-year absence from UNESCO, where she assured the world that the US would be a “full, active and enthusiastic participant” in the organization.
Rejoining UNESCO, of course, means paying for it. Our new commitment to UNESCO costs $60 million annually for starters, fully one-quarter of the agency’s budget. Sadly, I believe the administration made this decision as a concession to our globalist critics, who decry supposed American unilateralism.
UNESCO stands for
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, which sounds
lofty. In truth, the agency is nothing but a mouthpiece for the usual UN
causes, including international abortion and population control; politically
correct UN curriculum for American schools; and UN control of federal land in
America through so-called World Heritage sites.
rightly withdrew the U.S. from UNESCO in 1984, citing the organization’s
financial mismanagement, blatant anti-Americanism, and general hostility to
freedom. He believed the
organization had become too politicized, too bloated, and too hostile to free
markets. Furthermore, UNESCO
enjoyed rapidly expanding budgets during the 1970s and 1980s, which President
Reagan felt American taxpayers should not shoulder. President Reagan was correct
in identifying UNESCO as an organization that did not act in America's interest,
and he was correct in questioning why the United States should fund 25 percent
of UNESCO's budget for that privilege.
From its inception
UNESCO has been openly hostile to American values, our Constitution, and western
culture. Why in the world should we send tax dollars to an organization that
actively promotes values so contrary to those of most Americans?
To better understand
the origins and ambitions of UNESCO, we need only consider a quote from Sir
Julian Huxley, brother of the famous Aldous Huxley. Julian Huxley was the
founding director-general of UNESCO when he said the following:
philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent...
It can stress… the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to
a world political organization… Political unification in some sort of world
government will be required…to help the emergence of a single world
Those who supported
rejoining UNESCO claim the organization has been reformed over the years.
Yet it’s strange that in two decades since the United States left
UNESCO, we only started reading about purported reforms in the year 2000. Are we
to believe that after nearly twenty years of business as usual, a large
bureaucracy like UNESCO suddenly reinvented itself in a few short years?
Is it worth spending $60 million every year on an organization with such
a terrible history of waste, corruption, and anti-Americanism?