The same could be said of the county commission and the city councils of just about anywhere. The difference is that the UN has a shot. That will likely be so for a long time with all the lesser entities pushing the UN this way and that; a sustem of checks and balances if you will.

Those who get excited about excess government - local, state, national or global - probably need to spend time learning how to play with others

Have you heard about the United Federation of Planets? Dude, you are so going to hate it.

More fear-mongering and hate-generating speech. I have other (maybe not better) things to do than allow myself to get worked up over such rubbish.
Why must people think they have to project their fears on others? Do they really think it will have the effect being sought after?

The last paragraph tells you everything you need to know about the motivation of the author:

“The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers. The relevance of the individual is downplayed. It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945. Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body?” [emphasis mine]

The UN is made up of representatives from each member nation, representatives who are swapped out occasionally and are acting in accordance with the leadership of each nation. The idea that there's some global group acting independently is without evidence. The UN makes broad recommendations but doesn't have any real authority outside what the members give it. The author takes the declarations made by the UN and presents them as some sort of sinister manifesto instead of treating them as what could be more accurately considered a mission statement. (It's still fine to disagree with these declarations or to find fault with the philosophies, of course, but I don't think it's justifiable to overstate the significance therein.) The UN has little power, and what it does have is put to a vote by its member nations, with a few members having veto power. It's unimaginable that the majority of nations would vote to give up sovereignty and that the most influential wouldn't cast their veto if that somehow managed to happen. And, let's suppose even that happened and such a resolution passed without the respective governments and their citizens backing it, where is the force of will? The UN military is made up of the forces of the various nations. Those forces can be recalled. But even if that, too, somehow managed to be handled, what on Earth makes anyone think a single government could function effectively? This is the crux of the problem for any new world order or one world government: governing. It's not practical. Individual countries with differing needs have a terrible time with governance. But this NWO concept is in the Bible, so fundamentalists spin these conspiracy theories out of the thinnest of threads and hope that nobody tugs at them to reveal that they aren't tied together at all. The author is selling fear for the sake of promoting Christianity and an America-first mentality. It's mighty easy to deny rights to non-Americans and non-Christians when there's a secular, international boogeyman to fear.

Rubbish, if you look the UN has not got teeth. Just look at the resolutions in relation to Israel or the US.

'United' Nations? Hahahaha. Delusion at it's finest.......