@
TexChik I don't consider myself "socialist" in my country's terms. "Centrist" perhaps - whatever that encompasses?
Anyway, I don't know how you define "socialist"!
I see both good and bad in both Left and Right wing mainstream political ideologies here, on the general L-R spectrum in Britain and much of Europe - a spectrum that may or may not closely match that in the USA.
I support the idea of individual, autonomous, democratic (small "d"!) countries living in mutual co-operation and harmony... but realise that is highly idealist due to so many huge differences in politics, economy, geography, language and culture.
Even the European Union is not a cohesive "nation" (as some arch-federalists undeniably dream about) but a somewhat uneasy, political-economic
bloc of over two dozen, largely friendly countries with a lot in common and many agreed aims, but also many of those differences I listed above. Its purpose is much like that of the UN, really, and a lot of its policies and "Directives" (law foundations) are within a vast array of international treaties*.
'
It's that matter of differences which would act against any international body trying to be some sort of "world government" as some fear, even before individual nations obstruct such attempts anyway.
Obstruction may be direct and constructive - diplomats telling the UN General Assembly "My country does not agree and will not support that, but suggests instead we....". The natural democratic way, by consensus among hopefully, largely friendly countries.
Or indirect and destructive, by some hostile nations using many means including wild allegations, to sow suspicion and discord within and between others more widely: "divide-&-rule".
-----------------
*Although the United Kingdom has left the EU, it is still a member of or signatory to, around
ninety different international bodies and agreements. I would imagine the USA is, too - most of them the same. These are of autonomous countries helping each other, not of arcane committees trying to run them!
