The establishment of the United Nations was arguably one of the greatest achievements of the generation that emerged victorious from one of the most destructive wars in human history.

Surprise. Republicans don't like it very much.

Indeed, most Republicans like it less this year than they did last year, and most like it a LOT less than the American people as a whole.

According to a September Pew Research Center Poll (covering the US and 38 other countries) Americans in general have an overwhelmingly favorable view of the UN: 58 % positive. (A rating higher than the President's and a LOT better than that of the United States Congress)

Democrats, whose party has special ties to the UN, are 72% positive, compared to 70% last year. For younger Americans, those between 18 and 29, positive attitudes toward the UN rise to 71%.

Only 41% of TP-GOP folks, on the other hand, have good vibes. . . down from 48% last year and WAY down from an astounding high of 51% in 2011.

Why are the Neanderthals of American conservatism (the disproportionately old, white, male side of the TP-GOP) so adamantly and irreconcilably negative about the UN?

For some, no doubt, their negativism harks back to misty memories of tales of Republican "success" in shooting down the original League of Nations after World War I.

Statistically, however, the TP-GOP nay-sayers are older, whiter, disproportionately male and arguably more crotchety than the rest of us.

There are, of course, specific UN-related issues that have hacked off the American right (and sometimes the left) during the past year: recent problems with Russia and China in the Security Council over Syria; the "new" arms trade treaty we refuse to ratify; the organization's outspoken condemnation of Israel's civil rights record, and other things.

In general, however, the older, grumpier, denizens of the far right just don't like many of the things the UN stands for.

It is, after all, full of "foreigners" and it shamelessly celebrates cultural diversity.

Its universal declaration of human rights, described by Pope John Paul II as "one of the highest expressions of the human conscience of our time" was written by a commission chaired by (gasp) Eleanor Roosevelt.

That same declaration enshrines, as universal principles FDR's four freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of belief, freedom from fear and freedom from want.

The UN strives, as a matter of principle, to care for the sick and helpless (UNICEF alone has made the UN a treasure), promote education and economic development.

It engages in thankless peace-keeping missions where no one else will go and all too often, where no one else is trusted.

It insists that no one be tortured or subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

It convened the 2002 Rome Conference to establish an international criminal court (arguably the best way to address not only Syria's Assad, but those guilty of engaging in genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression everywhere.)

Even it biggest fans admit the UN as an organization is flawed.

Its processes and procedures are frustrating.

Some of its member states and people who serve in its organizations are corrupt, or worse.

But, these days it seems no more clumsy or impotent or dishonest than some of our representatives in Richmond or the US House of Representatives at its recent worst.

We can fix all three . . . and should.