Platonic Justice
25-05-2006, 03:09
I'm brand-new to Nationstates, so please forgive me if this is a topic that has already been considered before.
I think the United Nations mechanism is an excellent way to simulate international politics and the mixed blessings of membership in an international community, but what about countries whose philosophical commitments are inconsistent with the United Nations? (I'm not thinking about radical militarism or imperial nations here, but rather countries that reject democratic principles or conceding national sovereignty.)
Unless I'm misunderstanding the descriptions about how the United Nations works in the game, the resolutions and policies adopted by the UN become effective for each member state, and these policies will affect their welfare and description. This presents a tremendous temptation for nations to join the UN, since it theoretically offers an interesting method for faster national development.
While I have no idea how sophisticated programming this feature would be, it would be nice to have an alternative international organization (or set of organizations) that would parallel the effect of United Nations membership but with slightly different rules. To ensure competative balance, perhaps this alternative could only enforce policies that enjoyed unanimous consent from their members.
The natural response to this would be to ask how likely it would be for this organization to accomplish unanimous consent. Why not have more than one such coalition, each of which is centered around a common theme that would identify why that organization exists (things like socialist nations, or nations dedicated to philosophical analysis of political problems, etc.) To ensure that the membership remains loyal enough to that particular theme, there could be a mechanism by which a majority (or super majority) vote could eliminate members whose actions consistently defy the goals of that coalition.
I suppose another question would be whether these coalitions, if created, should be created and defined by those responsible for maintaining the site, or if the suggestions of players should be solicited for review when deciding which ones come into being. But I'll leave that up to other people's decision.
Any thoughts?
I think the United Nations mechanism is an excellent way to simulate international politics and the mixed blessings of membership in an international community, but what about countries whose philosophical commitments are inconsistent with the United Nations? (I'm not thinking about radical militarism or imperial nations here, but rather countries that reject democratic principles or conceding national sovereignty.)
Unless I'm misunderstanding the descriptions about how the United Nations works in the game, the resolutions and policies adopted by the UN become effective for each member state, and these policies will affect their welfare and description. This presents a tremendous temptation for nations to join the UN, since it theoretically offers an interesting method for faster national development.
While I have no idea how sophisticated programming this feature would be, it would be nice to have an alternative international organization (or set of organizations) that would parallel the effect of United Nations membership but with slightly different rules. To ensure competative balance, perhaps this alternative could only enforce policies that enjoyed unanimous consent from their members.
The natural response to this would be to ask how likely it would be for this organization to accomplish unanimous consent. Why not have more than one such coalition, each of which is centered around a common theme that would identify why that organization exists (things like socialist nations, or nations dedicated to philosophical analysis of political problems, etc.) To ensure that the membership remains loyal enough to that particular theme, there could be a mechanism by which a majority (or super majority) vote could eliminate members whose actions consistently defy the goals of that coalition.
I suppose another question would be whether these coalitions, if created, should be created and defined by those responsible for maintaining the site, or if the suggestions of players should be solicited for review when deciding which ones come into being. But I'll leave that up to other people's decision.
Any thoughts?