NationStates Jolt Archive

More people need to read and actually think through the various UN resolutions! At the surface level many UN resolutions look good; But, when you actually read the resolutions and THINK about how they will impact nations, it becomes quite evident that many of them are idiotic, or at least poorly thought out.

For example, the IRCO resolution that just passed was a good idea - EXCEPT that it only benefits UN-member nations and that it places a NGO (non-governmental organization) under a completely corruptible political entity. The beauty of NGOs is that they're non-governmental and thus the aid that they provide comes without any political strings attached.

How difficult would it have been to rewrite the resolution to make it more just, democratic, and overall better? Why settle for second best when we can create something much better?

Until more people actually think through the resolutions, we're all destined to get more crap passed through the UN. I'm beginning to see why nations decide to remain outside of the UN.

here here!

here here!

I'm sure the correct term is; Hear Hear! :mrgreen:

Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...

I totally agree. Think about everything presented to you. And when you're done, think about it again. But Opressed Possums is right. In a world with so many nations run by not-so-perceptive teen agers you're going to have a lot of people take noble proposals for face value.

Maybe some people would think we take this too seriously, and it's just a game. But I don't know... it seems as though this game would stimulate the exact kind of thinking the world needs THE MOST these days. People can't be lulled into complacency.

EXCEPT that it only benefits UN-member nations and that it places a NGO (non-governmental organization) under a completely corruptible political entity. The beauty of NGOs is that they're non-governmental and thus the aid that they provide comes without any political strings attached.

The one difference between our UN and the real UN: resolutions CAN NOT affect non-UN members. It's game mechanics. We can go to war with non-UN nations if we don't like their policies, but we can't force UN resolutions to be recognized in thier governments.

How difficult would it have been to rewrite the resolution to make it more just, democratic, and overall better? Why settle for second best when we can create something much better?

Not thinking hard enough. It's simply complacency.

Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...

Many of which have populations of over a billion.

I totally agree.
Thats whi I submitted a proposal titled, "IRCO Revision".
That addresses the issue of non-member nations being exlcuded from aid.
I hope you all will peruse it and approve it.

You realise that none of this is real, right?

You realise that none of this is real, right?

It's real enough. What's your point?

You realise that none of this is real, right?

It's real enough. What's your point?
My point is that you are all RPing about boring crap, dangnabbit!!!!! What in the name of HELL is so interesting about debating these boring, mundane, tedious, disinteresting, unfunny, useless things?

You realise that none of this is real, right?

It's real enough. What's your point?
My point is that you are all RPing about boring crap, dangnabbit!!!!! What in the name of HELL is so interesting about debating these boring, mundane, tedious, disinteresting, unfunny, useless things?

Get a life.

You don't have to participate if you don't want to do so.

You realise that none of this is real, right?

It's real enough. What's your point?
My point is that you are all RPing about boring crap, dangnabbit!!!!! What in the name of HELL is so interesting about debating these boring, mundane, tedious, disinteresting, unfunny, useless things?

Get a life.

You don't have to participate if you don't want to do so.
Just friendly advice, my fellow fool.
You Meretrix Masculana.

We the People's Republic Of Amyth have enshrined the right to abstain from reading or thinking. We feel that the right to utter stupidity should have been added to the current proposal human rights part II. We would also like to note that
Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...
Does this mean that Democracy is inefficient in a Counrty of over 70,000 citizens, cause this could be the source of many of the worlds problems.

We thank you all not to read or think or comment about this...

We the People's Republic Of Amyth have enshrined the right to abstain from reading or thinking. We feel that the right to utter stupidity should have been added to the current proposal human rights part II. We would also like to note that
Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...
Does this mean that Democracy is inefficient in a Counrty of over 70,000 citizens, cause this could be the source of many of the worlds problems.

We thank you all not to read or think or comment about this...

'I sure hope you voters ARE as dumb as you look.' Quote polititions should have said in debates but didn't.

We the People's Republic Of Amyth have enshrined the right to abstain from reading or thinking. We feel that the right to utter stupidity should have been added to the current proposal human rights part II. We would also like to note that
Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...
Does this mean that Democracy is inefficient in a Counrty of over 70,000 citizens, cause this could be the source of many of the worlds problems.

We thank you all not to read or think or comment about this...

Have you ever heard 70,000 voices all screaming at once? It isn't a pretty sight. Everyone will want to be heard. There are only so many minutes in a day to listen to anything...

Besides, a republic is more effective. It's far more powerful to have someone say that 70,000 support someone or something than having the 70,000 people individually saying that.

'I sure hope you voters ARE as dumb as you look.' Quote polititions should have said in debates but didn't.

Our glorious leader is grateful for your expressed hope that his tenure in power is long and un-opposed, however, we at the PROA have banned the voting process and our glorious leader, the right honourable Prime Minister is in for ever.

We thank you all for your support...

We the People's Republic Of Amyth have enshrined the right to abstain from reading or thinking. We feel that the right to utter stupidity should have been added to the current proposal human rights part II. We would also like to note that
Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...
Does this mean that Democracy is inefficient in a Counrty of over 70,000 citizens, cause this could be the source of many of the worlds problems.

We thank you all not to read or think or comment about this...

Have you ever heard 70,000 voices all screaming at once? It isn't a pretty sight. Everyone will want to be heard. There are only so many minutes in a day to listen to anything...

Besides, a republic is more effective. It's far more powerful to have someone say that 70,000 support someone or something than having the 70,000 people individually saying that.

Isn't a republic supposed to be a democracy?

And personally, I don't want to be heard, so there would only be 69,999 voices screaming.

I think the thoughts of Scylding are valid though. While we can not force UN Resolutions on non member states it only takes a couple of minutes to read a proposal through

Have you ever heard 70,000 voices all screaming at once? It isn't a pretty sight. Everyone will want to be heard. There are only so many minutes in a day to listen to anything...

Besides, a republic is more effective. It's far more powerful to have someone say that 70,000 support someone or something than having the 70,000 people individually saying that.

Isn't a republic supposed to be a democracy?

And personally, I don't want to be heard, so there would only be 69,999 voices screaming.[/quote]

We the People's Republic Of Amyth had the challenge of trying to run a democratic nation with everybody screaming. After many idea's were tried and dismissed we have developed the concept of using a hidden ballot. This allowed our citizens to have their say without all the noise, or fear of reprisals. We at the PROA would be happy to offer assistance to any Nation looking to set up a similar system.

We the People's Republic Of Amyth have enshrined the right to abstain from reading or thinking. We feel that the right to utter stupidity should have been added to the current proposal human rights part II. We would also like to note that
Democracy is inefficient in a world of over 70,000 nations...
Does this mean that Democracy is inefficient in a Counrty of over 70,000 citizens, cause this could be the source of many of the worlds problems.

We thank you all not to read or think or comment about this...

Hear, hear! The efficiency of democracy shouldn't even be an issue! The fact that democracy is considered inefficient by some in reality is precisely the source of many of the world's problems.

I totally agree.
Thats whi I submitted a proposal titled, "IRCO Revision".
That addresses the issue of non-member nations being exlcuded from aid.
I hope you all will peruse it and approve it.

Thank you. I was much pleased with your "IRCO Revision" proposal. As you said, it deals with "the issue of non-member nations being exlcuded [sic] from aid." It's a smart revision, and I would've supported it; except, unfortunately within the realm of this game, UN resolutions CAN'T affect non-UN members. It's part of the game mechanics, and a shortcoming that may never be appropriately addressed.

Originally, I didn't know that UN resolutions can't affect non-UN members. But, the other key reason I didn't vote for the IRCO resolution is because it places IRCO under the management of the UN. The mistake of this action is that the UN is a political therefore corruptible entity just like any other governmental body. Humanitarian aid shouldn't have any political strings, which is why it's important that organizations like the Red Cross/Red Crecent remain NGOs.

Oonamahambra wrote:

I totally agree. Think about everything presented to you. And when you're done, think about it again. But Opressed Possums is right. In a world with so many nations run by not-so-perceptive teen agers you're going to have a lot of people take noble proposals for face value.

Maybe some people would think we take this too seriously, and it's just a game. But I don't know... it seems as though this game would stimulate the exact kind of thinking the world needs THE MOST these days. People can't be lulled into complacency.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you. However, as I said before, the efficiency of democracy shouldn't ever be an issue. Many nations very well may be run by "not-so-perceptive teen agers [sic]," but: 1) I've experienced many teenagers who are more perceptive and thoughtful than many adults and 2) Just because someone isn't perceptive doesn't mean that the rest of us can't try and kindly educate/inform them.

Naturally some people think we take this game too serioiusly, for example, The Piece of Yellowfat posted, "You realise that none of this is real, right?" (Thanks for pointing out the obvious, Yellowfat). But, as you correctly express, Oonamahambra, this game should help stimulate good, sound political and social thought, which is precisely what "the world needs the most these days," now more than ever.

what really disturbs me is when people takes thing to literally in resolutions. i mean who are those delegates that keep passing these proposals for us delegates and un members to vote for? i never pass this recent bill for to vote. all we need to do is to get the delegates to understand each and every bill that is put to open for delegates to get it to pass. it is a must. everytime a bill is brought up for vote all we do is backlash at it but we won't win because the delegates who put it in the floor has its members to support it and make it happen, alright? all we need to do is broaden our topics in this forum. thats all the questions that we need to do to make silly bills not get into our un floors...

We would like to know why the IORC proposal cannot affect non member nations? While we know that the game mechanics do not allow for the actual influence of the proposal to be felt, there is no reason why for rp purposes the NSun could not implement an emergency assistance organisation which helps out non-member states. When was the last time your nation had it's population deciamted by a disaster? Wouldn't a little IORC help out? Are there actual game mechanics in place for disasters?

We would like to know why the IORC proposal cannot affect non member nations? While we know that the game mechanics do not allow for the actual influence of the proposal to be felt, there is no reason why for rp purposes the NSun could not implement an emergency assistance organisation which helps out non-member states. When was the last time your nation had it's population deciamted by a disaster? Wouldn't a little IORC help out? Are there actual game mechanics in place for disasters?

War is a disaster as far as the IRCO is concerned. I think the wording even allows the IRCO to fight the war for a country that asks for help.