NationStates Jolt Archive

I have proposed the following UN resolution, I ask that you all go and vote for it, and that you all do your best to help it get passed..

Self Inforcement
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: The Furtherment of Democracy Strength: Mild Proposed by: The Byzantine League
Description: We the Byzantine League here by propose that all nations with in the UN retain the Right to implement a UN resolution in a means they seem fit. In addition we propose that the UN can not interfere with how a nation chooses to implement a UN resolution with in its own country.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 136 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Mon Dec 29 2003

8) it seems reasonable enouph. but why do you want it?

Besides being sensible it would be realistic.

We of we are all Humanoids find this proposal dangerous! If this were implemented then any nation could, and many certainly would, ignore any UN resolution that they did not like, or that may have effects within their nation or region they did not like.

The basis of membership of the UN is that all nations will implement all resolutions that are passed. Without this there is little reason for having the UN!

If this proposal is passed, and if the subsequent resolution were passed then the UN would become no more than a debating chamber, where delegates could pontificate while other nations waged war on the innocent and starved the poor for their own personal gain!

We Strongly urge all nations to reject this proposal!

This proposal is going to die... it affects game mechanics. You should see the rules for UN Resolutions.

I agree...any one nation can choose to ignore any one resolution...there'd be no point.

But this proposal doesn't say the resolutions can be ignored, it says they will be enforced, only in custom-tailored ways. Exactly how then does this affect game mechanics?

this proposal would not prevent a UN resolution from being implemented, it would just allow for a nation to incorporate it using the language of law that a Nation is used to, plus it would make things allot more affordable for the UN because now the Member states will have all the financial responsibility for implementing UN resolution, and hence the UN would save lots of money. Plus this proposal is with in the Spirit of international cooperation. Isn't the Idea to get all nations cooperating voluntarily to the same Ideals?

would it be possible for UN resolutions (once passed) to come with several options for compliance, each with differing levels OF that same compliance?

this would have the appearance of maintaining national sovereignty while at the same time allowing for a fully functioning UN.

The Republic of Cannaganja issues the following official statement regarding the proposal. It farking blows!

The Federation of Soltak feels that this proposal would undermine the authority of the UN and cause a rift to grow between the UN and its member nations.

I refuse to support this proposal.

Durtistan feels that a weak United Nations serves no purpose. itmight as well not exist.

The purpose of debating resolutions before they are voted on or passed is to introduce ammendments to them. If member nations do not approve of a proposal, they should take the opportunity to have changes made at this stage. Graded implimentation and allowing member nations to ignore UN resolutions is folly. Since UN Membership is voluntary and since no nation is required to be a member, Nations who express extreme dissatisfaction with resolutions passed should leave. At that point, the issue of compliance no longer matters.

If the number of members leaving means that the UN does in fact become powerless and ceases to have meaning then they have registered their protest in the best way possible. This recourse is open to all and does not require debate.

My country is always in favor of democracy and likes to see it spread. This is a very sensible piece of legislation which is very interesting.


One problem: it creats loopholes for nations who want the UN's protection without accepting UN legislation.

If this article has provisions, I will support it.


General Zircon, Desra

Given the last clause of this proposal, the UN would be rendered unable to enforce any resolution, no matter how extremely violated. Further, I think it could be argued that the effective abolishment of the Ministry of Compliance would be a change to the game mechanics.

Desra, what provisions would you like to see happen to this proposal?

Self Inforcement
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy Strength: Mild Proposed by: The Byzantine League
Description: We the Byzantine League here by propose that all nations with in the UN retain the Right to implement a UN resolution in a means they seem fit. In addition we propose that the UN can not interfere with how a nation chooses to implement a UN resolution with in its own country.


A foolish proposal that ultimately undermines democracy rather that furthers its strength, or such is the position of Salliston.

If we allow individual nations to custom-design the consequences of resolutions, dialogue surrounding issues will become obsolete, ultimately destroying the free exchange of ideas that makes true democracy possible. This is something that cannot be allowed to occur.

Also, by allowing the customization of UN decisions, democracy is not better served because anarchy is supported. When there is no rule of law, no order, no true reliability of the system, then anarchy seeps into those wounds and festers like a disease. If we are to maintain clear order under democracy, we cannot allow this resolution to pass!

i cannot support the proposal

we have join the UN so we must abide by the laws set out by it, when resolutions are proposed we all have the right to vote for/against.we must go with the majority. if you see fit to speak out about it then do so but as members of the UN we must show we are willing to accept all without question. we cannot say oh i like that one we will use it or i dont like that one im not doing that, it makes a mockery of all that is lawful.


KING J of Myrulesia

Last time I checked, you had to use proper english to submit a proposal, so it wouldnt fly anyways. Enforcement is with an E. Kinda like Police Enforcement.

Anywho. It is just another blanket proposal that will give all the dictators (like myself) a loophole to get around things, as if there was not enough of those anyways. Seriously people, go look at the passed proposals, you can usually find DOZENS of loopholes around all of them as they are all, for the most part, poorly written or does not emphasize anything, like definitions.

Ex: Landmine Resolution.
It does NOT even specify what a land mine is! Later on some dude posted how he was going to change the names of his land mines to land traps, as land traps are not covered in the resolution. AND GUESS WHAT! He can. There isnt anything in that resolution saying you cant do things like that.

For the last part, U.N. membership is voluntary. If you dont like it, leave. Nations that dont like what happens should learn to read the small print, like the part where ALL NATIONS MUST ABIDE BY THE RULES, not just the rules it wants to abide by. That is so f*%&ing stupid. Not to mention childish. Either fess up and obey the laws, whatever they are like everyone else, or get the hell out. People like YOU add to the fact that this place is a mockery led by the silent majority.

But don't you see that this resolution actualy ensures UN Resolution complience, and makes the UN even stronger, and advances democratic freedoms?

You mean by implementing a resolution however the nation seems fit?

I would just choose not to implement anything at all, or a tiny, worthless part of it. Such as the healthcare one that is up now. I will create a board that consists of a single person, might be a doctor even. He will tell the U.N. that the healthcare resolution is in place, implemented by how I want it to be in my country.

So it would be implemented. There would be an actual review board for it, some step to ensure it exists. But that would be it. If that could be done with all the resolutions, the U.N. will become a larger joke than it already is.

While I agree with you, that the U.N. should not pass laws based off of religious spats (Gay marriage, abortion) because too many people will disagree with them in one way or another. But THAT is what we should be fighting, what kind of resolutions can pass, as they do effect everyone. But to ignore the law out of hand just because your rights are infringed, is wrong. READ THE SMALL PRINT. You dont HAVE to be in the U.N. Membership is voluntary. But if you cannot even expect its nations to abide by what little rules there are now, what can the U.N. hope to accomplish?

if the last clause in the Proposal were to be eliminated, "In addition we propose that the UN can not interfere with how a nation chooses to implement a UN resolution with in its own country." Would then the proposal be satisfactory to every one's needs?