NationStates Jolt Archive

*Standing behind a side curtain, GD Hendrik shoves a bewildered academician on the stage. The tall, thin, grey-haired man begins to speak... *

"Uh, I'm Prof. Ludwig du' Applewattle, Professor of International Affairs at the Royal Laioian University. The facualty and students of this most learned institution have come to gather to form an organization to encourage and educate non-UN nations on the benefits and responsibilities of joining the UN."

"The government pf the Grand Duchy of Laio has initially funded the Save the UN Foundation to the generous sum of 253,407 bongs and 34 tokes (100 tokes to a bong). The Foundation request that other concerned nations, join with us and provide additional funding."

"Remember, if you are not a member of the UN... you are powerless. By working together... we can educate the leaders of the world to the dangers that the One-Worlders pose."

Professor, would you be so kind as to clarify who and what you mean when you refer to the 'One-Worlders'?

Frank Chalmers
Speaker for International Relations
Community of Ecopoeia

*Unfamiliar with life outside a classroom, being questioned startled the learned professor, he quickly recovered and said... *

"The UN is currently controlled by a majority that promotes strengthening the powers of this august body. When this organization was founded, in the dark days following WW2, its powers were never meant to be greater than those of its weakest member."

"To many proposals have been adopted by this faction... that has steadily eroded the independence of member nations and un-aligned states. The only way to stop this march towards a world dictatorship, is by being a part of the process and defeating these harmful measures by the vote."

The learned professor's response raises just a few questions:

When this organization was founded, in the dark days following WW2

1) What is this WW2 of which you speak? This UN was founded by the Most Exalted Max Barry, about...ooh, a year or so ago - and it is entirely within the hands of its members to set the limits of its power.

"To many proposals have been adopted by this faction... that has steadily eroded the independence of member nations and un-aligned states.

How can the UN undermine the independence of non-aligned states? This organisation does not have the power to affect them in any way.

The only way to stop this march towards a world dictatorship, is by being a part of the process and defeating these harmful measures by the vote."

We agree that increased democratic participation in the UN is desirable. However, we fail to see how the UN is becoming a dictatorship. These "harmful measures" are passing because the vast majority of UN members approve them and are happy that this body is passing measures for the benefit of humankind.

Comrade Chomsky
Delegate for Foreign Affairs

The mechanics of the UN are such that, intrusive resolutions aside, the sovereignty of nations and the strength of the UN are reasonably well fixed. The 'Rights & Duties' resolution, for us, was a well-judged and accurate definition of the relative rights and strengths.

I disagree that there is a majority controlling the UN. Distressingly few nations are active in the discussions on this forum and those that are active have arguably too little influence on major proposals; hence the pasing of the euthanasia and prostitution resolutions. Too many passive members are happy to vote without thinking. Shame on the delegates that allow poor proposals to even reach the floor - possibly these are the 'controllers' that need censure.

We absolutely agree with you that the answer is to increase membership - this in itself is a boon to peace and security - and also to encourage active membership and informed debate and decision making.

We thank the esteemed professor for his reponse.

Frank Chalmers

I disagree that there is a majority controlling the UN.

OK, strike out "vast majority" in our last post. But 18,478 nations voted on the Rights and Duties proposal, for a turnout of 48.9%. But we would argue that that represents a healthy turnout, because:

[lengthy OOC bit] given that the turnout in the 2000 US elections was 51.3% and given that a) there's no way of measuring abstentions, b) there's doubtless a lot of inactive nations among those 37,758 UN members and c) this is only a game - I think a lot of people probably only spend time on the UN forums and examining proposals at weekends, if at all. Not everyone is a student or lucky enough to have a job where they can get away with spending all day on the UN forums, hem hem.

And I won't go along with the complaints about "sheep", either. The only proposal I've seen that that might genuinely apply to is the Save the Forests one. I think many players vote on resolutions because they like the game mechanics effect (which, while I wouldn't do that myself because I'm in this for the RP, I have no problem with - this is a game, remember?).

[back in character]And many more vote on resolutions based on a quick impression of what it's about. What's wrong with that? Why should we demand that every nation has to take the time to plough through what often amounts to several paragraphs of dense legalese? It's the job of these forums to make proposals as clear, readable and free of loopholes as possible.

Delegates are the issue, really. The point of the UN should be to allow each nation as much or little involvement in the resolution-making process as it wants. That means that if the "sheep" want to just skim through the proposals at vote and hit yes or no, fine. But the delegates are the ones with the real power, and they're the ones who should be in here all the time. So we agree with Ecopoeia on this:

Shame on the delegates that allow poor proposals to even reach the floor - possibly these are the 'controllers' that need censure.

But we actually feel that the general level of democratic participation in the UN is higher than the cynics make out.

[OOC]Once more with feeling: it's just a game. We can't expect every player to spend as much time on these forums as us slackers do.
[edited to add]: we should probably stress that this is not in any way an attack on Ecopoeia. It was more fuelled by the oft-repeated whines about "sheep" that mar these forums.

The glorious nation of Bahgum can understand the sentiments of our fellow most concerned nations. However, it is likely that we shall just have to learn to accept that many delegates, don't have the time/inclination to do the required first rate job.
There is no game mechanic to rectify this (i.e. sacking delegates for not posting in a forum at least once a month), but delegates could be sent direct messages from concerned nations. Identifying them is a big job, but if the UN friendly states here did 10 each, that could make a difference.
Meanwhile our superb leader has instructed the UN ambassador of Bahgum to continue to submit what we view as important issues for resolution at the UN. We just have to live with only having a handful of endorsements and being passed over by boring obvious proposals and those written by 7 year olds. A Bahgum proposal which made quorum would be a most joyous event though......

I wish to assure East Hackney that I take no offence to his words. Indeed, I welcome them. My original post was made when in a...shall we say...sour mood. I stand by my comment but wish I'd phrased it a little more softly.

Kind regards
Frank Chalmers

Ultimately, it is down to the nations of each region to ensure that their delegate is representing them properly. Our main concerns are the various Pacific delegates - 1 Infinite Loop and Francos Spain wield huge bloc votes, but are seen all too rarely on this forum. Why do they hold the UN delegate positions if they have no desire to use them? And why do the nations of the Pacific continue to allow this state of affairs?

Ultimately, it is down to the nations of each region to ensure that their delegate is representing them properly. Our main concerns are the various Pacific delegates - 1 Infinite Loop and Francos Spain wield huge bloc votes, but are seen all too rarely on this forum. Why do they hold the UN delegate positions if they have no desire to use them? And why do the nations of the Pacific continue to allow this state of affairs?

We wholly agree with these sentiments - indeed the absence of such members (especially 1 Infinite Loop, as our former delegate) prompted the DSH to move away from the East Pacific because of the lack of any sustained drive from the delegate.
_________________________
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/hirota.jpgThe Democratic States of Hirota (DSH) (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hirota)
http://www.nationstates.net/images/un_member.gif For the region of cm4rums (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/32808/page=display_region/region=cm4rums)