NationStates Jolt Archive

LawAlone has submitted a proposal to the UN in the hope that it will soon be submitted to the attention of Regional UN Delegates and that many of them will vote it, so that this most important resolution be submitted to the judgement of the whole United Nations
This proposal starts from a set of fundamental assumptions about the individual rights to happiness and liberty and that these rights will never be achieved without PRIVATE PROPERTY
Thus, LawAlone proposes that the UN itself protects Private Property against communist legislations willing to abolish it
LawAlone sincerely hopes that all freedom loving states will understand how important this resolution is and will help it become a UN-approved Resolution
Thank you,
The Dictator of LawAlone

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: LawAlone

Description: Seeing that
1) no man can actually be free without the ownership of material wealth
2) happiness and stability cannot be acquired without the posession of objects and money
3) one of the main duties of a State is to defend the rights of ALL his citizens and not just of an elite
the Republic of LawAlone proposes that
Private Property be granted to all citizens in any State around the world and that no Government be allowed to take it away by means of Law

We consider 1) and 2) to be convergent-thinking claptrap.

Um... have you ever heard of taxes? Land requisition for building motorways? Confiscation of the gun you were shooting pedestrians with?

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: LawAlone

Description: Seeing that
1) no man can actually be free without the ownership of material wealth
2) happiness and stability cannot be acquired without the posession of objects and money
3) one of the main duties of a State is to defend the rights of ALL his citizens and not just of an elite
the Republic of LawAlone proposes that
Private Property be granted to all citizens in any State around the world and that no Government be allowed to take it away by means of Law

We consider 1) and 2) to be convergent-thinking claptrap.

Um... have you ever heard of taxes? Land requisition for building motorways? Confiscation of the gun you were shooting pedestrians with?


The representative from Bootai-Bootai does not fully agree with Rehochipe's position. Perhaps the clauses do not accurately convey the meaning that Bootai-Bootai believes they are trying to convey. A more accurate (but still lacking) way to reword these clauses may be to combine them into a single clause similar to this one:

Recognizing that
The right to liberty is intimately bound to the right of individuals and entities to posses and use freely those objects obtained in accordance with national and international law that allow them to conduct activities in accordance with the liberty garenteed them guaranteed.

Nonetheless, this is a fairly flawed resolution for a number of reasons and probably should be re-written. The aquisition of private property by the government should not be completely outlawed since even in the most liberatrian nations the government takes private property from individuals, as Rehochipe has stated. Also, generally the way that the resolution is worded is problematic (that "Private property be granted to all citizens in any State" sounds like the resolution is forcing UN nations to actually give property to individuals.)

I'm sorry to inform the sponsor of this proposal that The Confederacy of Alphared will not endorse this proposal as written. It's fundemental clauses do not stand up to logic, and seems to promote one socio-economic system at the expense of all others (namely capitalism).

His Holiness the Governor-General objects to this proposal twofold.

His Holiness first states this proposal violates national sovereignty.

His Holiness also asserts this proposal would be in violation of the Economic Rights Act, which will most likely come to pass quite soon, as that proposal *enshrines* sovereignty rather than defiles sovereignty.

[signed]
The Bishop Fred al-Rubei of The Directorate of Foreign Relations of The Dominion of North East Cathanistan

We agree with Rehochipe.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Do you know what ‘gay science’ is?

I disagree with this proposal, as several Native American tribes demonstrated that it is perfectly possible to be both free and happy without communally owned property.

Apart from the replies of those who really seem to disagree with the whole concept of "private property" (and consequently with the proposal altogether), I suppose LawAlone's intent has been misunderstood
The proposal does NOT want to force the UN into *giving* goods to people, but is more adherent to Bootai-Bootai's scheme:

"Recognizing that
The right to liberty is intimately bound to the right of individuals and entities to posses and use freely those objects obtained in accordance with national and international law that allow them to conduct activities in accordance with the liberty garenteed them guaranteed. "

so...if anybody wants to help rephrase this proposal, or contribute something to it..they're welcome to do so. you can post your ideas in the forum or send a telegram to LawAlone, so we can discuss them privately. LawAlone is ready to modify its proposal with any rewording or additions that can help the UN (and the World) understand what the proposal exactly wants to obtain
Sincerely,
The Dictator of LawAlone

Um, I just wanted to let you know that that garunteed at the end was a typo.