NationStates Jolt Archive

Please, UN members, take a look at this new proposal.

It's about eliminating Rave music, raising the musical culture and knowledge of all childs. The main objective of eliminating Rave music it's because syntethic drugs are mainly consumed during rave parties.
Well, and it's true that music stimulates our intelligence, so it would be a good thing for all the world.

The propossal is actually on page 13.

Compulsory Music Lessons

A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.
*

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Reich de Metal

Description: Compulsory Music Lessons
A resolution to improve musical knowledge in order to give an end to Rave music.

CONSIDERING that rave and unbearable electronic music is tearing apart many of our youngsters lives;
RECOGNIZING the most influent areas where to purchase synthetic drugs and other illegal substances are places where rave music is listened to, reason why these drugs are best known as “dance” or “recreational “ drugs
CONVINCED that compulsory music lessons will keep children of rave music and therefore from synthetic drugs;
REQUESTS a council formed by a teaching board, psychologists, pedagogues, music experts and social counsellors, to elaborate a report on the viability of the resolution and then act in consequence;

1. DECIDES to plea for a General United Nations Counsel on Musical Education no longer than July this year in order to be able to elaborate a new studies plan for the new school year which starts 7th of September, and humbly accepts the The Lines Government offer to hold the Counsel.

ANNEX

DEFINITIONS
In the present resolution and its aspects:

a) Rave music is all music made by computer generated sounds ordered in such a way that tries to make believe it is music. This music can be divided into different styles, hardcore, noisecore, softcore, dance, house, acid, acidhouse, although all have the same basis. It is well known that this music is normally accompanied by synthetic drugs such as ecstasy and amphetamines not taken under many other circumstances but under influence of electronic rave music.
b) synonymously with dance or recreational drugs following the emergence of the synthetic drug ecstasy (MDMA) and other ring-substituted amphetamines in the recreational dance drug scene, although non-synthetic drugs, such as cannabis, cocaine and magic mushrooms, are also consumed in these settings. Synthetic drugs with long histories of illicit use include amphetamines and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), while ecstasy (MDMA) and other drugs have much shorter histories of illicit use. There is growing global concern about the potential manufacture of other and newer synthetic drugs sold as an alternative to MDMA, or added to MDMA tablets. The ease with which many 'synthetic drugs' can be manufactured constitutes a challenge to efforts to control supply, as laboratories can be set up and moved with relative ease. Some synthetic drugs, not all, have hallucinogenic effects and may be either stimulants or depressants of the central nervous system (CNS), the latter being the case for GHB. There are also synthetic opiates, such as methadone, pethidine (MPPP, MPTP), fentanyl, 3-methyl-fentanyl, etc. 'Designer drugs' are chemical analogues of controlled drugs. Illegal producers modify slightly the molecular structure of a prohibited substance in order to obtain similar or stronger pharmacological effects, thereby avoiding prosecution. The Heavy Metal Land Joint Action, on new synthetic drugs was launched in May 2004 with the purpose of preventing and/or limiting the extension of such practices.
(Assertion taken from The Annual report on the state of drugs problems in the Heavy Metal Land’s territories)

Objections:
1) Legislating on purely aesthetic choices is not valid.
2) In some nations, the drugs listed below are legal.
3) Your assumption that musical education will necessarily make people stop liking a particular music form is baseless.
4)
Rave music is all music made by computer generated sounds ordered in such a way that tries to make believe it is music.
This is a silly definition. Just about all musical genres use computer-generated elements to some extent.
5) not taken under many other circumstances but under influence of electronic rave music.
False. I know of many people who take these drugs regularly, but never go to raves.
6) If nations don't want music to be part of their core syllabus, they shouldn't have to have it there. Approach to the arts is a national issue.
7) Personally, I don't see how someone who's into metal can pretend to have more taste than ravers.

Yours,
PDK Orthmann
Ministry of Wu-Wei (Civil Liberties and the Arts)

I came from a grade school that had music forced into its curriculum for all students, and it was horrible (as was the rest of the school). I say, hire music teachers, but make the classes optional. Forced curriculum will just make the kids more depressed and more prone to using said drugs. Shouldn't this be an issue of sovereignty as well?

DP

This is what the proposal is saying:

Music Education->Kids aquire an aversion to rave music->Kids stop going to raves->Kids stop using drugs!!!!

Do you honestly think that teaching kids about music in school is going to make them hate popular youth music? I guess kids learn to love science and literature from their elementary school education too, right?

Secondlly, kids are going to party whether or not they listen to techno or rave music. (OOC: You sound like a European... I'm an American and very few people listen to techno here.)

Thirdly, the UN does not function as a universal morality police. Why don't we just ban all rock/modern music? Well, at the beginning of the century some people objected to jazz music as encouraging amorality. So then let's just ban everything but traditional/classical music. Well, some of those traditional songs have immoral and shocking themes, including sexual and violent lyrics. In the early 17th century, some people complained that the "new style" of music (Baroque) "stirred up the youths' passions."

Geez, let's just ban all types of music. While we're at it, we should ban dancing, colors in clothing, gambling, opposite genders touching each other in public...

NOTE: editted out overly mean statments :(

We disagree with such resolutions. We believe that enforcing laws designed to reduce the sales of illegal drugs will better suit policies that attempt to keep children off of drugs. This idea will instead ban a genre of music that many enjoy, and will enrage those citizens who may commit violent acts in response, or take more drugs.

Easy there, Stereotype McGee. Just because someone goes to a rave doesn't mean they're a drug-ridden fleabag, and just because someone is forced to play an instrument doesn't mean they're going to become geniuses. In fact, you might piss some people off so much that they ignore music on purpose. Listen to what the others have said: this proposal doesn't solve anything.

as bootai bootai said, the ones who did this proposal are european. And at least, in erurope techno = drugs. There's a social massive though that if you dont have drugs, you arent cool. And almost everyone here uses drugs, and, maybe sounds strange, but without techno it will be in other way... (now people listens more nasty pop, and hard drugs are losing a lot)

And it's science that music improves intelligence, and i got music in my school, and we liked that class.

And another thing, techno music fits on the definition of noise, just take a look to dictionary.

Remember, the effort of lots of people to do music, cant be compared with 1 drug addict with a computer.

This isn't Europe.

In my country you can get drugs from the chemist, are we going to ban chemists now?

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

Well I got news for ya, bub - this isn't Europe. This is NationStates.

Well I got news for ya, bub - this isn't Europe. This is NationStates.
Hay you stole my post! :P

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

some dumb people who wants an easy joke eh?

Read the stuff before posting anything. Thas lil part of post was talking about the people in front of the monitor.

Common myths debunked

People who legalise drugs are drug addicts- false Personally I believe in freedom of choice.

Ravers = drug addicts- false Just because you're at a rave doesn’t mean you have to say yes.

Musicians = geniuses- false Some are some aren’t.

Rave music isn't seen as music- false Stop cluttering legislation with personal preferences.

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

( APPLAUSE )

Saves me a long post, :wink:

- Le Représentant de Komokom.

Ministre Régional de Substance.
L'Ordre de Vaillant États.
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/komokom.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/24401/page=display_nation)
Aspirez a la legalite avec l'egalite

<--- Not a Moderator, just a Know It All.

The music and drug argument has been used again and again. It is just a convenient way for people to rationalise drug taking without looking at the issue itself. It is always far easier to blame something else, than to look at the issue face on.

The fact is that people like taking drugs, why else do alcohol exist, which is nothing but a legal drug in most nations. It is just a matter that some drugs are considered more socially acceptable. The real question is more social and psychological. Why do individuals enjoy drugs? Is it purely personal escapism from society or perhaps from personal problems? Could it be that as much as some would like to frown upon it, individuals might just like it, like others like to drinking alcohol and there is no other reason for it?

The fact of the matter remains that millions and millions of individuals will take drugs every night across the world and not always in clubs and no matter what governments do this will always be the case. Society as a whole have and always will have drug culture, from the birth of society drugs has been used by many cultures for both spiritual and entertainment purposes. The fact that something is illegal, only serves to spur on a culture to try ‘forbidden fruit’ and to rebel against a state that is seen as over bearing.

It is for these reasons we reject the measures in this proposal. Whilst we agree that safety of its citizens is of primary importance to any government, we feel this is better served by ensuring that for those individuals who do wish to take drugs it is safe from them do so by removing the black market element. Many drugs have highly complex chemistry and as such should only be made by qualified individuals. Other drugs are harmful and cause long-term dependency even in its purest form and by educating and allowing individuals to make an informed choice it will ultimately lead to these drugs decreasing in demand as they become more socially unacceptable.

This is not an easy strategy for any government to take, but without allowing a society to start taking responsibility for itself, it will never grow from adolescence. The state cannot go on forever making decisions for its citizens; it should rather help its citizens make right ones.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
HM Government of Telidia

We applaud the thoroughly sensible attitude of the government of Telidia.

For those of you still undecided on the question of whether music leads to genius, I present the following sampling of musical artists and their craft. Make your own decisions.

Get Low
By Lil' John
To the window, to the wall, (to dat wall)
Till the sweat drip down my balls (my balls)
To all these bitches crawl (crawl)
To all skeet skeet motherfvcker. All skeet skeet God damn.
To all skeet skeet motherfvcker. All skeet skeet God damn.

While I can respect the idea that John's use of urban slang in his music exposes other cultures to the uniqueness of ebonics, I don't think his pairing of "to the window, to the wall" counts as poetry when paired with the genius of "to the sweat drip down my balls."

I'm A Slave 4 U
By Britney Spears
Get it get it, get it get it (whooa)
Get it get it, get it get it (whooa)
Get it get it, get it get it (ooooh)
(Panting)

Your first genius indicator should be the title. Britney, ever so clever, has manipulated the homonyms of the number four in and the preposition for. One small step for Britney, one giant leap for those seeking to bastardize the English language. I think the lyrics speak for themselves.

Stand
By REM
If you are confused check with the sun.
Carry a compass to help you along.
Your feet are going to be on the ground.
Your head is there to move you around.

And you thought people figured out what to do with their heads and feet all on their own! No, I imagine without these stunning words of wisdow, there would still be people trying to think with their feet. Thank you, REM. Thank you.

The defense rests.

You all should walk out on street, and take a look to the world around you. When reality beats you all... then come again and vote.

And the music = intelligence stuff, it's science, people who listen music are more intelligent, and techno isnt music. In general terms of course.

I know the world of ravers, i have taken drugs too, and i'm ready to say, i hate all that stuff.

And, drugs should be illegal, 1 joint = 20 cigarrettes.... if euthanasy its illegal why drugs must be legal?

What a brilliantly convoluted mishmash of idiocy and nothingness. Want to throw out some more unsupported generalities there, buddy? If so, let me get out my painfully uniformed opinion net. Wouldn't want to miss any.

PDK Orthmann, Minister for Civil Liberties and the Arts, wandered out onto the street and took a look at the world.

Reality summarily failed to beat him. On the other hand, it did provide a pleasant breeze and a light touch of autumn sunshine. He breathed deeply of the air of the Rehochipean capital Gabran, where drugs (and, for that matter, euthanasia) were legal and cars forbidden. His nostrils quested for the odour of deadly toxic drugs, his ears straining for the sound of sinful, sinful electronica.

Mostly, it smelt of horse dung.

Minister Orthmann sighed, extracted a Biotopian dictaphone from a breast pocket, and flicked the 'on' button with a gesture of world-weary elegance.

"Memo to self. In future, pay no attention to metalheads."

You all should walk out on street, and take a look to the world around you. When reality beats you all... then come again and vote.

And the music = intelligence stuff, it's science, people who listen music are more intelligent, and techno isnt music. In general terms of course.

I know the world of ravers, i have taken drugs too, and i'm ready to say, i hate all that stuff.

And, drugs should be illegal, 1 joint = 20 cigarrettes.... if euthanasy its illegal why drugs must be legal?

In response to the honourable member of Reich de Metal regarding his above comments, I’d like to point out that music is a creative pursuit. The fact that different genres exist is testament to that creative spirit. Whilst I respect his opinion that techno is ‘not music’, others who create or listen to the genre may not feel so. The same as someone who like Country & Western may not like Classical music.

Listening to music fires up emotions, and for that reason the choice of what we do or do not like is as subjective as trying to explain why we may prefer apples to pears. I note and respect the decision you have made, however I’d like to point out that is what we are advocating. You had free will, made decision; decided you didn’t want part of it.

All we are advocating is that citizens have that same right to do so, without the state forcing an opinion or choice on them. By banning a genre you see as associated with drug sub-culture all you are doing is taking that decision away, whilst at the same time you will just create another black market for this genre. The genre will exist regardless whether we ban it or not. Human creativity cannot be controlled.

Respectfully,
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
HM Government of Telidia

Personally, I don't see how someone who's into metal can pretend to have more taste than ravers.

Indeed.

I mean, clearly folk-punk and hip hop are the only true forms of music.

Well, there is absolutely nothing subtle or intellegent about metal. It's just playing the same chords really loud over and over again and screaming into a microphone.

Also, heavy metal encourages youth to be violent and reckless.

So, I will only endorse the current bill if Reich de Metal modifies the bill to also ban heavy metal.

I think we should outlaw all genres of music other than polyrhythmic orchestral.

Honestly, people. Outlawing musical styles is an ignorant practice, much like burning books. People (OOC: like myself) orchestrate symphonies completely electronically; would this law affect them? Who would be the final authority on what is music, or art, and what is not?

Many forms of electronica contain sophisticated musical elements. The genre is not without its hacks and poseurs, but much of it is found to be enjoyable by people who would never touch a recreational substance.

This appears to me to be legislation based on personal preference.

Secondlly, kids are going to party whether or not they listen to techno or rave music. (OOC: You sound like a European... I'm an American and very few people listen to techno here.)

Thirdly, the UN does not function as a universal morality police. Why don't we just ban all rock/modern music? Well, at the beginning of the century some people objected to jazz music as encouraging amorality. So then let's just ban everything but traditional/classical music. Well, some of those traditional songs have immoral and shocking themes, including sexual and violent lyrics. In the early 17th century, some people complained that the "new style" of music (Baroque) "stirred up the youths' passions."

Geez, let's just ban all types of music. While we're at it, we should ban dancing, colors in clothing, gambling, opposite genders touching each other in public...

NOTE: editted out overly mean statments :(

I think you should have left your overly mean statements in.

This proposal is nothing short of censorship of the arts, worse, it is misusing this international body to enforce one particular world view on the rest of us.

Frankly, though we can't (game mechanics) force a proposal to censure a nation, I think this body should certainly consider drafting a freedom of musical expression resolution to prevent future Nazis from closing down the arts.


The analogy I'd use, is Does anybody here think that since the t.v. show Cops has shown wife beaters smoking and drinking Coors, that by banning cigarettes and god awful cheap beer that spousal abuse will decrease?

Of course not. People are going to use drugs no matter what music they listen to.

Finally, a point to consider. In many countries, censorship is real. Often the arts are means of political expression that is otherwise overlooked. Bearing this in mind, my nation is reserves its right to allow any artist the freedom of expression. Furthermore, it is already a matter of international law that people have the right for freedom of choice (we passed a resolution to this effect less than 2 months ago).

This proposal is in violation of the principles of that resolution, and it is my government's opinion that this proposal should be REMOVED from the UN proposal queue if it is there on the grounds that this resolution is seeking to amend or repeal the provisions of a previous resolution!

10kMichael

And it's science that music improves intelligence, and i got music in my school, and we liked that class.

And another thing, techno music fits on the definition of noise, just take a look to dictionary.


You don't have a clue about what you're talking about. There is an entire genre of music called .... *drumroll*

noise.

It is music. Without a doubt.

There other genres called ....

power noise,
noise core,
core,
hard core,
etc.

Some of them are somewhat affliated with techno and house music, but most really are forms of experimental art. Art that a great many of our nations sponsor. My own nation holds an Industrial Music Festival every summer. [OOC: A number of us listen to some of these.]

But this is all pointless, your proposal is in violation of the UN Resolution: The Universal Bill of Rights.


Article 2 -- All human beings have the right to express themselves through speech and through the media without any interference.


TRANSLATION:
Nations can't pull the plug on music just because you don't like it.

But please explain why your attempt at CENSORSHIP isn't in violation of Article 2 of the Universal Bill of Rights, because frankly I think the moderators should just kick your proposal out of the queue.

It looks to me like you're attempting to repeal a previous resolution.

10kMichael

We'd like to poke a couple more holes in his argument, if you please.

1. Your analogy of pot to ciggies doesn't work because
A. Pot is not a syntheticly produced drug, which is what you claim to oppose.
B. Cigs are a drug that some countries (OOC:*cough* RL ones *Cough*) chose to leagalize.
2. All music is noise. So is speech. You simply find patterns in it. Morse Code sounds pretty random if one dosen't know what it is, and the squeal from a modem certainly dosen't make any sense to us. (OOC:Assuming these technologies exist within NS for ease of debate)

Well, there is absolutely nothing subtle or intellegent about metal. It's just playing the same chords really loud over and over again and screaming into a microphone.

Ah, but the worst kind of metal actually is musically quite accomplished. It just makes it worse.

How hard is it to understand? Censorship is both bad and illegal in the NSUN.

And the music = intelligence stuff, it's science, people who listen music are more intelligent, and techno isnt music. In general terms of course.

Techno isn't music, eh? It's got rhythm, notes, melody, chords, harmony, unison, beats, tempo, form, texture, blend, balance, dynamics, tuning, time signatures and bars, and it can even be expressed on paper using all the traditional (European) musical notations -- what more do you need to qualify as music? You need to realize that your semantic personal preference is not scientific in nature.

I know the world of ravers, i have taken drugs too, and i'm ready to say, i hate all that stuff.

Good for you. Ban drugs if they're such a problem. You haven't even attempted to demonstrate a concrete connection between listening to this music and taking harmful illegal drugs. If you don't like the music, fine, don't listen to it. Raving is another form of dancing; if you don't like it, don't participate. It's really just that simple. If so many people hate it, why is it so widely and successfully practiced for profit?

...1 joint = 20 cigarrettes

I think you would do well to read an Institute of Medicine report, commissioned by the United States Office of National Drug Control Policy in 1997, released in 1999 as the largest consolidated body of government research on marijuana, titled: Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base.

The study found that marijuana could not, with the evidence available, be considered a gateway drug which would lead to future addictions to harder drugs; while most users of cocaine or heroin did at one point use marijuana, most users of marijuana never go on to use another drug; rising marijuana use has not led to future increases in use of other drugs, and from the 1960s to 1970s actually established an inverse relation; the report finally states: “There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent use of other illicit drugs.” Regarding addiction, the report stated that:

Compared to most other drugs... dependence among marijuana users is relatively rare... [T]he proportion of marijuana users that ever become dependent in 9 percent of all users, compared to 32 percent of all tobacco users, 15 percent of all alcohol users, 17 percent of all cocaine users, and 23 percent of all heroin users.

Likewise, the Lindesmith Center has found data which indicates that marijuana is not addictive. In a 1993 report, they found that, while 77% of high school students reported having ever used marijuana, 74% of those users hadn’t used any in the past year and 84% had not in the past month.

The negative medical effects of marijuana are also often overestimated. A study by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Medical School which ran for several years comparing smokers of only marijuana, only tobacco, both, and neither, and found that while marijuana-only smokers did sometimes develop lung problems, those problems were fewer and less severe than those in the tobacco-only smoking population. Early studies using THC (the active chemical in marijuana) on small animals such as rhesus monkeys or mice did sometimes result in apparent brain damage, but often required absurdly high doses to do so, sometimes as high as 200 times that which a human might take. The IOM report referenced a more recent study where rhesus monkeys were given face masks and breathed the equivalent of five joints daily for one year without any brain damage; since then, no modern reports have found evidence of significant health risk with moderate use. Some accuse marijuana of demotivating workers or students, but studies which exclude heavy users of the drug have generally found that the average marijuana user has a GPA equal to or higher than that of the average non-user.

Quite simply: the most credible science and study on the matter says that you are basely incorrect.

::santin handing reich his ass in a basket::

-picks jaw up-

You sir, are a gentlemen and a scholar.

*faint* I cannot believe that I actually agree with Sophista on this!
Here goes:
If 20 people go to a rave, and 10 of those 20 cannot dance without taking drugs, is the music to blame? If so, why are the other 10 not getting high?
I think this is a pretty silly resolution.

People who take drugs usually have some or other deep mental scars (low self-esteem, etc), so maybe we should pull a Frued and say: "Blame it on the parents." instead of blaming it on the music.

Oh, look see, a Freedom of Choice resolution ... :)

Now, is it just me, or does the process of brain wash ... sorry, education, proposed in this proposal limit ones choice by trying to phase out a specific and recognised form of musical expression ? Do people not forget music is ultimately a mathematically ordered set of kinetic energy which exerts itself on the molecules and atoms in atmosphere, activity tected by the construct of the sensory organ the ear ?

What next, will you propose to destroy the greats of the seventies because " they used to smoke alot of drugs those days " ?

What about the music of the eighties, eh? Cause " Being out of cocaine then meant it was time to go back to work " ?

( Come to think of it, that would include the ninties too, :wink: )

P.S. Does Rave mean Techno, ? OMG, My X-files techno MP3, you evil ...

:wink:

- Le Représentant de Komokom.

Ministre Régional de Substance.
L'Ordre de Vaillant États.
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/komokom.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/24401/page=display_nation)
Aspirez a la legalite avec l'egalite

<--- Not a Moderator, just a Know It All.

I am a musician, and I have studied many years in order to be able to play guitar and bass. It takes a hell of a lot of time to compose a song. This song could be a total crap for some, or a masterpiece for others, but you can see it's had a lot of work behind it. Rave is not music because mainly it consists of pre-generated sounds on a computer that you just organize and give a rythym Anybody knowing anything about music can play techno. I have nothing against the so called rave music itself, what I don't like is the atmosphere surrounding it.
We are european, so what? When we think of proposals and resolutions and so for this game we tend to imagine things of our everyday lives, and this si what we live here. So you don't like it? Don't vote, nobody will be offende or wil sulk in a corner it's just a game.
We are ever so sorry if we offended anyone, it was not our intention, it was just a way of thinking and as far as I know in United Nations it is still legal to express one's mind.
Thank You very much, and in our next proposals we'll be more carefull with our words and geografic thoughts.
Jason King of the Song.

I am a musician, and I have studied many years in order to be able to play guitar and bass. It takes a hell of a lot of time to compose a song. This song could be a total crap for some, or a masterpiece for others,
And just because you think rave music is 'crap' doesn’t mean some others think it's a master piece.


Rave is not music because mainly it consists of pre-generated sounds on a computer that you just organize and give a rythym Anybody knowing anything about music can play techno.
Personal opinion has no place in legislation.

I have nothing against the so called rave music itself, what I don't like is the atmosphere surrounding it.
Then you are trying to demonise the wrong thing.

We are european, so what? When we think of proposals and resolutions and so for this game we tend to imagine things of our everyday lives, and this si what we live here.
a) This isn't Europe. b) Not everyone's countries resemble Europe.

So you don't like it? Don't vote, nobody will be offende or wil sulk in a corner it's just a game.
I believe it's 'don’t agree, vote no'.

We are ever so sorry if we offended anyone, it was not our intention, it was just a way of thinking and as far as I know in United Nations it is still legal to express one's mind.
Just because we disagree doesn’t mean we are stopping you from saying it. Right to free speech isn't right for people to agree.

And, drugs should be illegal, 1 joint = 20 cigarrettes.... if euthanasy its illegal why drugs must be legal?
Welcome to the UN, euthanasia is legal. The general principal behind it is giving people a choice

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

METAALLLLLLLLLLL \m/

Rave is not music because mainly it consists of pre-generated sounds on a computer that you just organize and give a rythym Anybody knowing anything about music can play techno. I have nothing against the so called rave music itself, what I don't like is the atmosphere surrounding it.

Well, anybody who can pick up a guitar can bust out some dodgy Clapton chords. Just because the learning curve's a little easier doesn't place it in an utterly different moral category.

And if you don't like the atmosphere, keep away from it. I don't like chewing-gum. A lot of people who do drugs also do chewing-gum. And sweets rot the teeth. Does this mean I should ban gum in my nation, and then try to get it banned in the UN as well?

(Actually, chewing-gum is a bad example, because it's more likely to cause trouble to you against your will than rave music is).

(Actually, chewing-gum is a bad example, because it's more likely to cause trouble to you against your will than rave music is).OOC: Tell me about it. Always look before you sit down on busses.

Eliminate country music and classic rock to get rid of beer (and whiskey)
Eliminate country rock to get rid of weed
Eliminate classical music to get rid of brandy
Blues=cocaine
psychedelic/funk=acid (d'oh!)
folk=cheap table wine

There! We have achieved prohibition through deafness.

You sir, are a gentlemen and a scholar.

Thanks muchly, and, at least in my fairly limited experience, likewise. I kinda cheated, though, seeing as I recently wrote a fairly long research paper on marijuana for school.

I am a musician, and I have studied many years in order to be able to play guitar and bass.

Good for you, and I do mean that. Good luck pursuing music to whatever level you desire. But I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with most of your other points.

It takes a hell of a lot of time to compose a song.

So it does. What basis do you have to propose that this is undeniably less the case in the genres of synthetic sound?

This song could be a total crap for some, or a masterpiece for others, but you can see it's had a lot of work behind it.

That seems to be the unifying point of quite a few arguments in this thread, and most of them don't share your conclusion, as far as I can tell.

Rave is not music because mainly it consists of pre-generated sounds on a computer that you just organize and give a rythym

There is a good amount of synthetic music that is far more than that. Are you suggesting that any sound generated electronically or plotted out beforehand cannot be counted as music? If the former, you'll find a good counterpoint by looking at a number of game soundtracks, many of which are obviously synthetically generated and many of which are undeniably "music;" if the latter, you would do well to note that all music is just organized notes or sounds set to a beat.

Anybody knowing anything about music can play techno.

Apart from the hidden revelation that playing techno requires musical knowledge, is techno really different from other musical genres in this regard? Anybody knowing how to play a few notes on a clarinet can get through a song like Mary Had a Little Lamb -- bad music is still music. All that aside, I still don't see this as adequate justification for a ban.

I have nothing against the so called rave music itself, what I don't like is the atmosphere surrounding it.

That I can understand and have little problem with, but I do want to point out that you aren't banning the atmosphere, but rather the music, and that seems to run a course counter to what I think some of your intentions are.

We are european, so what? When we think of proposals and resolutions and so for this game we tend to imagine things of our everyday lives, and this si what we live here.

There, I agree with you. Just being European doesn't automatically render anyone's views invalid, in my book.

We are ever so sorry if we offended anyone, it was not our intention, it was just a way of thinking and as far as I know in United Nations it is still legal to express one's mind.

I don't think you offended anyone; it's easy to be thick-skinned over the internet. Hopefully you haven't been much offended, either. You have views and you stand up for them; I disagree, but I hope to avoid disrespecting that. That aside, all of us here are happily enjoying our freedom of speech. NSUN proposals to ban areas of music (usually rap) are relatively common, and while I'm no authority on the matter, I've never heard of anyone getting into trouble with the mods for it.

I am a musician, and I have studied many years in order to be able to play guitar and bass. It takes a hell of a lot of time to compose a song. This song could be a total crap for some, or a masterpiece for others, but you can see it's had a lot of work behind it. Rave is not music because mainly it consists of pre-generated sounds on a computer that you just organize and give a rythym Anybody knowing anything about music can play techno. I have nothing against the so called rave music itself, what I don't like is the atmosphere surrounding it.


That is a load of B.S.

Any real musician knows that there is a huge difference between:

- the instrument vs. the music, &
- live vs. recorded.

Example: human vox (oldest instrument around) ain't guitar strings, and yet many people find them to be the most dynamic and versatile instruments around. As for your misconception that guitar based music is superior than electronic generated music, bear in mind that most guitarists not only make use of amplifiers, but are modulating the sounds coming out of their guitars. At live shows, many classic rock bands rely on both sound engineers. The villian isn't electronic based sounds, we are surrounded by them.

Also consider:

- composition vs. performance.

When we listen to audio recordings, the recordings are static. At least at raves, there *can be* talented DJs who will beat match and better yet beat mix. Beat mixing is performance, but based on completely using pre-recording compositions from others.

(The best DJing I've personally heard was when Cevin Key (Skinny Puppy / Tear Garden) came through San Francisco. He was making non-stop music using a constant rotation of various sources -- all recorded songs.)

Though in the case of music that is electronic based, music can be composed on the fly as well. I've seen great noise shows that easily hold a candle to traditional stringed instrument based performances.

I highly doubt that you'll find many musicians or artists that respect any opinion to promote government sponsored censorship of expression. Hilter would be proud of you. You've found something you don't like: DJs playing electronic music, and claim that it leads to crime and thus needs to be eliminated.

If your problems is with drug you, make drug enforcement policies, but please leave the international community out of your little exercises of fascism.

10kMichael
p.s. your proposal attempts to repeal an existing UN resolution, if you submit it and it is called to a mod's attention, you'll be zinged ... I'd suggest you just take it as a given that the freedom of expression is here to stay

I must humbly reckognise that we were wrong in words and thoughts. We apologise for any offensive things we could have said and will not mix our personal thoughts with proposals from now, after all we have to admit you are right. We will try to do (although somebody told me once "do or do not, there is no try)" things in a better way in future contributions to this world we all enjoy so much that is Nation States and sincerely hope that our mistakes will not interfere with future proposals we could make (unless they are so bad as this one).

Yours faithfully, Jason King of The Song.