NationStates Jolt Archive

I ask the following question to the nations in NationStates:

Is the UN too invasive?

The concept of a United Nations, of course, is to construct a co-op of nations that are peacefully working together to increase stability, peace, and relations between all nations of the world.

But does the UN sometimes go too far?

Throughout the time that the UN has been in existence, we have seen many resolutions that have been passed in the UN that ban things that do not deal with issues based on the dealings of lnternational Law.

To clarify, international law pertains to laws between two or more countries (or nations, whatever).

Although it doesn't say anywhere in the NationStates rules, it is my opinion that the rules should be revised to keep all UN resolutions to issues pertaining to International Law.

We must keep a degree of independence between countries in the UN, and to do that, we would need to outlaw resolutions not pertaining to International Law.

We have sovereign governments to rule as they see fit. We have the UN to assure that all nations can exist in peace.

PS- Someone is going to disagree with this, I'm sure. I know that about 70% of you are going to say this when you argue back, so I've prewritten my response. Here's what a lot of people will say: "Well, you signed up for the UN, you knew what the rules were, so too bad for you" 1. I'm not a UN member, and 2. that's begging the question, or, answering the question with the question. Since the whole point of this argument is to debate about whether or not the rules should or shouldn't be changed, saying that just flat out doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Have fun :-)

Perhaps a better question would be, "Is this topic already being discussed in at least three other threads, without any headway being made because there are two diametrically opposing camps throwing rhetoric back and forth day and night?"

I know, everyone's mad about the United Nations dictating internal policy because some people who write proposals don't read the rules, and the moderators are apparently ignoring what we decided in Rights and Duties. Here's the thing though: we're all mad about it. As a general rule, we don't like it when the UN leaps over it's boundaries because a proposal apealls to a certain group and they ignore the protest in these forums.

Can the UN do naughty things with it's power to shove sovereignty in the closet? Of course. Should it? Well, that's up to us to figure out, issue by issue, day by day.

I'd argue it's not invasive, but rather seeks to protect and enforce the rights of NPC's (aka the civilians)...If that means treading on the toes of governments, so be it....although does not mean we should stomp on them :)

Throughout the time that the UN has been in existence, we have seen many resolutions that have been passed in the UN that ban things that do not deal with issues based on the dealings of lnternational Law.


OOC: I'll be the first to agree with you when not playing. The problem isn't NationStates. The problem is that the vast majority of players have a limited understanding of domestic and international politics, which is why homosexuality, abortion, and gun control are extremely popular topics. These same topics are popular in US politics, because they are binary and "easy". You either hate guns or love 'em. There might be a bit of middle ground in the other two issues, but they aren't very complex.

I certainly see this in even more complex NS UN proposals. My favorite are the "save the forests" ideas. There are some good ones, but more often than not, these resolutions over simplify the problem.

Shrug, I would think that the way to change this would be in NS2 to have "political" leanings of your population. When you vote in the UN or on daily issues opposite of your political leanings, your "approval" rating goes down. When you in favour of your leaning your approval goes up again. And you should have the ability to slowly change your leaning, so that if you decide your population truly is getting more conservative or liberal, they too can reflect that.

I think in a very general sense my answer is no. While I have my problems with the UN, I personally think that the UN is doing more or less all it can do, and considering the general problems of the UN, is doing exceptionally well.

The Nationstates UN isn't exactly like the real UN. There are several conditions that take place in the NS UN that do not exist in the real world UN. The inability to repeal resolutions, the inability to focus on specific nations, and finally the implication that all of these resolutions have some important impact on the nations in the UN and on what issues they may receive in the future.

One major problem is that it is too easy to submit a resolution to the deligates. Too many of the resolutions are garbage. A majority of the resolutions should probably be removed for violating the standards for UN resolutions. Fortunately almost all of these never get more than a handful of deligates to approve it, and they wither on the queue and pass into a better place.

It turns out that most of the resolutions that pass mustre are somewhat above mediocre. Yes I would love to see great resolutions always up for votes, but considering the flotsam filling up the sea of resolutions to be approved, one cannot be too picky. My basic goals for a good resolution are (in no particular order)


It must be an international matter. (As opposed to some national matter that one wants uniformly applied to all nations)
It must be reasonably written and generally easy to understand the implications.
It must be consistant. A proposal that tries to argue A and then then tries to legislate not A is definitely not on my list of things I would approve.
It has to have some relationship with a measurable factor in the NS universe. If the resolution is really pure fluf and has no NS impact whatsoever it is probably best done through forum RP.

I don't believe that the problem is the UN. Its the delegates in it and the egnoramouses writing resolutions.

The topics that some people submit proposals on are just STUPID! They all need something better to do with their time than writing proposals on things like "planting a tree in front of the UN".

I think that there needs to be a regulation on what can be accepted to become a resolution. ALL proposals MUST be in the proper format....much unlike the resoultion that is on the table right now.

Why should the UN waste their time debating resolutions that are not even real resolutions?! And most people in this game do not know what the proper format of a resoultion is, therefore they blindly vote for resolutions that they think sound good when in essence it cannot be implemented becuase it has no operative clauses!

I think that all UN delegates need to show that they have the knowledge as to what a REAL resolution looks like, what topics the UN has the right to debate, and what resoultions would be infringing on national soverignty if they are passed....

If a UN delegate doesn't know any of that...they shouldn't vote and risk the soverignty of the world.

-The Rogue Nation of Javala
Founder and UN Delegate of the Awesomely Free Nations

The UN has overstepped its boundaries with the whaling resolution which affects all countries, including those not members of the UN.

The UN acts as if it is a government, a nation itself, and therefore strips the
rights of nationality and sovereignty from ALL it's member, by it's very
constitution.

See any of my writings for my views:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/search.php?searchid=63576

The UN promulgates the myth that it is a "world meeting place of nations"
when in fact it is a "world legislative body with enforcement powers".

The "enforcement powers" part of that makes it a "nation" as nations are the
only bodies with the power to enfore laws (legislation).

((Please don't argue that internal bodies within nations also have
enforcement powers, and must therefore be defined as nations, as that is
enforcement of law "WITHIN" national boundaries))

My point is that any nation that joins the UN has stripped themselves of
nation-hood, and should be regarded as a province of the nation state of UN.

I have proposed an alternative, the NU:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=350200
..although the UN (mod) seems to dislike dissent.

Not an unexpected reaction. :)

The UN has overstepped its boundaries with the whaling resolution which affects all countries, including those not members of the UN.

No it hasn't.

It simply forces a ban on whaling in UN nations, and in turn forces UN nations to place embargos on other nations that choose to not adopt the ban on whaling.

It even has some provisions for allowable takes under very specific circumstances.

I'd say that this resolution's author actually had a clue what he / she was doing. Hell, that is a lot more than can be said of most NationStates players ... especially the ones that know squat about international politics.

OOC: Bear in mind that in the real world there already *is* a more detailed international convention (adopted in 1946) to restrict whaling.

I have proposed an alternative, the NU:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=350200
..although the UN (mod) seems to dislike dissent.


OOC: Dude, it is really bad form to SPAM other threads by pointing to *threads* that have already been locked by the mods and then restarting them again.

BTW Myrth isn't the UN mod, but a game mod. Your anti UN thing wouldn't have been locked if you would have put it in the appropriate forum. Go to moderation to ask where an appropriate forum is.

OOC: Dude, it is really bad form to SPAM other threads by pointing to *threads* that have already been locked by the mods and then restarting them again.

BTW Myrth isn't the UN mod, but a game mod. Your anti UN thing wouldn't have been locked if you would have put it in the appropriate forum. Go to moderation to ask where an appropriate forum is.

It makes no difference who Myrth is.

I consider it rude (and I actually do APPROVE of some rudeness as appropriate) to close a thread before reply can be given.

Thanks kindly for the suggestion to find a mod (where does one do that?) and seek a more appropriate venue for my weirdness..?! :)


-Keiki'olu I'ake'oke'o
Current "Big-Diggah" and "Chief Head-Whompah"

"May prosperity and freedom from silly rules be your destiny..!"

Thanks kindly for the suggestion to find a mod (where does one do that?) and seek a more appropriate venue for my weirdness..?!
The MODERATION (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=1231) Forum, sir.

It makes no difference who Myrth is.

I consider it rude (and I actually do APPROVE of some rudeness as appropriate) to close a thread before reply can be given.

Thanks kindly for the suggestion to find a mod (where does one do that?) and seek a more appropriate venue for my weirdness..?! :)


We aren't asking you to build statues of Myrth or even hang photos of him next to your Queen's photographs, but if you don't want to be deleted from the game it does make a difference who Myrth is. (Of course I do think it would be kinda funny if a nation did have a statue of Ming the Merciless and worshipped him as a diety!) ;)

While you might consider it to be rude for a moderator to shut your *threads* (both of them) down before you can get your last word in, in the less than one month that you've been in NationStates, did you ever consider that maybe there was a good reason that Mryth locked your threads?

I don't think so.

Slow down. Spend a few weeks seeing how things are done. Then go hog wild.

I'll go ahead and tell you why you got your threads locked.

This is a UN forum. Wars, anti-UNs, and even technical questions that aren't about the UN, even if appropriate in NationStates, have their own forum.

The example here is your body has tons of holes. Shoving a pizza in your ear isn't a good idea. While technically the pizza will fit with a bit of work(especially in the case of some people's heads), it isn't going to do you any good there. In fact, most of us would consider that downright nasty, I mean how often do you see people walking around with pepperoni hanging out on their ear lobes?

(I know, it is a poor analogy. But I wanted something kinda graphic and gross.)

See you can be weird here. We love that. You can even be slightly cranky. We actually love that, but most of us will deny it. But shoving a pizza in our ears? No way. Take that to the other forums.

We aren't asking you to build statues of Myrth or even hang photos of him next to your Queen's photographs, but if you don't want to be deleted from the game it does make a difference who Myrth is. (Of course I do think it would be kinda funny if a nation did have a statue of Ming the Merciless and worshipped him as a diety!) ;)

While you might consider it to be rude for a moderator to shut your *threads* (both of them) down before you can get your last word in, in the less than one month that you've been in NationStates, did you ever consider that maybe there was a good reason that Mryth locked your threads?

I don't think so.

Slow down. Spend a few weeks seeing how things are done. Then go hog wild.

I'll go ahead and tell you why you got your threads locked.

This is a UN forum. Wars, anti-UNs, and even technical questions that aren't about the UN, even if appropriate in NationStates, have their own forum.

The example here is your body has tons of holes. Shoving a pizza in your ear isn't a good idea. While technically the pizza will fit with a bit of work(especially in the case of some people's heads), it isn't going to do you any good there. In fact, most of us would consider that downright nasty, I mean how often do you see people walking around with pepperoni hanging out on their ear lobes?

(I know, it is a poor analogy. But I wanted something kinda graphic and gross.)

See you can be weird here. We love that. You can even be slightly cranky. We actually love that, but most of us will deny it. But shoving a pizza in our ears? No way. Take that to the other forums.

Thank you very much for your wisdom. I very definately agree that all things should be in their proper places, especially discussions, but while familiarity with the "labyrinth of the Great Hall" would be good to have, small, relatively backward nations like mine would be better served if they could be directed in a polite way (or even a rude way as long as it's an accurate way) to the proper speaking venue.

The matter of my perception of the UN as being a nasty evil obnoxious and throroughly inhuman organisation should be of high importance to the UN iteself.

Apparently I'm not the only one of that opinion.

But the issue you bring up is very important too. Things should be handled in their proper place.

This barbarian from his backward, obnoxious and highy annoying nation looks forward to the practical guidance of the great thinkers and philosophers of the world, such as yourself.

Thanks again..! :)

OH..! And as for the Pizza analogy... :) Yeah,.. that's a pretty freaky analogy, but my whole POINT is that this "NU" thing (UN alternative) is built TO BE FULL OF HOLES..! It's very libertarian, actually more like radical objectivism, in intent,.. and the basic idea is that ONLY NATIONS (with nationalities) CAN be nations..! Artificial things like the UN are NOT nations and therefore have no right to act as nations. If it DOES act like a nation, then it IS a nation, and all it's internal parts [it's constituent members] are no longer nations but provinces. Which is fine if your nation wants to give up it's nationality, sovereignty and culture.

Anyway,.. more pizza to you..! :)

Aloha..!

The matter my perception of the UN as being a nasty evil obnoxious and throroughly inhuman organisation should be of high importance to the UN iteself.

Apparently I'm not the only one of that opinion.


You most certainly are not alone. Hence this thread.

I think the difference is that this thread is viewed as a means to improve the UN by providing some criticisms of the body, whereas your NU (other UN) was a tool to just bypass the UN.

There is nothing wrong with bypassing the UN, but realistically do you think active UN members are going to want that pizza shoved in their ear? If they wanted that, they'd go to the pizza shop down the street. ;)

You most certainly are not alone. Hence this thread.

I think the difference is that this thread is viewed as a means to improve the UN by providing some criticisms of the body, whereas your NU (other UN) was a tool to just bypass the UN.

There is nothing wrong with bypassing the UN, but realistically do you think active UN members are going to want that pizza shoved in their ear? If they wanted that, they'd go to the pizza shop down the street. ;)

As would I..! :)

I absolutely agree with you. John the Baptist srceaming away in the halls of the UN saying they stole his head and they owe him dinner and a movie would probably be gracefully escorted to the nearest exit.

I expected that.

Though you'd think the UN could spring for dinner, at least...

:)

Though you'd think the UN could spring for dinner, at least...


Would you like some whale blubber? ;)

Granted, it is illegal in my country because of the junk that is saturated in it, but the UN is happy to hand out its stock. We also have stockpiles of illegally logged trees that can be set on fire to cook your blubber, and a collection of used and dirty syringes for those who enjoy "sharing" the blubber.

10kMichael

Would you like some whale blubber? ;)

Granted, it is illegal in my country because of the junk that is saturated in it, but the UN is happy to hand out its stock. We also have stockpiles of illegally logged trees that can be set on fire to cook your blubber, and a collection of used and dirty syringes for those who enjoy "sharing" the blubber.

10kMichael

As long as you caught the blubber in your territory, or at least checked to see if the blubber-animals (what are those called again?) weren't gonna die out on you,.. and if the logs are yours,.. but we prefer not to eat with unsanitary utensils..!

Is the "sauce" that your blubber comes a special home recipe, or can I get some from the store..? (the "junk that is saturated in it", as you said)