NationStates Jolt Archive

After much deliberation over several months. The Constitutional Republic of Tekania has decided to anul our UN Membership.

The NSUN has been on a slippery and heavily graded slope of self-destruction for some time. Her own resolutions have proven that much.

The NSUN is incapable of true self-government. Instead, it relies on the whims of marginal democracy... tyrany by majority... and self-defeat. The entire organization seeks control so much, it damages its own constituency.

It seeks the destruction and abolition of individual rule and self-government in deed, while in word pretending not to.

It subverts the rule of law, at the expense of poorly thought, and incompitent resolutions writen by the most incompitent persons, and approved by equally incompitent delegates.

The NSUN Security Council (OOC: read UN Moderators) are incapable of performing their own required duties. And thus their own slackness further weakens the chain of true and proper government.

As such, it is the determination of the Representatives, on behalf of the people of the Constitutional Republic of Tekania, to anul, and void all ties and duties to this most unUnited Nations.

Be it further known, that since the NSUN enacts rules, in violation of the citizenry of sovereign and free nations, and that it seeks the subservience of all nations to its evil and wicked body, that henseforth, the Constitutional Republic of Tekania, will consider all NSUN members as terrorist governments.

Be it further resolved that the Constitutional Republic of Tekania, shall never again place her name in membership of this organization untill the evil corruption, and ineffectual operation of the body is corrected. And the following Resolutions, lacking the appropriate construction and operation as law, are repealed....

1. Fight the Axis of Evil (generic and poorly written)
2. Scientific Freedom( generic and poorly written)
3. Education for All (generic and poorly written)
4. Mandatory Recycling (generic and poorly written)
5. Protect Historical Sites (generic and poorly written)
6. Legalize Euthanasia (poorly worded, and poorly written)
7. Public Domain (legalizes pure theft, destroys independant business in favor of multi-nat corporate conglomerates)
8. Abortion Rights (complete incompitent legislation, and a shame on the very face of the NSUN for allowing its passage as it stands)
9. The Law of the Sea (complete self-defeating legislation, seeks to put non-UN members at the whim of UN law, and therefore is a violation of UN charter).

The following is a prepared press statement from the offices of The Rep of Komokom.

Komokom supports Tekania in this venture, in so far as we agree to the current frail nature of the N.S.U.N in that we believe this nature to be a terminal one.

We disagree only in that matter of the actions of the N.S.U.N. Security Council, have been sub-standard. We do not see this as correct. We find that in these days of the reduction of fundamental democracy, at the hands of subversive off-site based groups, the N.S.U.N Security Council has fought valiantly within its own regulations to ensure the continued enjoyment of this game for the player body, and enforced the rule of law with an even hand, with equality.

We our-selves see such failing only in what powers they are granted to act with in this present ... situation ... as it stands presently.

Let it be known through the actions of Tekania and the future actions of other players we are sure, that the thinking nations of the world will not be bound by the petty adventurism of the subversives or ruined by the subsequent destabilisation of this organisation at the hands of those who do not respect the import of others, in a place where global co-operation is key.

We applaud the action here of Tekania, and we welcome them to the free world.

Blaming the mods any of the first 5 resolutions the non-existant nature of sovereignty poor writingfor the UN's failings is just plain silly.

NSUN doesn't belong to the mods, it belongs to the membership. Mods are just cops, and frankly we don't pay them enough to hang around. Sovereignty is outlawed in the very rules, and poor writing is a fact of life in this internet world, especially one that welcomes very young players.

The first half-year of resolutions came about before there were any accepted rules. Now there are rules, and those sorts of things don't happen any more. In fact, now that repeals are authorized, we can dump that old crap and replace it with something reasonable.

You want to leave? Fine. But most of your reasons are silly or just plain wrong.

OOC:

Game Mods are more like the real UN Secretariat. When they are doing their moderation duties notice that they always make it clear again that they are speaking not as a moderator as a representative from a nation when they are playing again? Cog, the Most Glorious Hack, and Unfree People have all done this in the past 48 hours here.

The UN Security Council of the real world does not exist in NationStates ... maybe in NS2, but not here.

Fris is right. Blaming the mods (which they make me angry frequently too) is the easy way out. You now have the power of the repeal ...


"Join me and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can
end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." [+1 pt] ;)

"poor writting" amongs several, and consecutive proposals throughout the history of NSUN operations is most certainly a failing. If you believe otherwise, you're an errant knave, to put it bluntly. A poorly written resolution, passed by a "mere majority" of the NSUN (and since mere majority is indicatively the design of the NSUN control scheme [sic tyranty by majority]) is therefore indicitive of NSUN failing.... as it is pure, and direct logical proof that the controling majority of the NSUN is poorly operated by an incompitent lot. This has nothing to do with rules... rules are invented things, this trancends rules into the arena of ethics.

It is obvious that my Aristotelian ethical model is not in line, and therefore incompatible with the overal Kantian ethical operations of the NSUN body. Philosophically speaking.

The majority ethical rule of the NSUN votes in favor of resolutions, on context, that accomplish a good idea, no matter how badly written the idea is. Thus indicating that the NSUN body (as composed of its majority membership) believes that good is operative, no matter if its implimented in a bad manner, and therefore is still good. (sic) That if good can be accomplished out of bad intent, that the good still prevails as good. Most certainly Kantian in philosophical ethical matters (and also absolutely wrong in operative matters).

The minority and fleeing segment of Aristotelian members, recognizing that even if good is generated out of bad intent, that the intent is what matters and not the operation as such. And therefore no matter how much good operates, as long as it comes from evil intent, that it is still a bad act. And therefore must be opposed in favor of impimenting under the ideals of positive and good intent.

The two views can be summed as such, the Kantians (The ones who design and favor these bad and poorly written resolutions, in that they attain the end goals of their views... regardless of content, and who oppose the idea of opposition to resolution/proposal on the basis of 'poor writing') are the ones who live by the motto that "it is whether you win or loose, and it does not matter how you play the game"... These are also the ones most frequent to QUOTE the 'rules' when the issue suits them. Of course their reliance on them itself is illogical and unfounded (and therefore logically moots their argument as soon as they make it).

The Aristotelian on the other hand (The ones who oppose resolutions/proposals on ISSUES of their very poor writing and implimentation), go by the motto "it is how you play the game... not whether you win or lose".

To the Aristotelian the CONTENT of the resolution matters as much, if not more, than the goal it tries to attain... to the Kantian the CONTENT is meaningless as long as it accomplishes the task at hand.

In the long run the Kantian looses, as has been time and again proven through history.... Kantians, in all realism, lack any real ethical framework to stand upon, and therefore their operations, being clumsy collapse eventually on their own self. Kantian philosophy generally gets adopted by regime operatings living on their last stollen breaths, as they begin to slowly plument into obscurity. Such can be seen in the NSUN, presently on a dying slope to it's own governmental end. The Aristotelians stagger out, leaving the sinking ship, knowing to protect truth and goodness, flee from the NSUN, to form other, more effective pro-active and operative alliances amongst the non-NSUN NS world. Eventually, all that is left is the Kantians..... but now, their model of 'winning' regardless of play is ended, as they have been robbed of the function of actually winning. Such has been seen. the NSUN has had a constant stream of people leaving her doors, and not enough to make up through her present growth. 6 months ago, she was a body comprising almost 38% of the NS world... and now barely scrapes 30%. That percentage drop will not change, unless the NSUN in effect CHANGES her direction and operation.

Many will appeal to rules in opposition of this, but such appeal is not logical. As NSUN members it is (and in my case was) our ethical goal to defend and protect the NSUN, and insure its continued existance and operation.

As a nation Tekania was stuck, and unable to perform obedience to NSUN resolutions and charter. The NSUN, in operative deed wants to die. Afterall, it has ignored, slandered and smashed every warning of its logical and inevitable demise and death. As such, Tekania under the spirit being the Legalize Euthanasia law, must respect the NSUN's wish to die. At the same time we cannot, as being a member, under charter it was our duty to protect the NSUN (even from itself)... As such, principle ethics were conflicting, and the only logical resolution to it is resignation from the NSUN, to let its mess die in peace (but with no dignity, as the NSUN has no dignity as a form or operation of government).

In the end, I would state all NSUN nations are either guilty of violating the SPIRIT of the NSUN resolution to Legalize Euthanasia, by not leaving the NSUN and letting it die peacefully. Or are violating the ethical and moral responsibilities as charter, to protect the NSUN.

Instead, it relies on the whims of marginal democracy... tyrany by majority... and self-defeat. The entire organization seeks control so much, it damages its own constituency.

You can say this about any democracy. All you need is one more person on your side than the other side and you have complete control over everybody.

OOC: oooh… philosophy against the UN! *drags out Nietzsche again*
IC:
Publicly published thingy
“My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force, to thrust back all that resists its extension. The NSUN has continuously sought to extend its influence on its member nations, by approving laws of openly domestic nature or by installing committees which have the power to decide for all as one. Lately it has sought to extend this influence outside its traditional domain by claiming the seas. But, as with other body of power, the NSUN continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the circle of fortune turns round...

The NSUN, in operative deed, does not want to die. It wants to live! It has, as the Tekanians say, ignored, slandered and smashed every warning of its inevitable demise and death because it wants to live. And why not live this lie? Anything which is a living and not a dying body will have to be an incarnate will to power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is will to power... 'Exploitation' belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will to life. The NSUN has always, by means of laws, resolutions and committees, striven to do this.

It is not at all surprising, the level of self-delusion and insanity that the NSUN has at times displayed. Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. The greater the organisation is, perhaps, the greater the insanities of it are.

It is our task to be part of such countering forces, to stand against the growing threat of what is no longer our will but theirs, to come to an arrangement and conspire together! Those reasonable nations who have abandoned the UN should unite, and scheme and plot together, The Goontopians, too, can be such a countering force against the NSUN establishment, not by virtue of its own agenda or its own “moral” value but because it is a power and because it is against the NSUN. It is as simple as that. If they struggle this can only be applauded, for they will be struggling not with us but with another power which is not our power."

~Knootian modern philosopher, on the NSUN

Statement by the ministry of Foreign Affairs
“The Knootian government fully supports the decision of the Tekania government to resist NSUN centralism and incompetence. We invite their nation to begin talks on signing the KIST treaty on trade, and express an equal amount of interest in reviewing their ‘Capitalist Defense and Economic Alliances’. “
~Minister van Mierlo

You can say this about any democracy. All you need is one more person on your side than the other side and you have complete control over everybody.
"There are such things as constitutional limitations, acting for the general good and principled self-restraint in matters that can better be solved at a lower level. Democracy becomes tyranny by majority only because those participating in it choose to make it thus."

You can say this about any democracy. All you need is one more person on your side than the other side and you have complete control over everybody.

True, which is why pure democracy is proven unjust and ineffectual.

You also might want to relate to Aristotle's close relations, namely Plato, and his direct critique of democracy.

1. Democracy leads inexorably to "mob rule" with those in power pandering to "pleasure-seekers" whose principle goals are the satisfaction of their immediate desires (hedonism).

2. Democracy leads to rule by the stupid (sophists [the ancestors of modern day lawyers]), who while they may have good rhetorical skills (that can exert some control over the masses) have no true knowledge itself.

3. Democracy leads to disagreement and conflict, which is something that is intrinsically evil and to be avoided...


All three aspects are inherant to the modern operation of the NSUN. A perusal, looking from pure logic and symantecs, of the bulk of NSUN resolutions proves point 2 beyond a shadow of a doubt (sic. Legalize Euthanasia, Abortion Rights, and Free Education being the most prevalent). This also goes back to my Aristotelian ethical model.... I don't disagree with the ideal but with the implimentation and motive. The philosophical problem arrises in the differing concepts between Aristotelian and Kantian ethics. Kantian Ethics is not based logically (a RL example would be the US Republicans using abill, which John Kerry voted against, that would fund 87 billion for US troops.. that also would impliment no-bid contracts, and other 'bad' concepts, along with borrow type funding.... In this example, under Kantian ethics models, anyone who votes against this bill is in complete disagreement with it.... we know such does not hold up to Aristotelian and operative logic... Kantian model dictates you should accept as much bad as possible as long as it contains some good... whereas Aristotelian model ethics dictate that unless the operative is intrinsically good, you should oppose it, regardless if the ideal is right.) In the long run, Kantian model fails pure logic. It is more properly an inconsistent ethical model. IOW, Kantian ethics hold truth, much like the sophists of Plato's time, as being relative... whereas Aristotelian model views truth as absolute.

On the third point, it is applicable to the failed logic of some implimentation of UN operatives by the membership. For example, using the resolution system to mold the world into your view. It is an established fact that the NSUN is not global, and as long as it remains such, it in no way has the power to mold the world as a whole. Only a small fraction of it. On top of that, the attempt by some to bring up, and pass highly controversial proposals at this level of the NSUN, is inherantly illogical and self-defeating. Because, by the passage of such, you cause more strife and division, and seperation in the existing body, lessening the impact of the resolution even further... and therefore logically abolishing your intended goal (once again, back to Aristotelian vs. Kantian ethics....) hense, regardless of intent, your logic is intrinsically bad, and flawed. So logically, the only resolutions which would ethically apply to this principle, would be ones which create unity, and strengthen the NSUN's power base. Such is not the case, rather than operate on logic, the operative of the NSUN power base relies of sophist rhetoric... rather than on logic and truth, on misconception and falsehood. Since this same powerbase, based on the unfounded and incompitent form of pure democracy, is representative of UN policy, anything attributable to the simple majority is attributable to the body as a whole. And therefore all members of the NSUN can be deemed, logically, as flawed, false, misconceived, sophists. The NSUN is in and of itself a flawed body, since it refuses, as a majority to use logic rather than rhetoric.

Just about all arguments that have opposed my view have been based on rhetoric rather that logic, I might add. Take for example the argument that 'poor writing' is no argument against NSUN resolutions. That statment, while seeming to state fact, is mere rhetoric. It attempts to convince the reader, through subterfuge, that the argument against is unfounded based on a principle the writer pulled from thin air... namely that there is nothing wrong with 'poor writing'. Such is not the case, logically. The content of the resolution, what it contains, within the ideal it expresses, is indicative of motive and intent. Poor writing is indicative of poor motive, and therefore poor writing is most certainly an argument against a resolution from the logical and consistent Aristotelian model of ethics and law..... while it might not be from the flawed and inconsistent Kantian model. The same in the case that since my argument against mob rule invalidates pure democracy it is therefore not logical. It in fact is, as pure democracy, both in terms of logic and social order is in fact intrinsically evil. (I might add, the ones who purport pure democracy as proper are mostly self-labled 'socialists'..... they are in fact inconsistent in their logic, as pure democracy ultimately leads to the downfall of society, and therefore their 'socialism' is in fact anti-social, the intent ultimately leading to the destruction of the society.

(In RL example, the Greek City-States is the only historical example of Pure democracy. And it was a dismal failure in the end. Many arguments have come out that technology can solve it.... but what CAUSED the problem in Macedonia, had nothing to do with speed of message, but rather with consolidation in the city-states, none could reach concensus, ultimately leading to their destruction. Furthermore such can also be seen in early US history. 'majority rule' was something unheard of, and properly so, and infact negated by some...... Patrick Henry for example had this to say "One man with courage is a majority")

OOC: oooh… philosophy against the UN! *drags out Nietzsche again*
IC:
Publicly published thingy
“My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force, to thrust back all that resists its extension. The NSUN has continuously sought to extend its influence on its member nations, by approving laws of openly domestic nature or by installing committees which have the power to decide for all as one. Lately it has sought to extend this influence outside its traditional domain by claiming the seas. But, as with other body of power, the NSUN continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the circle of fortune turns round...

The NSUN, in operative deed, does not want to die. It wants to live! It has, as the Tekanians say, ignored, slandered and smashed every warning of its inevitable demise and death because it wants to live. And why not live this lie? Anything which is a living and not a dying body will have to be an incarnate will to power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is will to power... 'Exploitation' belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will to life. The NSUN has always, by means of laws, resolutions and committees, striven to do this.

It is not at all surprising, the level of self-delusion and insanity that the NSUN has at times displayed. Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. The greater the organisation is, perhaps, the greater the insanities of it are.

It is our task to be part of such countering forces, to stand against the growing threat of what is no longer our will but theirs, to come to an arrangement and conspire together! Those reasonable nations who have abandoned the UN should unite, and scheme and plot together, The Goontopians, too, can be such a countering force against the NSUN establishment, not by virtue of its own agenda or its own “moral” value but because it is a power and because it is against the NSUN. It is as simple as that. If they struggle this can only be applauded, for they will be struggling not with us but with another power which is not our power."

~Knootian modern philosopher, on the NSUN

Statement by the ministry of Foreign Affairs
“The Knootian government fully supports the decision of the Tekania government to resist NSUN centralism and incompetence. We invite their nation to begin talks on signing the KIST treaty on trade, and express an equal amount of interest in reviewing their ‘Capitalist Defense and Economic Alliances’. “
~Minister van Mierlo

I would say more in that its INTENT is to want to live, but in operative deed (ie, what ACTUALLY OCCURS) is its own death, because of the MOTIVE by which it tries to attain its goal, in fact eventually leads to its own destruction. Ultimately, in logic, for the NSUN to attain its ultimate goal, is to absorb and engraft all nations into her sphere. By operating on a motive that defeats its capability to engraft all nations into its sphere, it in fact cuts its own lifeline, for which it can survive. So, in this case its motus operandi is contrary to its intent of operation.... therefore its actual operation, following its motus operandi, is contrary to its own intended purpose, and therefore its own existance. So in the long run, much like a trapped animal trapped.... it has trapped its own self into a false motive, and therefore will eventually consume itself.

The ony logical course of action if to change its motive, but of course, much like the trapped animal, devoid of logic, is not capable of rationally determining what needs to be done... and in fact ignores rationality in favor of immediate gratification (very hedonist once again).

In fact, the operative of the NSUN is purely hedonist in operation. Proposal writers draft most of their resolutions to gain immediate "pleasure" and satisfy lusts..... rather than work out the best course for the world in general. Their desire is to their own self, some satisfaction for their own work, rather than what is best for the world (once again, indicative of the differentiation between Aristotelian and Kantian ethics).