NationStates Jolt Archive

Before I put up this proposal, I'd like any constructive criticisms, or other efforts to attempt to improve the proposal. Telegram me with any questions or comments you feel the need to ask or say. Thank you.



Title: National Sovereignty Rights
Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Strong

Description:
NOTED: The UN has recently passed several pieces of legislation that tend to violate the sovereignty of its respected members.

INACTION by member states on this matter will only allow for this problem to worsen.

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN be restricted to dealing with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc.

LET IT BE KNOWN that the purpose of this act is meant to further democracy in the sovereign UN member states, not restrict their freedoms. We aim to allow for matters of a sovereign concern to be handled in the said sovereign members.

FROM NOW ONWARD the United Nations is a body meant to aide its member states in their time of need, not unnecessarily pass through matters concerning a select few.

Description:
NOTED: The UN has recently passed several pieces of legislation that tend to violate the sovereignty of its respected members.

That describes all of them.

INACTION by member states on this matter will only allow for this problem to worsen.

The member states did act. They voted them in.

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN be restricted to dealing with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc.

The mods have ruled this illegal.

LET IT BE KNOWN that the purpose of this act is meant to further democracy in the sovereign UN member states, not restrict their freedoms. We aim to allow for matters of a sovereign concern to be handled in the said sovereign members.

FROM NOW ONWARD the United Nations is a body meant to aide its member states in their time of need, not unnecessarily pass through matters concerning a select few.

Personally, I don't think many of the matter cater to a select few. If they do, they are catering to the select few who are the majority of those voting in the UN.

Hey, if you want to propose an illegal proposal and get a warning from the Moderators for doing so, who are we to stand in your way?

Title: National Sovereignty Rights


You might want to look on what the UN has already defined as National Sovereignty Rights in "Rights and Duties of UN members". It's through the the "previous resolutions" link on the UN page, or (even better), in the "passed resolutions" sticky here in the forum.

The UN has full right, as stated in the FAQ, to screw around with your nation. You agreed to that rule when you applied to join, and are now bound by it as a member. If you do not want the UN to mess with your nation's soverignty, then you always have the option to resign. Membership is optional.

And if you choose to stay, deal with it. There is nothing you can do.

In five posts, he was warned four times.

Bets its still proposed?

Just in case: this proposal is illegal

Lady Desdemona of Merwell,
Senior UN representative,
The Black New World

So what you are saying is this proposal is illegal? Cause I wasn't sure if I had got the gist or not :}

Thank you for brining the fact that the proposal was illegal to my attention.


I have revised the proposal to be as much as the original intent as possible with still being legal. Please give any ideas for improvement, constructive criticisms, or other comments.




Title: National Sovereignty Agreement
Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant

Description:
NOTED: The UN has recently passed several pieces of legislation that tend to violate the sovereignty of its respected members.

INACTION by member states on this matter will only allow for this problem to worsen.

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc. This does not actually limit the ability to do otherwise, but simply states this as an agreed attempt to respect national sovereignty.

LET IT BE KNOWN that the purpose of this act is meant to further democracy in the sovereign UN member states, not restrict their freedoms. We aim to allow for matters of a sovereign concern to be handled in the said sovereign members.

I personally like the proposal but it still attempts to limit the UN's power and so is illegal. Proposing it would be pointless, it would just earn you a moderator's warning. Sorry Jason.

Thank you for brining the fact that the proposal was illegal to my attention.


I have revised the proposal to be as much as the original intent as possible with still being legal. Please give any ideas for improvement, constructive criticisms, or other comments.




Title: National Sovereignty Agreement
Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant

Description:
NOTED: The UN has recently passed several pieces of legislation that tend to violate the sovereignty of its respected members.

INACTION by member states on this matter will only allow for this problem to worsen.

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc. This does not actually limit the ability to do otherwise, but simply states this as an agreed attempt to respect national sovereignty.

LET IT BE KNOWN that the purpose of this act is meant to further democracy in the sovereign UN member states, not restrict their freedoms. We aim to allow for matters of a sovereign concern to be handled in the said sovereign members.

Yep, still illegal.

You cannot restrict what the UN can or cannot do in any way.

Yep, still illegal.

You cannot restrict what the UN can or cannot do in any way.

Just wondering, where in the revised proposal does it restrict what the UN can or cannot do in any way?

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc. This does not actually limit the ability to do otherwise, but simply states this as an agreed attempt to respect national sovereignty.

Wouldn't the last sentence show that it would not restrict the UN? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Just wondering, where in the revised proposal does it restrict what the UN can or cannot do in any way?



Wouldn't the last sentence show that it would not restrict the UN? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Sorry, Jason. Here's the deal. There's a ruling by the mods or admin that there can be no resolutions limiting the power of the UN. That's just how it is. I know that it is a ruling that contradicts itself by limiting the power of the UN to limit itself. It's still the ruling, though, and we have to abide by it or get a warning for submitting illegal proposals.

Edit: Essentially, what your revised proposal does is create a contract which if voted in by a majority of the UN would obligate all UN members to not pass resolutions violating national sovereignty. Basically, this would mean that the UN could not pass resolutions at all. I would be fine with that, actually, but other important persons would not be fine with it.

THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc. This does not actually limit the ability to do otherwise, but simply states this as an agreed attempt to respect national sovereignty.

Wouldn't the last sentence show that it would not restrict the UN? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

You're wrong.

"... the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters..."

That's an attempt to restrict.
That's illegal.

And the UN has no respect for national soverignty, save as outlined in resolutions.

You're wrong.

"... the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters..."

That's an attempt to restrict.
That's illegal.

And the UN has no respect for national soverignty, save as outlined in resolutions.


THEREFORE it is henceforth proposed that the UN attempt to deal with SOLELY matters of an international concern. Issues of war and peace; matters of international trade, etc. This does not actually limit the ability to do otherwise, but simply states this as an agreed attempt to respect national sovereignty.

It says attempt to deal with solely matters of international concern, not force to do so. So, this is not limiting the UN, but more of a suggestion. Am I wrong?

Yes, you're wrong. If passed, it would have the force of law.

As such, its illegal. The UN can do what it wants.

I know that it is a ruling that contradicts itself by limiting the power of the UN to limit itself.

Unstoppable force, unmovable object; God creating a boulder so heavy that he can't lift it... You know how it goes...


As for the proposal...

It's still illegal, but now it's stuck in a Catch-22.

IF proposal limits future UN legislation THEN illegal (mechanics)
IF proposal doesn't limit future UN legislation THEN proposal does nothing THEN proposal is rhetoric THEN proposal is illegal (format)

QED

- "Damned if ya don't; damned if ya do"
UN Gnome #1785w124