NationStates Jolt Archive

-A- SHOCKED by the amount of children worldwide who do not have basic access to a computer

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs.

-2- STRONGLY URGES all Nations to secure that every child, aged more than 12, has a computer for himself with internet access and educational software. Computers and internet access should be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them.

-3- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by paragraph [2], by:

-3.1- Running the computers mentioned in [2] with open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them

-3.2- Proposing some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign

-4- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by:

-4.1- Sharing technologies with nations that are developmentally and financially ready to provide an infrastructure and education system that will be appropriate to the technology.

-4.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector

-5- MANDATES that manufacturers must provide schools with a 24/7 technical support hotline in case a computer is broken or beyond repair. In the event of a computer malfunction, the computer will be sent back to the manufacturers for replacement or repair.

http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/cluichstan.jpg

The people of Cluichstan believe this goes far beyond the mandate of the UN and will never support it, however well-intentioned it may be.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstan's Ambassador to the UN
Regional Delegate from Scybala

I agree with Cluichstan on their stance on this. It would cost billions for most countys every year to adopt such a plan, so Caer Dunnottar must decline this proposal as well.

What?! Cobdenia has only one computer, and all that does is crack codes and make chocolate browny recipes

ok, after having read all comments, here are some suggestions, i hope you will continue to improve this draft and it will become great

---------------------------------------
-A- SHOCKED by the amount of children worldwide who do not have basic access to a computer

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-C- FULLY AWARE of the difference of technology level between member nations

-D- SEEKING to minimize the cost of the following clauses

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap and basic computer designed by non-profit organisations (as the 100$ laptop project)


-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs.


-2- URGES all nations to secure for every child, aged more than 12, some access in school to computers with educational software and internet access


-3- ENCOURAGES all Nations, where the cost of this clause will not be significant, to secure that every child, aged more than 12, has a operational computer for himself with internet access and educational software. Computers and internet access could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them.


-4- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by paragraphs [2] and [3], by different means such as:

-4.1- providing cheap and basic computer designed by non-profit organisation as those that already exist

-4.2- Running the computers mentioned in [2] and [3] with needed open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them or by non-profit organisation

-4.3- Proposing some non-profit organisation or some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign


-5- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by different means such as:

-5.1- Sharing technologies with nations that are developmentally and financially ready to provide an infrastructure and education system that will be appropriate to the technology.

-5.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector

the 100$ laptop project:

http://laptop.media.mit.edu/laptop-images.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4292854.stm

What about nations that haven't developed electricity yet?

What about nations that haven't developed electricity yet?


as all UN Nation members are able to connect on the UN internet network => all UN member have electricity

Just because in RL we all have electricity doesn't mean our RP nations do.

This resolution is a dead horse

Correct me if i'm wrong, in real life only 2 nation don't have (willingly by their government) access to internet: Myanmar and North-Korea!

Even the closest Nation in the world, Bhutan, where the tourist visa = 200US$/day (yes 200US$/day), has internet access

=>Cobdenia, your scenario is 100% hard-Science fiction, i don't think we should take hard-SF scenarios in consideration for resolutions

No it isn't; in NS various countries do not live in the modern world. Cobdenia is basically 1930's tech, other nations are Lord of the Rings, some are post modern tech (e.g. 2030) some are so far into the future that you can't imagine it, and some are prehistoric tribal.

Anyway, it's illegal due to real life references ($100 computer scheme), and even if it was removed it may well be considered illegal as it interfere's strongly with forum activity.

And I suggest you read the DLE guide to UN arguments (Link here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423925))

Here are some useful titbits:
<snip>
Illegitimate Arguements
<snip>
15. "But I don't like/play/want to deal with that technology level!"- Then maybe you shouldn't have joined the UN. The UN is made up of a multitude of nations, which in turn are made up of multiple technology levels and types. While you may not like it, you still must deal with the fact your proposal about guns does affect that nation with the massive warships in orbit.
<snip>

Legitimate Arguements
<snip>
Our example arguement- This is where a person uses their own nation as an example. Said example doesn't have to match the RP aspects of the nation, or even be anywhere close. Some uses of this lead to the techwank reply, but that is easy to deal with. It is this reason as to why techwank really can't be committed outside of RPs, as you could just be using a theoretical example instead of how your nation really is instead of intending what you post to become the facts of your nation.

What about nations that haven't developed electricity yet?

You could use the ancient computer called an ibicus. lol

No it isn't; in NS various countries do not live in the modern world. Cobdenia is basically 1930's tech, other nations are Lord of the Rings, some are post modern tech (e.g. 2030) some are so far into the future that you can't imagine it, and some are prehistoric tribal.

Anyway, it's illegal due to real life references ($100 computer scheme), and even if it was removed it may well be considered illegal as it interfere's strongly with forum activity.

And I suggest you read the DLE guide to UN arguments (Link here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423925))

Here are some useful titbits:

I would suggest that if a resolution like this was to be proposed that it would deal with school equipment in general rather than specifically laptops. Try and avoid specific references to specific levels of technology.

Originally posted by Caer Dunnottar You could use the ancient computer called an ibicus.

A pox upon the esteemed delegate from Caer Dunnottar ... for making the abacus joke first. :headbang:

Correct me if i'm wrong, in real life only 2 nation don't have (willingly by their government) access to internet: Myanmar and North-Korea!

Even the closest Nation in the world, Bhutan, where the tourist visa = 200US$/day (yes 200US$/day), has internet access

=>Cobdenia, your scenario is 100% hard-Science fiction, i don't think we should take hard-SF scenarios in consideration for resolutions

Irrelevant. Somepeople are RPing as far back as Iron age, perhaps even caveman days. The concern is a legitamite one, though those nations are RP-screwed by many other resolutions that simply don't care about the tech levels used. Recommended rewrite: "if the nation has access to the technology in question"

Now, why would an FT nation provide their students with such obsolete technology as computers? What about neurological implants that give people direct access to the Internet with their minds? Recommended rewrite: "or more powerful high-tech educational tool"

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap and basic computer designed by non-profit organisations (as the 100$ laptop project)[/B]

The "$100 laptop project" you are referring to is an RL reference, illegal.

The "$100 laptop project" you are referring to is an RL reference, illegal.

ok, thanks,
so it's better to have only:
"-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap and basic computer designed by non-profit organisations"

Now, why would an FT nation provide their students with such obsolete technology as computers? What about neurological implants that give people direct access to the Internet with their minds? Recommended rewrite: "or more powerful high-tech educational tool"

you right, thanks a lot

=>

-2- URGES all nations to secure for every child, aged more than 12, some access in school to computers with educational software and internet access or more powerful high-tech educational tool


-3- ENCOURAGES all Nations, where the cost of this clause will not be significant, to secure that every child, aged more than 12, has a operational computer for himself with internet access and educational software, or more powerful high-tech educational tool. Computers, internet access or others tools could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them.

I would suggest that if a resolution like this was to be proposed that it would deal with school equipment in general rather than specifically laptops. Try and avoid specific references to specific levels of technology.

yes good idea also, thanks

maybe we can use instead:
=>
-2- URGES all nations to secure for every child, aged more than 12, some access in school to information technology school equipment with educational software and internet access,

i should say, here, that the author of this proposition is Caradune, and as i helped him since he submitted it once last month and get 100 approvals, he proposed me to be the co-author, and i gracefully accepted. As he didn't connect for more than one day i continue the debate, but it will be up to Caradune to decide in last ressort.

Irrelevant.Correct. UN Proposals need not be appropriate to every single possible permutation that exists, as it would be impossible to create any Proposals at all.

If your nation has no electricity, or exists in 5000BC, then clearly this won't apply to you. Quit being a dork.

But it does, and thats the problem.

Especially articles 1 (what is the point in teaching IT in the Cobdenia when the PC won't be invented for 50 years?), and I find 5.1 rather ambiguous. Cobdenia is a rich nation, therefore financially ready, and, as we have both telephones and electricity, we could easily be said to be developementaly ready.

Of course, (I'm going to be constructive here) one could change the mandates to urges in one, and add technologically to 5.1; but then one has a toothless and pointless resolution.

what is the point in teaching IT in the Cobdenia when the PC won't be invented for 50 years?)

The Most Serene Republic of Love and esterel will be very happy to offer thousands of computers to The Governorate of Cobdenia schools.


Cobdenia is a rich nation

as your nation is rich, and as in many nation as in love and esterel, computers are very cheap => it will be easy for your country to import many of them. Love and esterel will be also very happy to encourages our IT companies to share thechnology with The Governorate of Cobdenia

Oh, hundreds of thousands of paperweights!

I wonder if they float...

The education system of the Austro-Awestralian Empire places very high emphasis upon the use of computers, and thus, the use of computers is compulsory in most subjects, except Physical Education.

Information and Process Technology is a high valued subject upon entry into a number of tertiary educational organisations within the Empire.

the distinguished republic of sidtherealistan would have to politely decline the proposed legislation, for it would be too much of an economic strain right now for the country.
it can be noted however, that the government has moved in improving internet access throughout the state and developing the information technology sector through strong impetus in regards to tax cuts and funding.
we shall endeavour ourselves to adopt universal availability of computer education to the children of our lands, but for now due to aforementioned constraints, computer/information technology education would only be available for college graduates.
regards to all.

No support for the following reasons:

1) We don't need universal access to computers as we already have books and other media.

2) Many of our communities (of a more religious bent) refuse to avail themselves of any form of advanced technology.

3) We have more important things to spend our meagre financial resources on, such as food.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

and I find 5.1 rather ambiguous.

you right

maybe the following will be better:

-5.1- Sharing technologies with nations who don't have yet access to them

Cobdenia I think you only want something to whine about. I believe that it is impossible to create a resolution that fits all nations in nationstates. I have done my best to create a resolution that will help the children of the world and give them a chance at a better future. I do not mean to be rude, I merely wish to say that I believe this resolution is for the greater good. I want this resolution to be focused on computers and that area of technology. This resolution would be very expensive and I don't wish to add anymore expenses to that. Many resolutions have been passed before that were very expensive but they helped the people, environment, and economy of the world. I do like the ideas that all of you have sent me and I will take them into consideration when I submit this proposal. I will change a few words around to include computers and greater technology and I will make sure this resolution costs as little as possible. Thank you everyone for all of your help

Caradune

No support for the following reasons:

1) We don't need universal access to computers as we already have books and other media.

2) Many of our communities (of a more religious bent) refuse to avail themselves of any form of advanced technology.

3) We have more important things to spend our meagre financial resources on, such as food.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

As stated above the Commonwealth of Libearty also has religious groups who refuse to use any modern technologies. Also seeing that the UN has a universal bill of rights, which includes freedom of religion (see resolution 26 Article 1), this bill would infringe upon these people's religious beliefs, without a valid reason. Ie. if someone's religious beliefs included the killing of other people then that right to life of the person being killed overrides the other person's religious beliefs.

Also in section 5 you require that a malfunctioning computer be sent back to the manufacturer for repair. Several objections: A) what if the original manufacturer is out of business and B) why require that they be sent back to the manufacturer, quite often it's cheaper, faster, and easier for a tech person to fix the computer on site, also the UN has no jurisdiction over individual companies, rather it's jurisdiction extends only so far as countries who are members therefore if you wish to have this passed and actually used, it should instead say something to the effect that a country will insure that the computer has (oh say) 98% uptime, there's no reasonable way that you can insure 100% uptime as all things do break down.

Anyways those are the initial concerns of the Commonwealth of Libearty.

What category should this proposal be under and how strong should it be? I really need help with this one.

Caradune

What category should this proposal be under and how strong should it be? I really need help with this one.

Caradune

should be more like a general assembly resoultion, which is not binding on its members as opposed to a security council type resolution.

should be more like a general assembly resoultion, which is not binding on its members as opposed to a security council type resolution.
This isn't the "real" UN. We don't have a Security Council. All resolutions are binding.

Cobdenia I think you only want something to whine about. I believe that it is impossible to create a resolution that fits all nations in nationstates.

(ooc)No, it is not. It is merely impossible to create a resolution that fits all nations if you insist on goals that would be vastly impractical IRL and then on top of that insist on something that only works with one particular tech level.
IRL more than half the world's population has still never even made a phone call, let alone used the internet, so this resolution would be running before you can walk. And even the $100 figure you talk about would be more than 2 years' income for many citizens of third world countries.
Now when you add *that* level of impracticality to the fact that NS contains many nations with pre-steam technology while containing others that are so far advanced above the levels spoken of here that you might as well put a resolution through saying that all children must have a slate to write on, you're left with a proposal that is completely unworkable.
A way that *would* work is to say that all children should have access to levels of information technology equal to those in day-to-day use by the middle classes of that society. In a stone-age society, that could be drawing on the cave walls. In a Victorian society, books and an abacus, today, a Windows PC (ugh, I know, everything has its drawbacks) with internet access, and in a thousand years a small chip placed in the brain that contains all the recorded information of the whole of history.
This would also have the advantage of making sure that the resolution was time-proofed. Given the differences between technology now and ten years ago, this resolution would be obsolete almost instantly.

This isn't the "real" UN. We don't have a Security Council. All resolutions are binding.

Unless you do the semi-binding "urging/encouraging" as opposed to "Mandating"

I don't get why this is a UN thing. As it happens everyone has free access to the internet in my nation - we believe it is good for education and democracy (etc), but that's just our nation. I can see why other nations might not want it - the internet is just a faster delivery system for gossip and pornography and I can see why people might not want all their kids having access.

Further more - why 12? Kids in Pallatium start school at 3, and are capable of using computers by 7. Why should they not have access?

I have submitted the proposal to the U.N. as Computers for School Children. Feel free to approve it if you would like to. If anyone has anymore advice you can give it. Also the age is very important because children under 12 do not really need it and if they recieved a computer the price of this resolution would go up.

I have submitted the proposal to the U.N. as Computers for School Children. Feel free to approve it if you would like to. If anyone has anymore advice you can give it. Also the age is very important because children under 12 do not really need it and if they recieved a computer the price of this resolution would go up.

Kids learn better when they are younger. There is ample evidence of this all over the place. So if kids are taught to use computers when they are eight or nine they will pick it up much faster than when they are twelve. (I admit as the age goes down it stops being true, but most of the girls in my country seem to demonstrate their learning best when they are seven or eight. Now that could just be cause they are fast developers - they leave school at thirteen - but maybe it would be true elsewhere).

But the overriding question remains - why should this be an international issue? What about countries that - like mine - are almost 100% farm land and farms and have very little need for computers? Why should we be forced to do this when we don't need it?

You are talking about technology and finances, but this are the less imporant issues:
1. If all children have their own computer, and they don't pay for it, they'll do a breaking contest, they will create viruses for themself just for making the teachers angry.
2. If all children will be connected to the internet, why would they listen to their teacher when they can surf the internet?
3. If they have access to all sites, they will enter adults only sites, you just can't prevent that without limiting the connection.
4. If all children are conected to each other through chats, they will insult and even blackmail each other without anyone to stop them.
5. They will install things you don't want them to install.

I think that students should be teached through interesing ways and then they will be educated well, MAKE THEM WANT TO LEARN BY THEMSELF OR THEY WON'T LEARN AT ALL!

Magriver
The UN Delegate of the Democratic League.

The people of Cluichstan would like access to the recreational drugs being consumed in Magriver.

The people of Cluichstan would like access to the recreational drugs being consumed in Magriver.

Ha, Ha, Ha.
Very funny.
It's a fact, if you will give me a computer, I won't listen to the teacher, my friends won't, all of my school won't. Before you give someone a computer, make sure that he is mature enough, that his teachers are good teachers(not nice but good), and even that the cost of fixing the computer will go to the parents of the every pupil in the classroom.
Another fact: children do what you tell them not to if they are not mature, and 12 is not mature enough. I was 12 and everyone in my class were acting like 3 year olds exept for 7 pupils.(I am not counting myself because no one can tell about himself if he is mature)
The one thing that most countries doesn't teach is how to learn without a teacher, and computers don't help that.
Do you know about the democratic school in England?
That way to teach is the best way because pupils want to learn things if they don't have to do it, and if they can choose the hour to do it.
It's a fact that more precents of the pupils that learn in that school succeeded in university.

And drugs are not legal in my country, maybe in your country.

We haven't got enough money in our nation to take part in this resolution if proposed.
I fear if it is passed we will have to leave the UN due to lack of funds for this resolution which will endanger even more of our nations people.
As the only thing currently stopping an invasion from the Vietnamese Liberated Nation is us being apart of the UN we would like to stress how much of damaging thing this would be to allot of UN nations including our own.

although we have a high enough tech level and enough computers already in our schools and universities we cannot support this.

We also believe that this is another case of UN micro-management although well meaning.

Each nation state is different in its structure, beliefs and technology level and education is a government responsibility not a UN one.

Greetings to the UN Delegate from Caradune!

We have already supported your proposal for Computers for Children. However, it is likely not to pass on this round seeing how it needs about 60 more approvals in a day.

You can, of course, resubmit the proposal after it lapses and try again. It has happened, and people try over and over with proposals, sometimes editing them between submissions.

One thing you might note is that some nations may require a significant increase in power-consumption to deal with having computers for all children. What would a remote village do with 30 computers and no power generation?

Remember that in some nations, children account for half the population, sometimes more. This could, in effect, double the country's energy intensity (number of units of energy consumed to produce a dollar of GDP), and double energy consumption.

Access to computers and modern technology is important -- without question. The issue is whether the ratio of 1:1 is sustainable in all countries regardless of economic or infrastructure settings.

Also note that not all computers are functionally equivalent. And that Internet connectivity or software can be as vital as simply having a lunk of metal and plastic plopped on each child's desk.

I suggest, if this bill does not pass, that it be resubmitted with considerations for creating a proper 'electronic classroom.' It might require sharing of computers in certain cases, and it might require networking setup and even, say, solar, wind or other environmentally-neutral power projects to ensure that a class actually can operate their equipment, plus donations or low-cost versions of software applications and utilities for sciences, mathematics, writing and artistic expression. [Edit: It does touch this already, but does not specify what sort of software is desired, and whether it meets national curriculum standards, is localized to the nation, etc.]

Also consider that governments might wish to allow parents to afford computers for their own children rather than have them provided by the government, but allow the government to establish subsidies or reimbursement programs. They would need to be 'as good or better' than what might be provided de facto for the student, but this gives parents choice, and students of means greatest advantage. (Unfair as this might seem.)

You might index it so that there is a ratio set up for a minimum ratio of computers-to-students based on economic output in a nation -- GDP per capita. So that below a certain GDP per capita, a certain ratio could be used -- even as little as 1:100 or 1:50, and in other nations with high GDP per capita (say, above $30,000 in constant dollars to account for inflation over time), a ratio of 1:1 can be achieved. [Edit: It generally gets around to this, but does not give definitions of what 'some access' might be.]

This way, nations of different economic means can each participate and comply with the programme, and scale their budgets as their GDPs rise and fall.

It may not be 'fair' to students in poor nations, but there is no reason to artificially conflate problems by dumping effectively useless computers on markets that are not ready to deal with them, or their massive increase in power consumption.

Curiously, in many advanced nations, the number of computers per student may be rising above 1:1. A student might have, say, a laptop, a school desktop computer, a wireless Internet handheld, and their Internet-enabled mobile phone, which is a computing device in a way.

The issue is not to pretend that an impoverished nation of a few million souls and an imploded economy can compete with a frightening nation of over six billion souls.

Or inversely, that a large country's imploded economy would have to suffer the power consumption of literally over a billion personal computers for their children.

We need to have a program that allows each nation to afford, as it can, better computing for their students, better networking, and appropriate software applications to enable teaching and learning to flourish.

The idea of mandating that all UN nations promote technology education the same way is not constructive, in my opinion. If this proposal were to urge nations to find their own solutions, encourage nations to take certain, largely universal (though not absolutely universal) steps, or form in the UN a support structure to help UN members increase the technology education in their nations, then maybe I'd support it.

But as of now, is just seems another "I think it's good for my country, therefore it's good for every country" thing. Honestly, I would've thought the UN'd outgrown such naïveté by now. The UN should not be construed--immaturely, I feel--as a conduit through which 30,000+ nations receive divine wisdom as to how to govern their domestic issues. Rather, it's function should be (and can only effectively be) a conglomerate of nations who work together, inclusively rather than exclusively, in solving international problems.

I mean, just because I like to play house one way, doesn't mean you have to play house the same way.

The idea of mandating that all UN nations promote technology education the same way is not constructive, in my opinion. If this proposal were to urge nations to find their own solutions, encourage nations to take certain, largely universal (though not absolutely universal) steps, or form in the UN a support structure to help UN members increase the technology education in their nations, then maybe I'd support it.

But as of now, is just seems another "I think it's good for my country, therefore it's good for every country" thing. Honestly, I would've thought the UN'd outgrown such naïveté by now. The UN should not be construed--immaturely, I feel--as a conduit through which 30,000+ nations receive divine wisdom as to how to govern their domestic issues. Rather, it's function should be (and can only effectively be) a conglomerate of nations who work together, inclusively rather than exclusively, in solving international problems.

I mean, just because I like to play house one way, doesn't mean you have to play house the same way.


Thanks for your interest about this proposition.

I learned in this forum the definition of "DECLARE"

In one of your proposition, which i like very much: UN resolution #79 Reformed Literacy Initiative
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=78

is a clause that i fully approve:

"DECLARES, as a right for all, the opportunity to learn how to read and write in the official language(s) of a nation and extend this right to all citizens with in member nations;"

Our nation didn't exist at that time, but i would like to congratulate you for it.

Please let me know if i'm wrong but it seems to me that:

"-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs."

in our proposition, is almost the same.

As society evolves => basic needed education is growing
before: basic needed education was about read, write, count etc..
Nowadays basic needed education also include Information Technology education

In the future, i'm pretty certain others skills will be added to "basic needed education"

i hope i have answered to your question

We congratulate this proposal for getting over 100 UN Delegates to support it! We hope it gets the others needed to achieve quorum before the world body.

Bon chance!

I learned in this forum the definition of "DECLARE"

In one of your proposition, which i like very much: UN resolution #79 Reformed Literacy Initiative
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=78

is a clause that i fully approve:

"DECLARES, as a right for all, the opportunity to learn how to read and write in the official language(s) of a nation and extend this right to all citizens with in member nations;"

Our nation didn't exist at that time, but i would like to congratulate you for it.

Please let me know if i'm wrong but it seems to me that:

"-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs."

in our proposition, is almost the same.I do not see them as the same, thouhg I think you are justified in bringing this apparent inconsistency.

First, I will note that Reformed Literacy Initiative was passed November 2nd, 2004, and was just my second passed resolution. Since then I have had a lot of time to develop what I feel is a more mature view of how the UN should interact with its members.

Second, the difference I see between "Declares" and "Mandates" is that "Declares" doesn't make countries do anything. It's just a semantic declaraton, and not a direct attachment of national legislation. It's like a mission statement, or a policy statement, not actual policies or procedures. It's what "Refomed Literacy Initiative" later does, in mandating certain minimums for literacy education, that is like your "Mandates" clause.

And, to be frank, I was wrong to mandate those things. Nations have to account to their people, not the UN. If the people of a UN nation felt the literacy education weren't adequate, then the national government should have changed what it was doing. I mean, I think there is plenty of reasonable interest in literacy and think the UN can do a lot on the topic, but I think my resolution in it largely went about it in the wrong way. I eventually hope to repeal and replace some of my early resolutions, like "Reformed Literacy Initiative".

I do not see them as the same, thouhg I think you are justified in bringing this apparent inconsistency.

First, I will note that Reformed Literacy Initiative was passed November 2nd, 2004, and was just my second passed resolution. Since then I have had a lot of time to develop what I feel is a more mature view of how the UN should interact with its members.

Second, the difference I see between "Declares" and "Mandates" is that "Declares" doesn't make countries do anything. It's just a semantic declaraton, and not a direct attachment of national legislation. It's like a mission statement, or a policy statement, not actual policies or procedures. It's what "Refomed Literacy Initiative" later does, in mandating certain minimums for literacy education, that is like your "Mandates" clause.

And, to be frank, I was wrong to mandate those things. Nations have to account to their people, not the UN. If the people of a UN nation felt the literacy education weren't adequate, then the national government should have changed what it was doing. I mean, I think there is plenty of reasonable interest in literacy and think the UN can do a lot on the topic, but I think my resolution in it largely went about it in the wrong way. I eventually hope to repeal and replace some of my early resolutions, like "Reformed Literacy Initiative".

1. when i was wrinting adoption&ivf, it happen at a time that nothing was mandated in the draft and many nations in this forum urged me: "this proposition must DO something"

2. You repealed this proposition yourself but, this clause was written by you (i don't disagree with it at all):

2 REQUESTS member nations allow for those who cannot pay their debts to declare bankruptcy: so they may not be pursued by lenders whom they have no means to pay;

3.ok for DECLARES, your knowledge on this matter is for sure better than mine, but i understood before in this same forum that "declare" has a direct attachment of national legislation, thanks for helping me on this point, i'm totally lost

4.apart from your general dislike about "mandates" and "request" which i fully understand, you didn't expose any argument for why a child would not need inrformation technology education

as it got 114 approvals last week, Caradune resubmitted it today
the preliminary clause -A- have been changed after a suggestion by Mikitivity

---------------------------
The United Nations,

-A- CONCERNED by the number of children who do not have basic access to a computer

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-C- FULLY AWARE of the difference of technology level between member nations

-D- SEEKING to minimize the cost of the following clauses

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap and basic computers designed by non-profit organisations


-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs.

-2- URGES all nations to secure for every child, aged more than 12, some access in school to information technology school equipment with educational software and internet access,

-3- ENCOURAGES all Nations, where the cost of this clause will not be significant, to secure that every child, aged more than 12, has a operational computer for himself with internet access and educational software, or more powerful high-tech educational tool. Computers, internet access or others tools could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them

-4- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by this resolution, by different means such as:

-4.1- providing cheap and basic computer designed by non-profit organisation as those that already exist

-4.2- Running the computers mentioned in this resolution with needed open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them or by non-profit organisation

-4.3- Proposing some non-profit organisation or some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign

-5- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by different means such as:

-5.1- Sharing technologies with nations who don't have yet access to them

-5.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector

-1- MANDATES all nations to provide each child, aged more than 12, Information Technology education; which can be integrated into National Education programs.




Although the people of Cluichstan believe this proposal to be a waste of this austere body's time when it has more pressing matters it should be addressing, we will not be affected, should it come to the floor and pass. We have no "National Education programs" through which to implement the only action it mandates.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstan's Ambassador to the UN
Regional Delegate from Scybala

the proposition we are co-authoring got 110 approvals for our 2nd submition, we didn't campaign a lot as we wanted to have some feedback to improve it and also collect a wider list of interested delegates.

we are also thinking to rename it, as the objective have changed since the first draft:

IT Education Act
or
IT Education Initiative

here is the new draft
thanks a lot for your comments, ideas, critics

------------------------------------------------
The United Nations,

-A- CONCERNED by the number of children who do not have basic information technology education,

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-C- FULLY AWARE of the difference of technology level between member nations

-D- SEEKING to minimize the cost of the following clauses

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisations


-1- URGES STRONGLY all nations to secure that each child, aged at least 12, receive some information technology education adapted to the national technology level. This can be integrated into National Education programs,

-2- ENCOURAGES STRONGLY all nations to secure for every child, aged at least 12, some access in school to information technology school equipment with educational software and internet access,

-3- SUPPORTS operations which provide children, personal computers with internet access and educational software, or more powerful high-tech educational tool, when the cost for the Nations will not be significant. Computers, internet access or others tools could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them

-4- RECCOMANDS all nations to be prudent by ensuring that these actions don’t undermine or reduce currents nutritional, health or clothing efforts

-5- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by this resolution, by different means such as:

-5.1- providing cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisation as those that already exist

-5.2- Running the computers mentioned in this resolution with needed open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them or by non-profit organisation

-5.3- Proposing some non-profit organisation or some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign

-6- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by different means such as:

-6.1- Sharing technologies with nations who don't have yet access to them

-6.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector

1. when i was wrinting adoption&ivf, it happen at a time that nothing was mandated in the draft and many nations in this forum urged me: "this proposition must DO something"
Well, they were wrong to do that. It's a pretty naive thing to think that to have any effect one must have an absolute effect. Respect and Responsibility as well as execution and accountability need to be in balance. Those who complain that a proposal "must have teeth", or "must DO something" are mostly either ignorant of realistic exigencies or of the negative effects "teethy proposals" have on a vast number of nations.
[/quote]
And that clause was a large part of why I repealed the proposal: I needed to condone less of a certain system of tax, otherwise I'd be a hypocrit when I later said that nations have a right to decide their own systems of tax.

3.ok for DECLARES, your knowledge on this matter is for sure better than mine, but i understood before in this same forum that "declare" has a direct attachment of national legislation, thanks for helping me on this point, i'm totally lost

4.apart from your general dislike about "mandates" and "request" which i fully understand, you didn't expose any argument for why a child would not need inrformation technology education
Well, I'm not sure a child needs it. There's a subtle line between a "want" and a "need". There aren't infinite resources to pour into education, yet the more resources spent the better it seems the better the education seems to be. There needs to be an equilibrium reached. I'm not convinced that that equilibrium for each nation in the UN will include buying technology systems, computers, et al for every child.

However, I'm in full support of encouraging individual school systems to place a greater importance on technology and computers (however you want to take that). In other words, I like the idea and ambition you have. I just don't like the idea that that ambition might harm a nation's education system. Such as it a mandate for computers for every child would in RL Afghanistan might (which likely doesn't have the support staff for all those).

Well, they were wrong to do that. It's a pretty naive thing to think that to have any effect one must have an absolute effect. Respect and Responsibility as well as execution and accountability need to be in balance. Those who complain that a proposal "must have teeth", or "must DO something" are mostly either ignorant of realistic exigencies or of the negative effects "teethy proposals" have on a vast number of nations.

And that clause was a large part of why I repealed the proposal: I needed to condone less of a certain system of tax, otherwise I'd be a hypocrit when I later said that nations have a right to decide their own systems of tax.

Well, I'm not sure a child needs it. There's a subtle line between a "want" and a "need". There aren't infinite resources to pour into education, yet the more resources spent the better it seems the better the education seems to be. There needs to be an equilibrium reached. I'm not convinced that that equilibrium for each nation in the UN will include buying technology systems, computers, et al for every child.

However, I'm in full support of encouraging individual school systems to place a greater importance on technology and computers (however you want to take that). In other words, I like the idea and ambition you have. I just don't like the idea that that ambition might harm a nation's education system. Such as it a mandate for computers for every child would in RL Afghanistan might (which likely doesn't have the support staff for all those).


thanks for your comment
we had modified the text, and i posted our modifications, in the post preceeding yours
------------------------------------------------
The United Nations,

-A- CONCERNED by the number of children who do not have basic information technology education,

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-C- FULLY AWARE of the difference of technology level between member nations

-D- SEEKING to minimize the cost of the following clauses

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisations


-1- URGES STRONGLY all nations to secure that each child, aged at least 12, receive some information technology education adapted to the national technology level. This can be integrated into National Education programs,

-2- ENCOURAGES STRONGLY all nations to secure for every child, aged at least 12, some access in school to information technology school equipment with educational software and internet access,

-3- SUPPORTS operations which provide children, personal computers with internet access and educational software, or more powerful high-tech educational tool, when the cost for the Nations will not be significant. Computers, internet access or others tools could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them

-4- RECCOMANDS all nations to be prudent by ensuring that these actions don’t undermine or reduce currents nutritional, health or clothing efforts

-5- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by this resolution, by different means such as:

-5.1- providing cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisation as those that already exist

-5.2- Running the computers mentioned in this resolution with needed open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them or by non-profit organisation

-5.3- Proposing some non-profit organisation or some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign

-6- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by different means such as:

-6.1- Sharing technologies with nations who don't have yet access to them

-6.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector
__________________

Since this is coming to a vote after the current one, I figured I would ask something that has been bugging me for a little while


What does it do? It doesn't require us to do anything, just suggests, recommends and urges various things.

So -- what does it DO exactly?

So -- what does it DO exactly?IC it's trying to convince nations to do stuff, but it doesn't actually do anything. OOC it modifies your nation's stats. I automatically vote against all such resolutions. (I'd vote nay if it actually mandated what it encourages, though. No government schools (except for schools for government stuff like military service) in Nianacio.)

As True Evil UN delegate, I must protest this resolution. So what a bunch of whining kids don't have access to computers. It's a priviledge, not a right. Besdies the fact, obesity rates in children are riasing, Its high time they got off their butts and got some good old fashion excerise outdoors.

Having a computer and/or access to one, is for the priviledged. Children do not need computers to survive, in fact, becuase of the obesity issues, computers are helping to increase the need for better medical facilities to treat all the fat related health issues (not to mention the extra $$$ they cost the health system).

I say vote against making access to computers a right. It's a priviledge people! It's like owning a car. It's not a right to own one, it's a priviledge.

IC it's trying to convince nations to do stuff, but it doesn't actually do anything. OOC it modifies your nation's stats. I automatically vote against all such resolutions. (I'd vote nay if it actually mandated what it encourages, though. No government schools (except for schools for government stuff like military service) in Nianacio.)

(smirk) I got the stats part, thanks :} But IC - it doesn't require anything to happen so the entire UN can ignore it? Surely that has to break some kind of rule?

What does it do? It doesn't require us to do anything, just suggests, recommends and urges various things.

So -- what does it DO exactly?

"IT Education Initiative" promotes and praises the virtue of Information Technology education in all UN Nations, it does something.

Yes this proposition we co-authored doesn't requires us to do anything, but sometimes the effect of something "urged" and "encouraged" can be greater than something "mandated".

We had a discussion about it, with the author, Caradune, we both agreed to use "STRONGLY URGES" in -1-, i personnally don't care if it's "STRONGLY URGES" or "MANDATES" here.

"IT Education Initiative" is MESSAGE, a move very similar to "The Sex Education Act",
http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/The_Sex_Education_Act?goobergunch1_session=0bdbf1d9148c3c5c2e2c9c81af55b8c8
and Right to Learn about Evolution
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=100

So what a bunch of whining kids don't have access to computers. It's a priviledge, not a right.

So what a bunch of whining kids don't have access to books? Is it a priviledge, not a right?

Our society evolves, basic education evolves and nowadays It education is becoming something ESSENTIAL

Besdies the fact, obesity rates in children are riasing, Its high time they got off their butts and got some good old fashion excerise outdoors.

Very interesting, if you write a proposition promoting "Sport Education", Love and esterel will help you and will be a strong support, this is a great idea you have (but no needs to say "Its high time they got off their butts":p )

No government schools (except for schools for government stuff like military service) in Nianacio.)

Love and esterel is horrified with the fact that there are only schools for government stuff like military service in Nianacio.

Anyway, we are pretty sure that your military activities use some Information Technology, and you already provides or will need to provide some IT education in these schools.

So what a bunch of whining kids don't have access to books? Is it a priviledge, not a right?

Our society evolves, basic education evolves and nowadays It education is becoming something ESSENTIALWell, in some nations it's more "essential" than others. In some it's not "essential" at all. In Powerhungry Chipmunks, for example books still prevail as the main pedagogical tool among the rural and urban areas, as the education leaders are 1) unsure they want to lessen children's tactile relationship with the world around thm any more and 2) are more concerned with spending their funds right now on ensuring the growing number of children have a school to go to at all, or a half-way decent teacher to teach them. to force the government to buy school computers for every child would be a waste, as the schools simply don't require them, and the money simply isn't available to invest in computers rather than construction and hiring better teachers.

"IT Education Initiative" promotes and praises the virtue of Information Technology education in all UN Nations, it does something.

Yes this proposition we co-authored doesn't requires us to do anything, but sometimes the effect of something "urged" and "encouraged" can be greater than something "mandated".

We had a discussion about it, with the author, Caradune, we both agreed to use "STRONGLY URGES" in -1-, i personnally don't care if it's "STRONGLY URGES" or "MANDATES" here.

"IT Education Initiative" is MESSAGE, a move very similar to "The Sex Education Act",
http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/The_Sex_Education_Act?goobergunch1_session=0bdbf1d9148c3c5c2e2c9c81af55b8c8
and Right to Learn about Evolution
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=100

But it doesn't actually do anything. It does not require me to do take any action when it passes. At least the goddess-forsaken evolution thing indicates that you must do something in some cases.

And honestly - the Sex Education Act is pretty pathetic as well.

If a law isn't going to acomplish something other than make us feel good about it, why the hell is anyone wasting time voting on it?

If a law isn't going to acomplish something other than make us feel good about it, why the hell is anyone wasting time voting on it?

A psychotic need to legislate, I suspect.

(smirk) I got the stats part, thanks :}Yeah, but if I hadn't included that someone might have responded by saying I should vote for it because it won't do Nianacio any harm.But IC - it doesn't require anything to happen so the entire UN can ignore it? Surely that has to break some kind of rule?Nope and AFAIK nope. >_>Anyway, we are pretty sure that your military activities use some Information Technology, and you already provides or will need to provide some IT education in these schools.Indeed. Our military education is of quite a high quality.

But it doesn't actually do anything. It does not require me to do take any action when it passes. At least the goddess-forsaken evolution thing indicates that you must do something in some cases.

And honestly - the Sex Education Act is pretty pathetic as well.

If a law isn't going to acomplish something other than make us feel good about it, why the hell is anyone wasting time voting on it?
*rolls eyes*

To answer your question, let's consider the exigency of the RL UN for a moment. Any idea why the RL UN resolutions aren't universally adopted by magical gnomes in member nations? Why they wouldn't tell all nations they must comply with a resolution saying every child should have a keyboard and mouse?

Here's, to my understanding, why exigencies of the RL UN disallow the manic enforcement of the NSUN
There are no magical gnomes (to my knowledge) which can simultaneously and instantaneously rewrite nations' laws or manhandle governments into conformity. In fact, there's doubtfully even a combined military force (European and American militaries or whatever) large enough to enforce such a uniformity in any realistic space of time, and certainly not without gross human rights violations by such a force.
The UN recognizes, rightly, that it, just because it thinks such and such is right, cannot and should not just rewrite another nation's law. That's just bad practice. At least, that's my understanding.
If the UN were so totalitarian in its governance of member nations, no one would be a member. In the Real World, there's a diversity of opinion and understanding of what things are most important and what things are not. This diversity would be grossly molested if the Real UN said "here's what you need to spend x money on, and you aren't allowed to do this, oh, and you must buy computers for every school children because we say so."
Individual nations potentially have large ability to resist economic and military pressures, even those that persist over time. Just look at Cuba, which has endured decades of economic penalties. Poor it is, true, but broken it is not. This means that in order to enforce the fairly arbitrary legislation universally among all member nations the UN would need disastrously large economic and military resources. Did someone say “global dictatorship”?
The UN is not representative of people. The people in Podunkville, South Dakota, who have just enough money in the school budget to purchase twelve desks for their twenty-five students have no effective say in the UN's vote which would decide whether they’d even be able to do that (since the money would have to be used to buy computers instead). The UN is democratic in that every nation gets a vote. But local issues are abused by international decision. And even a democracy, if it goes through enough layers to make decisions, becomes unjust and unrepresentative.


So, to summarize the list above: 1) There's no mechanism to do it (magic gnomes, which arguably don't exist, via I.G.N.O.R.E. cannons, in the NS world either) and it'd be impractical to try to universally enforce a global national agenda (such as buying computers for every school child) with current resources. 2) It'd be unjust to do so. National, Provincial and Local governments have a much better chance to represent their respective realms of authority and the people involved in that than a distant and unaware-to-situations UN. The UN, which is against totalitarian regimes, is not about to be a megalomaniacal despot itself. 3) It wouldn't have any members if it were to undemocratically enforce arbitrary legislation on its members.

So, as you see, we don't "not get anything done" (which is a misrepresentation in and of itself) because we're lazy or whatnot. But rather because "getting something done" (or, as I feel more accurate, "undemocratically enslaving nations to arbitrary legislation") is unrealistic in Real Life and, if you discount the gnomes, in NS to a large degree as well.

gnomes

Personally i don’t know much about gnomes, so i will not discuss about them.

As we made some changes, i just want to post once again the new proposition text
We also chose a new name:

"IT Education Initiative"

i want to congratulate Caradune, as "IT Education Initiative" reached quorum; the UN vote will begin Saturday


-------------------------------------------------------------------
IT Education Initiative

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Caradune

Description: The United Nations,

-A- CONCERNED by the number of children who do not have basic information technology education,

-B- CONVINCED that the mastering of Information Technology is essential in the education of every child worldwide and for his/her own future

-C- FULLY AWARE of the difference of technology level between member nations

-D- SEEKING to minimize the cost of the following clauses

-E- FULLY AWARE of the availability of cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisations


-1- STRONGLY URGES all nations to secure that each child, aged at least 12, receive some information technology education adapted to the national technology level. This can be integrated into National Education programs,

-2- ENCOURAGES STRONGLY all nations to secure for every child, aged at least 12, some access in school to information technology school equipment with educational software and internet access,

-3- SUPPORTS operations which provide children, personal computers with internet access and educational software, or more powerful high-tech educational tool, when the cost for the Nations will not be significant. Computers, internet access or others tools could be bought or rented at a very modest price for children not able to afford them

-4- RECCOMENDS all nations to be prudent by ensuring that these actions don’t undermine or reduce nutritional, health or clothing efforts

-5- ENCOURAGES all Nations to try to limit the cost induced by this resolution, by different means such as:

-5.1- providing cheap, basic and low power-consumption computers designed by non-profit organisation as those that already exist

-5.2- Running the computers mentioned in this resolution with needed open-source software, freeware or software graciously paid or discounted by companies, as a sponsoring operation for them or by non-profit organisation

-5.3- Proposing some non-profit organisation or some companies to graciously offer some computers, internet access and technical support, as a sponsoring operation for them which can prove more efficient than a TV ad campaign

-6- ENCOURAGES all developed Nations to help developing Nations to implement this program, by different means such as:

-6.1- Sharing technologies with nations who don't have yet access to them

-6.2- Giving access to these nations to a low rate loan/bonds system, which will be repaid in middle term by the growth of the amount of taxes collected due to the growth of information technology economic sector

Co-authored by Love and esterel
Approvals: 208
Status: Quorum Reached: In Queue!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ecopoeia takes heart in the lack of any imperatives in this resolution. However, we have no wish to endorse its recommendations and urgings, so will likely vote against or abstain.

Varia Yefremova
Speaker to the UN

OOC: Excellent analysis, PC.

I can't get too enthusiastic either way about this one. I'm not sure there's anything missing, necessarily, just not sure I can get too worked up about it. I'll have a think. In any case, congratulations on reaching quorum.

Now it's only an urges, I support it.

Well written, good intentions, and doesn't effect industrial era nations like my own.

This latest draft is acceptable to us, too.

OOC: PC, all resolutions that pass in NS are put into force by magical gnomes that simultaneously and instantaneously rewrite nations' laws or manhandle governments into conformity. I certainly don't click a "Do as the resolution suggests" button.Well written, good intentions, and doesn't effect industrial era nations like my own.But it does affect you, by modifying your nation's statistics. You can RP however you want, but as long as you're a UN member your nation is always affected by UN resolutions that pass.

*rolls eyes*
(snip)
So, as you see, we don't "not get anything done" (which is a misrepresentation in and of itself) because we're lazy or whatnot. But rather because "getting something done" (or, as I feel more accurate, "undemocratically enslaving nations to arbitrary legislation") is unrealistic in Real Life and, if you discount the gnomes, in NS to a large degree as well.

Thank you for that enlightening, if somewhat patronising, lecture.

But the thing is - this is not the RL UN and there are many reasons why that is true. This is a game, and this is a resolution that - it could be argued - not affect any stats because it is entirely ignorable. Yet I suspect the game will not let that be the case - this will screw with a nation in some way, even though the nation can ignore it completely for RP purposes.

There things out there that need doing, and we are fannying around passing laws that have no effect on anyone. And if this were real life, I would accept it, but it's not, so I don't.

OOC: PC, all resolutions that pass in NS are put into force by magical gnomes that simultaneously and instantaneously rewrite nations' laws or manhandle governments into conformity. I certainly don't click a "Do as the resolution suggests" button.But it does affect you, by modifying your nation's statistics. You can RP however you want, but as long as you're a UN member your nation is always affected by UN resolutions that pass.

Forgive me, but when I talk of it not affecting my nation, I mean in an RP sense. I know that it will effect my stats...

Forgive me, but when I talk of it not affecting my nation, I mean in an RP sense. I know that it will effect my stats...If it doesn't exist (or is the ramblings of a suspected loon/sorceror?) IC and messes up your nation OOC, why vote for it? I really don't understand. :\

Edit: Unless I'm misunderstanding you and you like the effect it has on your nation?

But the thing is - this is not the RL UN and there are many reasons why that is true. This is a game, and this is a resolution that - it could be argued - not affect any stats because it is entirely ignorable. Yet I suspect the game will not let that be the case - this will screw with a nation in some way, even though the nation can ignore it completely for RP purposes.


Of course it won't be ignored. It will force the government of Cluichstan to enact some form of income tax, which it currently does not have at all, in order to pay for the outlays required by the proposal.

Thank you for that enlightening, if somewhat patronising, lecture.I apologize for any patronizing that occurred.

But the thing is - this is not the RL UN and there are many reasons why that is true. This is a game, and this is a resolution that - it could be argued - not affect any stats because it is entirely ignorable. Yet I suspect the game will not let that be the case - this will screw with a nation in some way, even though the nation can ignore it completely for RP purposes.
No, it is not the RL UN, You're completely. But, the exigencies which dictate a looser compliance to the RL UN are present in the NS UN as well. All I'm saying is that (1) it's somewhat realistic for a resolution not to attempt to force nations into some arbitrary legislative point. And (2) that resolutions don't have to "do" something: they're allowed to be democratic and open-minded.

There things out there that need doing, and we are fannying around passing laws that have no effect on anyone. And if this were real life, I would accept it, but it's not, so I don't.
Hitler rose to power on a platform that we would make the economy work. According to his wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler) Hitler and the government were granted "sweeping emergency powers" after the economic situation became most dismal and after the fire in the Reichstag. These, of course, were granted because of the promise to "get things done" economically and in a law and order sense. But, well, I don't think I need to rehash the eventual results of oppression and totalitarianism

According to here (http://www.euronet.nl/users/wilfried/ww2/mussolin.htm), of Mussolini "it was said, 'He made the trains run on time' (by shooting someone if they didn't)". According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini) Benito "built up the legend of Il Duce, a man who never slept, was always right, and could solve all the problems of politics and economics". To me this sounds a lot like the NSUN you seem to want to establish as controlling every aspect of our national governments.

Dictators often use "getting results" or "having some real effect" as an excuse to undertake some extreme measures. So, I dismiss it as an argument to do anything. Perhaps effectiveness needs to be taken into consideration, but always tempered with respect of and giving way to differing opinions and respect to individual nations' abilities to respond to their individual situations. What I hear when UN members say the UN has to "get things done", or that allowing nations flexibility in legislation is "fannying around passing laws that have no effect on anyone" is an ambition towards a UN dictatorship. "Trample the opposition! Burn the dissenters! Just make sure it gets results and all means are justifiable!" That's what it seems to me.

Dictators often use "getting results" or "having some real effect" as an excuse to undertake some extreme measures. So, I dismiss it as an argument to do anything. Perhaps effectiveness needs to be taken into consideration, but always tempered with respect of and giving way to differing opinions and respect to individual nations' abilities to respond to their individual situations. What I hear when UN members say the UN has to "get things done", or that allowing nations flexibility in legislation is "fannying around passing laws that have no effect on anyone" is an ambition towards a UN dictatorship. "Trample the opposition! Burn the dissenters! Just make sure it gets results and all means are justifiable!" That's what it seems to me.

Take this


Children in War


A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Sydia

Description: The NationStates United Nations,

Noting with regret that thousands of children continue to be abducted to serve as soldiers, spies, messengers, servants and sexual slaves with armed forces and groups,

Realizing that poverty, propaganda and ideology also continue to drive the involvement of children in many conflict areas,

Deeply disturbed by the idea that children make obedient and cheap soldiers capable of instilling terror in civilians and opposing forces alike,

Observing that many of these children are generally poor, illiterate, and from rural regions,

Bearing in mind that many nations have a difficult time in protecting these children,

Convinced that the social and economic viability of the future of all nations lies in the humane treatment of children in general,

1. Bans the practise of conscripting or placing children under 16 years of age into national armed services;

2. Insists nations address the causes of child abduction by non-governmental organizations;

3. Emphasizes the need for nations to prevent cross-border abduction and human trafficking;

4. All parties in armed conflict must adopt special measures to protect children from rape and sexual abuse and gender based violence;

5. Expects nations to take into account the special needs of children throughout the duration of the armed conflict and its aftermath;

6. All UN nations must ensure that international measures be taken to take care of child refugees displaced by conflict;

7. Condemns and bans attacks of any sort on places that have a significant presence of children, such as schools, hospitals, and day care facilities;

8. Deplores and bans the practice of using children as human shields by integrating child care facilities, such as those listed above, with military facilities, and prohibits this practise; and

9. Acknowledges the right of nations to set up military academies and to teach children basic survival and defense skills.


though to a lesser degree as it does interfere with some laws, just not a lot.

It's possible to pass laws without turning the UN in to a dictatorship, and it is possible to pass resoultions that DO something other than let member nations feel good about themselves cause they have done something to help the needy.


A Resolution To Make People Feel Happy

1) Urges all people to give to charity at least once a year
2) Recommends tax breaks for people that do
3) Suggests governments increase their charity budgets


If I proposed that it would be ludicrious, and yet it does about as much as this one does.


Just make sure it gets results and all means are justifiable!


Also - I have argued strongly against "the ends justify the means" on a lot of occasions. But this has no ends at all.

It's possible to pass laws without turning the UN in to a dictatorship, and it is possible to pass resoultions that DO something other than let member nations feel good about themselves cause they have done something to help the needy.
Of course it is. All I'm saying is that "it needs to do something" isn't a valid argument because "doing something" is not a measure of the justifiedness of the means, nor does it often effect legislation that is respectful of individual situations. i.e. Being tough on human rights violations is different than getting tough on nations spending fewer than 1.75% of their budget on computers for school children. Both could be “getting tough” or “actually doing something” as you seem to be saying, yet one is unjustified. The variability of situations and the viability of alternatives must be considered as mitigating factors before a proposal text "gets tough" or "does something", as you say.

This is what I see when I imagine 'respect for national sovereignty': understanding the individuality of each nation and its situation, and being very careful to write legislation to respect that. Or, in short, having the guts to admit that sometimes individual member nations can do things better than me the proposal writer and that others' ideas and ideologies have just as much merit as mine. And, as a result, I haven't just been proposing repeals and NSoT-like legislation under the sovereignty flag, but also positive legislation which is aware of the individuality of national situations and ideologies. "The Microcredit Bazaar" didn't group everyone under one roof and force all nations to go after things a certain way. Nor did it even force the ideology of humanitarianism on anyone. It responded to the exigencies of a diverse UN, rather than a single-minded one.