NationStates Jolt Archive

Diversity of Government
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Pulcifer

Description: WHEREAS, as a new nation, the Grand Duchy of Pulcifer recognizes it's relatively young status as a member of the UN, and furthermore wishes to show its respect for all systems of government, it Hereby wishes to submit a resolution to this noble union to restrict the usage of the term DEMOCRACY as a euphemism for freedom. It can be seen that just because a nation does not have a fully democratic system of government this does not automatic ly reduce the freedom of its citizenry. FURTHERMORE a country can have a kind-but-unelected dictator who pleases the people even though they had no hand in electing him or her. THEREFORE The Duchy requests that the United Nations from this point on, reflect the diversity of governments by considering resolutions that control voting rights and instead focus on other, far more critical Human Rights such as the furtherment of Universal Suffrage or Education. The Duchy of Pulcifer hopes that the members of the UN will consider this proposal with all due respect.


I would ask you, my fellow members of the UN, to give this resolution a chance in elections. I ask you to let this proposal be given to the people of the U.N. I ask that this resolution not be left to die by uncaring regional delegates who see no profit in giving it the mere six percent intrest to allow into the air. Whether you believe by cause is just or not, I ask you to let this be decided by those who have the patronage of endorcements. Let this be a sign that the UN can see beyond its petty biases and truely accept all nations.

Your humble servant,

James C.P.
Viceroy of the Grand Duchy of Pulcifer.

1. Probably illegal.
2. I don't understand. You're trying not to impose democracy...yet at the same time you think 'Universal Suffrage' is 'important'?

All I ask is that you please use a spell check tool when you create proposals and when you post here. I also am having a hard time figuring out exactly what your proposal is meant to do. Would you mind clarifying, please?

Gruenburg, Universal Suffurage is important for thoses countries that embrace democracy. What needs to be understood is that some people don't wish to live in a democracy. Some are perfectly happy not having to vote. I merely wish to allow those countries who don't want to be a democracy allowed to be what they are. Culture is an important factor in society, and some do not believe in the vote. If there are those who dislike their countries government, then I believe that their is a resolution allowing free passage between all nations.

Gruenburg, Universal Suffurage is important for thoses countries that embrace democracy. What needs to be understood is that some people don't wish to live in a democracy. Some are perfectly happy not having to vote. I merely wish to allow those countries who don't want to be a democracy allowed to be what they are. Culture is an important factor in society, and some do not believe in the vote. If there are those who dislike their countries government, then I believe that their is a resolution allowing free passage between all nations.

Ok. Could you, in one sentence, say what your proposal actually does? It seems like it's telling the UN not to consider any proposals pertaining to democracy. If so, that'd be illegal.

Ok. Could you, in one sentence, say what your proposal actually does? It seems like it's telling the UN not to consider any proposals pertaining to democracy. If so, that'd be illegal.


*deletes what she was typing*

What he said. Also, could you explain exactly why making a resolution to protect governments from being changed fundamentally by UN decisions is necessary considering the fact that the rules for UN proposals state that any proposal banning or mandating a specific type of government is illegal and therefore won't even be considered for vote by the whole of the UN?

(pardon my really long sentence)

I am only asking that the UN recognise that nations have a right to be as undemocratic as the populous sees fit. If the citizens really hate it, they can overthrow the government or leave. I just do not want to keep hearing the word democracy automatically paired with freedom. Some of the greatest tragedies in the world came about because of democracy.

I am only asking that the UN recognise that nations have a right to be as undemocratic as the populous sees fit. If the citizens really hate it, they can overthrow the government or leave. I just do not want to keep hearing the word democracy automatically paired with freedom. Some of the greatest tragedies in the world came about because of democracy.

Right. Well the UN can't, as I see it, impose absolute democracy, nor ban it completely. You might want to look at "Citizen Rule Required". Otherwise though I don't think you actually have a problem: no one's going to force you to be democratic.

I am only asking that the UN recognise that nations have a right to be as undemocratic as the populous sees fit. If the citizens really hate it, they can overthrow the government or leave. I just do not want to keep hearing the word democracy automatically paired with freedom. Some of the greatest tragedies in the world came about because of democracy.

And thus, my really long sentence. *points to her above post*

They may not force me, but it is directly implied that the only good government is democratic. You can see this when you try to submit a resolution. There is a topic whos sole purpose is to Increase Democracy. That is a slap in the face to non-democratic countries, even Constitutional Monarchies.

They may not force me, but it is directly implied that the only good government is democratic. You can see this when you try to submit a resolution. There is a topic whos sole purpose is to Increase Democracy. That is a slap in the face to non-democratic countries, even Constitutional Monarchies.

So use one in the Political Stability, which is to decrease political freedoms. In fact, the resolution that just passed was PS.

At this point, it seems to me that your proposal's only interest is to argue semantics.

I am only asking that the UN recognise that nations have a right to be as undemocratic as the populous sees fit.
My brain hurts.

I'm sure someone already got this, but permit me to beat a wonderfully dead horse:

Diversity of Government
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Pulcifer

Description: WHEREAS, as a new nation, the Grand Duchy of Pulcifer

Branding: cannot put your region or yourself into the resolution text anywhere.

recognizes it's relatively young status as a member of the UN, and furthermore wishes to show its respect for all systems of government,

Age within the UN is irrelevant. Intelligence in debate - that is much more important.

it Hereby wishes to submit a resolution to this noble union to restrict the usage of the term DEMOCRACY as a euphemism for freedom. It can be seen that just because a nation does not have a fully democratic system of government this does not automatic ly reduce the freedom of its citizenry. FURTHERMORE a country can have a kind-but-unelected dictator who pleases the people even though they had no hand in electing him or her. THEREFORE The Duchy requests that the United Nations from this point on, reflect the diversity of governments by considering resolutions that control voting rights and instead focus on other, far more critical Human Rights such as the furtherment of Universal Suffrage or Education.

Proposal limitation..... debatable but considering that this currently looks like the crux of your argument, it would be an easy one to argue for killing your proposal. You're trying to tell people how they should vote on future resolutions

The Duchy of Pulcifer hopes that the members of the UN will consider this proposal with all due respect.

Branding, again and all proposals are considered - some for 5 seconds, some for 5 weeks.

I would ask you, my fellow members of the UN, to give this resolution a chance in elections. I ask you to let this proposal be given to the people of the U.N. I ask that this resolution not be left to die by uncaring regional delegates who see no profit in giving it the mere six percent intrest to allow into the air.

I don't know if this is in your proposal, but if it is, I suspect metagaming violation. It is absolutely irrelevant to the rest of your text.

BTW - if it isn't, there is maybe 1% of the delegates that visit these forums regularly. You might get another 2% from people scanning proposals.

Whether you believe by cause is just or not, I ask you to let this be decided by those who have the patronage of endorcements. Let this be a sign that the UN can see beyond its petty biases and truely accept all nations.

Nay.

Your humble servant,

James C.P.
Viceroy of the Grand Duchy of Pulcifer.

1) Listed so far: branding, metagaming, Proposal limitation
2) Add on to it: unworthy of UN time, essay, etc (basically, it's a speech, not a resolution)
Result: it will be deleted, and I urge you not to resubmit a modified draft as I don't think it is salvageable.

Edit: PS: that's only the list of things that make it illegal. If you want me to check it for style - it's going to be in a heck of a lot of pain when I'm done.

Edit 2: Add to the list: wrong category (Political Stability), wrong strength (mild)

Right. Well the UN can't, as I see it, impose absolute democracy, nor ban it completely. You might want to look at "Citizen Rule Required". Otherwise though I don't think you actually have a problem: no one's going to force you to be democratic.

The most recent tax resolution (the name of which I forget) called for greater democracy. Other resolutions have called for greater democracy.

I think that the UN is going to force it one day.

The most recent tax resolution (the name of which I forget) called for greater democracy. Other resolutions have called for greater democracy.

I think that the UN is going to force it one day.

Representation In Taxation.

And "over my dead body".

The most recent tax resolution (the name of which I forget) called for greater democracy. Other resolutions have called for greater democracy.

I think that the UN is going to force it one day.

That would be illegal under the restriction on passing ideological bans... so no, definitely not going to happen.