NationStates Jolt Archive

I realize that simply the title will deter many people from approving this resolution, but please decide based on the arguments presented.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The General Assembly of the United Nations,

COMMENDING the intentions of Resolution #28: Free Education

ACKNOWLEDGING this resolution’s vagueness and the absence of set limits and requirements,

REGRETTING the resolution’s inability to consider each countries’ monetary abilities to provide teachers, facilities, and supplies to provide said free education,

CONSIDERING that the resolution makes no distinction between public and private learning institutions, and,

UNDERSTANDING that as most private institutions receive a lessened grant from their countries, providing a free education for these individuals creates an impossible situation for these schools to remain open,

REGRETTING that many of these said private institutions maintain standards for acceptance, and this resolution could be argued as a means to transcend this acceptance standard,

ALSO REGRETTING that this resolution fails to describe exactly what type of “education” each person under 18 will receive, and this could be used as an argument to receive free teachings of which were not intended in this resolution,

CONSIDERING that these arguments make Resolution #28 an ineffective resolution,

ENCOURAGES the speedy creation of a replacement resolution,

REPEALS Resolution #28: Free Education
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please provide any feedback that could assist the betterment of this repeal.

Sounds good to me, there is absolutely nothing in that...sentence, that couldn't be manipulated some way or another. I'd be interested in working on a new proposal for the education if you want.

Be glad to see the last of the "Free" everything proposals. Haven't these people ever considered where the "free" stuff comes from? Please. TANSTAAFL.

Luck with the repeal.

okay, here is the res in question:

Free education



A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: NASTIC 2

Description: To give every person under the age of 18 the right to a free education

Votes For: 11276

Votes Against: 3264

Implemented: Tue Aug 19 2003


i see no problem with that. the resolution is clearly stated. all it means is that the goverments of each nation have to supply at least on institution that provides free education. any guidlines is just micromanagement to me. we have been against any resolution or proposal in reguards to education that goes beyond it being a right and that students should have a proper learing environment.

all it means is that the goverments of each nation have to supply at least on institution that provides free education.

No it doesnt, it mandates that if your under 18, you can go to any learning institution and order a free education no matter what.

You want guitar lessons at age 17? Free
You want Rocket Science at age 8? Free
You want "How to fly a large plane into a large building" at age 15? Free

No it doesnt, it mandates that if your under 18, you can go to any learning institution and order a free education no matter what.

You want guitar lessons at age 17? Free
You want Rocket Science at age 8? Free
You want "How to fly a large plane into a large building" at age 15? Free

Actually, it doesn't.


To give every person under the age of 18 the right to a free education


No where does it say I can not put conditions on the education I provide. If someone wants to learn rocket science, but hasn't studied basic chemistry, I can say no.

And honestly - what is the alternative to this? Set up a class based society where everyone pays for their own education, so not only do the rich get richer, but they get better jobs and a better life, while the poor just get poorer and can not do any better cause, rather than sending little Timmy to school they decided to eat this week?

Or will someone draft a replacement, which will no dobut require high handed moral judgement to decide what someone can learn for free, and what they can't, so if they want a lesson in how to make guns, or play sports or become a laywer, by all means give that to them for free, but if they want to study art, music, litertature, basket weaving the are all wussy liberal-arts crap so they should do it on their own time?

The future of every nation is it's children, and every nation has a duty to invest in that, and the people who have benifited from it already should not have the right to decide who gets educated, nor what they get educated in.

No where does it say I can not put conditions on the education I provide. If someone wants to learn rocket science, but hasn't studied basic chemistry, I can say no.

The resolution does not specify what type of education your forced into providing. A scholastic education? Maybe. A scientific education? Maybe. And since "ALL" children, regardless of anything whatsoever, get this and any education (since its unspecified education), you can't say no.

COMMENDING the intentions of Resolution #28: Free Education

Which are?

ACKNOWLEDGING this resolution’s vagueness and the absence of set limits and requirements,

Good thing too. I don't want the UN fucking with my education system to the level of requirements.

REGRETTING the resolution’s inability to consider each countries’ monetary abilities to provide teachers, facilities, and supplies to provide said free education,

Fair enough.

CONSIDERING that the resolution makes no distinction between public and private learning institutions, and,

UNDERSTANDING that as most private institutions receive a lessened grant from their countries, providing a free education for these individuals creates an impossible situation for these schools to remain open,

REGRETTING that many of these said private institutions maintain standards for acceptance, and this resolution could be argued as a means to transcend this acceptance standard,

I don't see this resolution as overriding private schools. One has a right to free education, and I suppose, the state must provide that. The very fact that there is a distinction between public and private institutions means those private facilities are not bound by this. I'm willing to believe you could argue they have to accept it, but it seems a waste of time to be arguing this, anyway.

ALSO REGRETTING that this resolution fails to describe exactly what type of “education” each person under 18 will receive, and this could be used as an argument to receive free teachings of which were not intended in this resolution,

Spirit of the resolution doesn't matter. Anything which is not defined is a state right. Thus, I see this as an obligation to give some form of education, but I don't see it as a mandate to 'claim' any form of education one desires.

CONSIDERING that these arguments make Resolution #28 an ineffective resolution,

A. Why else would you make them?
B. Surely the fact that it's ineffective (has no effect) makes it ineffective?

ENCOURAGES the speedy creation of a replacement resolution,

This resolution only does one thing. How could you possibly replace it, without simply doing the same thing, or doing a new thing (which would, you know, not be a replacement)?

REPEALS Resolution #28: Free Education

This part I like. I support a repeal; not, in this shape, this one.

The resolution does not stipulate what constitutes an education, which leaves the decision up to individual nations. If one wishes to restrict the ability of one's nation's teenagers to fly aircraft into locations that are not equipped to receive aircraft, one may simply state that such material is not part of the national curriculum, and is therefore not covered by this resolution. Of course, if one wishes to bring a potential replacement before the Assembly, it might convince this representative of the value of the repeal effort.

Yoshi Takahara
Director, International Affairs
Empire of Krioval

The resolution does not stipulate what constitutes an education, which leaves the decision up to individual nations. If one wishes to restrict the ability of one's nation's teenagers to fly aircraft into locations that are not equipped to receive aircraft, one may simply state that such material is not part of the national curriculum, and is therefore not covered by this resolution. Of course, if one wishes to bring a potential replacement before the Assembly, it might convince this representative of the value of the repeal effort.

Yoshi Takahara
Director, International Affairs
Empire of Krioval

Pazu-Lenny Kasigi-Nero Concur with the position of Yoshi Takahara.
For us #28 is an essential resolution. Of course it's not perfect and could be better. So if anyone want to improve it we will fully support a draft effort before any repeal.

Jey - you are under a dillusion of what this resolution requires and does not require. It does not force nations to provide ALL forms of education free, but rather AN education for free. It requires that the option for a free education exists. It does not mandate quality, it does not mandate that you cannot have competing educations, it does not mandate that you MUST provide ANY education requested by parents. If it has any flaws, it's that it's so vague that it is useless thanks to loopholes.

That noted - it acts as a nice basis upon which additional resolutions can be implemented to deal with quality of education, dealing with the issues of loopholes. I see this repeal as absolutely useless and....well...boring TBH.

I see this resolution as a preambulatory clause, and also an indication of just why I get so tired of 'rights' debates. They have a right to a free education: well isn't that nice. Doesn't, though, mean:
i. they have a right to a free education in everything;
ii. they have a right to a free education in anything they want;
iii. they will actually get a free education.

For once, I'll take off my nasty boots, and say: ok, let's improve a fluffy proposal. Let's set up a way for disadvantaged states to establish a financial framework for public education. Let's try to go further than UNEC, and ensure that we're not pushing children into potentially radically doctrinal private schools, beyond the reaches of UN legislation. Let's define just what we mean by a basic education (I mean, come on, we teach children about the clitoris and the CPU, and we don't teach them how to count - hmm, idea forming).

And, once we've done this, let's survey our work, and see if, rights or not, our children are in a position to receive a good, free education. Then, we can start to feel we've actually accomplished something.

ENCOURAGES the speedy creation of a replacement resolution,Good lord. This is what's wrong with the UN: a maniacal reflex to replace anything this body has the gumption to repeal, and not in a thoughtful, deliberative, cooperative fashion, but rather a "speedy" one, because God forbid that member states go one day without intrusive, demeaning UN Nanny State instruction on any aspect of governance upon which this body has previously ruled! It was the desire for "speed" that produced FFRA; it was the desire for "speed" that produced the Worldwide Media Act (a certifiable folly that very nearly landed in the UN books); it was a lack of oversight that produced Right to Divorce and Promotion of Solar Panels.

Our view: The United Nations is corrupted, much if not most of the work-product of this assembly is shit, and as such we seriously need to re-examine our goals as an international organization. And a very important part of this long overdue reform is tossing out the most egregious legislation and, rather than satisfy our automatic impulse to relegislate, consider which issues of true international reach most need to be addressed by this body.

The current administration of the Federal Republic was elected on a promise to withdraw from the United Nations, but rather than withdraw, we chose to remain in order to push for badly needed reforms here. The repeals are an essential part of that reform. Automatic "repeal/replace," however, is just another symptom of this body's enduring illness.

Oh, and another thing that's wrong with the UN: the endless stickying of queued proposals, which only distracts from the official topic (you know, the one that's actually being voted on), unnecessarily buries the rules and user-guide stickies, and further confuses and disorients those who may be new to this forum.

I see this resolution as a preambulatory clause, and also an indication of just why I get so tired of 'rights' debates. They have a right to a free education: well isn't that nice. Doesn't, though, mean:
i. they have a right to a free education in everything;
ii. they have a right to a free education in anything they want;
iii. they will actually get a free education.

For once, I'll take off my nasty boots, and say: ok, let's improve a fluffy proposal. Let's set up a way for disadvantaged states to establish a financial framework for public education. Let's try to go further than UNEC, and ensure that we're not pushing children into potentially radically doctrinal private schools, beyond the reaches of UN legislation. Let's define just what we mean by a basic education (I mean, come on, we teach children about the clitoris and the CPU, and we don't teach them how to count - hmm, idea forming).

And, once we've done this, let's survey our work, and see if, rights or not, our children are in a position to receive a good, free education. Then, we can start to feel we've actually accomplished something.

I can agree with that - but if we're going to toss out old garbage - let's at least toss it out for the reasons it earned it

COMMENDING Resolution 28 for it's excellent intention

ACKNOWLEDGING the vagueness of its text leaving room for nations to implement systems that work better within the local framework

CONCERNED by the fact that no guarantees of quality of the education or, even more seriously, the fields that such education will cover whether it be merely learning how to use a hammer until a person is 18 and nothing else or to receive a full education from a variety of fields.

BELIEVING that a better resolution should be passed by the NSUN

REPEALS Resolution 28: Free Education

To give every person under the age of 18 the right to a free education
Frisbeeterian children have this right too, despite the fact that Frisbeeteria isn't in the UN. All they have to do to get a free education is visit Pallatium. or Krioval or Forgottenlands. Even if we were still in the UN, that would be our response. Nowhere in this resolution does it say that the government of the nation in question has to provide the necessary schools, teachers, materials, or anything else most modern nations consider part of a modern education.

We could simply say that we're providing an education on "how to survive in an urban environment" by providing them a tin cup and some pencils to sell on the street. You think that's not educational? Try it sometime. Learn or die, that's the mantra.

No, Resolution # 28 is full of assumptions that anyone dictator worth his salt could think around in 30 seconds or less. Unless you define it as "the nation's responsibility to provide" or "commensurate with developing the ability to become a functioning part of national society" in some carefully-phrased declarations, it's a load of bollocks. When Nastic wrote it, the NSUN was a pretty simple organization. Guess what? It grew up.

You're probably right in that this isn't the repeal to do the job, but somebody needs to. Who provides "free"? How do you ensure that teachers are paid? How do you guarantee that a student has something useful under his belt when he finishes his schooling? A one-liner resolution can't, and doesn't, cover that.

You people are capable of *thinking*. Take off your blinders and really look at this resolution, then come back at it. I think you'll see that you can do better.

Oh, and another thing that's wrong with the UN: the endless stickying of queued proposals, which only distracts from the official topic (you know, the one that's actually being voted on), unnecessarily buries the rules and user-guide stickies, and further confuses and disorients those who may be new to this forum.

Do you think it's desorienting?
Is it possible to have a higher level of sticky then, for the resolution at vote?:)

Do you think it's desorienting?
Is it possible to have a higher level of sticky then, for the resolution at vote?:)No, it's just overly cluttered and overwhelming and unattractive and makes me want to avoid all sticky material.

And a very important part of this long overdue reform is tossing out the most egregious legislation and, rather than satisfy our automatic impulse to relegislate, consider which issues of true international reach most need to be addressed by this body.

Education maybe;)

Oh, and another thing that's wrong with the UN: the endless stickying of queued proposals, which only distracts from the official topic (you know, the one that's actually being voted on), unnecessarily buries the rules and user-guide stickies, and further confuses and disorients those who may be new to this forum.
I hadn't considered that, but you're right. I stuck some queued resolutions around the holidays because I wasn't sure who would be here to change them, and it suddenly became habit.

I'm reversing that now. We'll still do the QUEUED [Official Topic] thing, but we'll wait to stick until it actually hits the floor.

My government recommends that, in the event that this repeal is passed, that some additional clauses be added as to what will be taught in these schools.

We feel that a carefully determined, worldwide educational program will help to build a new generation of children who have been trained to obey their government. Our educational systems should be used to teach children various ideals to make them the best citizens they can possibly be.

The mind of a child is incredibly malleable and we should take advantage of this. Imprinting concepts such as filial piety and nationalism at an early age could help to create a more obedient breed of citizen. Imagine, if you will, a world where people do not rebel against the government, where they accept their position in the social strata and go from birth to death serving the system. There would be a peace never before seen, an order that this planet has not known since man walked out from beneath the trees.

And it would all start here, with the creation of a new education resolution that encapsulates new teachings, teachings that help to shape our youth into the noble citizen of the future.

I can agree with that - but if we're going to toss out old garbage - let's at least toss it out for the reasons it earned it

Yeah. I think the repeal should be something like Reformentia's repeal of Elimination of Bio Weapons: demonstrate that the resolution actually does nothing. That said, you know I'll get all NatSov about a replacement. I do think there are some things we can usefully do, but I really do think that education is one of those areas where we have to trust, as you might say, 'more local' authorities.

I think appropriate terminology is important here. Of course education isn't actually 'free' when taxpayers are covering costs. Rather, it is free at the point of delivery. However, this isn't the emphasis I would apply to a resolution on this issue. The reason that many advocate 'free' education is that it is universal. Eqaulity of opportunity: a concept endorsed by those on both ends of the economic ideological spectrum.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

There's also the question about whether specifiying a particular age [i.e. 18] for the end of the entitlement is really appropriate, given the existence within various NSUN members of sapient species of non-humans that have widely differing natural lifespans...

I've noticed that some people are hoping for a replacement proposal and so I came up with a quick one below, I really have no plans of submitting this unless it is brought before the GA and this repeal goes through, but I figurd I would still put it out there anyways.


Description: United Nations,

RECOGNISING the need for basic education in the general population and the denial of that right for some citizens for many different reasons,

DEFINING basic education as the minimum skills that a person would need to function in their nation of origin or any other foreign nation,

DEFINING minimum skills as the level of reading, writing, and arithmetic a citizen would require to obtain a job at minimum wage,

1. If there is no minimum wage, the citizen must be given twelve years of schooling instead or to the age legally defined as adulthood, whichever comes first,

REQUIRING that all publicly funded educational establishments in UN Member Nations provide these basic requirements in a safe, healthy environment without religious or political pressure that would distract from the schooling,

NOTES that citizens may choose to remove their child or themselves from the state sponsored school system and may enroll in a privately funded school or home school them,

REQUIRES a certificate upon completion of a citizen's schooling as proof of their education,

ENCOURAGES UN Member Nations to further their education systems beyond the minimum requirements as well as promoting trade schools and extra-curricular programs to enrich those attending the schools.


*Added in suggestions

NOTES that citizens may choose to remove their child or themselves from the state sponsored school system and may enroll in a privately funded school, therefore nullify any protections this resolution provides,

I'd add something about home schooling; and remove the thingy about nullifying, and change the above artical to read:

REQUIRING that all publically funded educational establishments in UN Member Nations provide these basic requirements in a safe, healthy environment without religious or political pressure that would distract from the schooling,

Just think it reads better!

The only problem I can see is that many jobs that will operate at minimum wage will require no skills in readin, writing and arithmatic

The only problem I can see is that many jobs that will operate at minimum wage will require no skills in readin, writing and arithmatic


I'll change the stuff you suggested. I just mentioned the minimum wage because even working a cash register at McDonald's requires you to do, however basic, math and reading, but I felt that instead of setting an arbitrary limit to the public funded schooling, they would have a basic requirment to meet. I do think I should add something in about a certificate to prove they completed schooling if they are ever needed to show that they did in fact complete their ten times tables.

*snip*
The repeals are an essential part of that reform. Automatic "repeal/replace," however, is just another symptom of this body's enduring illness.

The people of Cluichstan couldn't agree more. Can't we just get rid of rubbish without creating more?

Free education is not a fundamental human right, or anything of the sort. It is the side product of some political ideals. Although I personally find these reasonable and sound principles, I would argue that any resolution in this direction goes against the NatSov of ultra-liberal right wing states, namely those that choose not to collect significant taxes. (Education is typically a major component of the national budget of RL states.)

I would prefer to have a resolution instituting compulsory, rather than free, basic schooling, either with specified duration or with reference to minimum competences, and leaving the funding issue to individual nations. This seems to be in the best interests of all nations, which would probably make the resolution needless, but a more accurate representation of the issue at hand.

Of course an extra clause could be written requiring governments to ensure that poorer families are not priced out of the system, instituting limited state support or income contingent fees. But no more than that.

I agree with many of the objections presented against the wording of the repeal. However, I disagree with some of the criticism of the wish for a repeal. I consider this wish legitimate, and quite different from the "no repeal until replacement is ready" filibustering argument.

I would prefer to have a resolution instituting compulsory, rather than free, basic schooling, either with specified duration or with reference to minimum competences, and leaving the funding issue to individual nations. This seems to be in the best interests of all nations, which would probably make the resolution needless, but a more accurate representation of the issue at hand.
Couldn't that turn into a pseudo-tax? Provide a bare-bones education and make people pay a fortune for it?

Couldn't that turn into a pseudo-tax? Provide a bare-bones education and make people pay a fortune for it?

There is nothing wrong with taxes. The right to tax whatever you want has been enshrined as a sovereign right. And anyway, this is not a tax, it is the price of a service.

I did write a line about ensuring kids are not priced out of education, but otherwise, charging for state services (education, health, justice, roads, to name a few) is legitimate, and common practice in RL.

EDIT: Gosh, I sound so NSO in this thread...

Fonzoland: what if, by making it compulsary and not funded there are citizens who, quite literally, cannot afford to attend ANY school?

Fonzoland, the ultimate right wing bastard.

Of course an extra clause could be written requiring governments to ensure that poorer families are not priced out of the system, instituting limited state support or income contingent fees. But no more than that.

Oh wait.

Ok, I'm beginning to think we should approach this from a different angle. Whilst I personally agree with Ambassador Riley, I accept that this is not an approach everyone favours and, as CEO Donovan has observed, this resolution really doesn't do anything. So I would favour a repeal on those grounds, but I also think that, given the resolution does nothing, there is nothing wrong with the 'replacement' - or rather, something that actually has an effect - being submitted first. So long as it doesn't contradict "Free Education", I can't see a problem with that. Then, a redundancy argument would be much more sellable.

Good thing too. I don't want the UN fucking with my education system to the level of requirements. .


I believe that some time in past this same one came up to repeal this and the fear was what would be passed in it's place. Each nation sets up it's own education system as it deems needed thus any proposal to effect that would by many be opposed especialy if that proposal in some way lowers the already established eduction standards in a nation. Which would be possible in the rewritting of a so called Free Education Proposal. So as long as this one is in place it lets each nation educate their own as they deem needed. Also it lets them deal with how this education is paid for. As somebody ends up doing it or it don't get done.

When this came up this nation was already giving so called free education at age 5 and by age 16 our so called 'children' become productive citizens having children who like them get their free education. Any new proposal that would cause us to lower our current education standards would meet with opposition. Not only from us but from anyone else effected by such.. as believe this one has come up and been defeated based on what might replace it could be worse..

This one simply says they get a free eduction at some point under 18.. This is great as by 18 they will be paying for the next generations to get that free education here. So it is effective as if you want tax paying productive citizens they must have some kind of education.. The better the eduction the more taxes you can get off them as productive citizens so it is good as is.