NationStates Jolt Archive

First attempt at a resolution, saw how poorly written this one was and had to repeal.

The United Nations,

COMMENDING the democratic intentions of Resolution #8, “Citizen Rule Required,”

NOTING that not all U.N. nations wish to be democratic,

FURTHER NOTING that Resolution #8, “Citizen Rule Required,” claims that citizen rule promotes “international peace,” which is unverifiable,

CONSIDERING that Resolution #8 does not adequately define “rogue nations,” nor how citizen rule deters said “rogue nations,”

ALSO CONSIDERING that Resolution #8 condemns certain types of government, such as Anarchy and Psychotic Dictatorship,

REALIZING that the United Nations should not publicly endorse nor condemn any form of government,

RECOMMENDS that member nations decide on their own form of government at local, regional, and national levels,

REPEALS Resolution #8 “Citizen Rule Required.”

Original resolution text:

This is a resolution to require all nations to grant self-rule to all citizen on some level. Local, Regional, or National is no matter, just so long that all citizens have some say and control over the way they are governed. These measures would promote international peace and serve as a deterent to the formation of so called "rouge nations" that to this day threaten all nations.

I think this looks pretty good, and CRR does need to be repealed. If this hasn't been submitted yet, run it past the mods for their new "national sovereignty" rule. Otherwise, though, excellent first proposal.

Agreed. And definitely a good go for a first attempt.

No. The resolution doesn't mention "rogue nations" at all. You should be referring to the infamous "rouge nations."

Syntax:

THEREFORE it is recommended that the each member nation decide on their own form of government on local, regional, and national levels,

should be

RECOMMENDS that member nations decide on their own form of government at local, regional, and national levels;

Also, numbering the operative clauses looks nicer.

Also, numbering the operative clauses looks nicer.

It's a repeal. There's only one operative clause:

REPEALS Resolution #8 “Citizen Rule Required.”

Hmmm...on the one hand I do support democracy over any other form of government...on the flipside however, some national citiczens support their monarchies more than any elected leader. I support this repeal because i have seen some "dictatorships" that where more fair and just then some "democracies".

Gruenberg is a democracy, and I think everyone would agree we're testament to that political tradition's fine history of promoting individual rights and liberties, and working together in collective harmony, and killing people because it's funny.

Gruenberg is a democracy,

Oh? Your people vote? For what? Which of them must be sacrificed next to Wena?

and I think everyone would agree we're testament to that political tradition's fine history of promoting individual rights and liberties,

Well, you gave them the right to die and right to worship Wena, but my citizens have quite a few more rights than that and somehow.....I just don't believe you.

and working together in collective harmony,

If death could be called harmony, I guess at a technical level.....

and killing people because it's funny.

This has certainly been proven.

Compadria would normally oppose this kind of repeal, based on our long-standing committment to supporting democracy and liberty and opposing tyranny and oppression.

However some resolutions really are just so awful and ludicrously illegal to boot that we would happily support their repeal whatever they advocated. This resolution is one of them.

As such, we wish you the best of luck.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Gruenberg: Thanks for your support, and where would I find the forum to submit the moderation request to? Or would I just do it here?

Fonzoland post #1: I beg to differ. The current resolution has this line:
These measures would promote international peace and serve as a deterent to the formation of so called "rouge nations" that to this day threaten all nations.

I could change it to simply "CONSIDERING that Resolution #8 does not adequately prove how citizen rule deters 'rogue nations,'" but I think that's ineffective.

Fonzoland post #2: Thanks for the syntax update, I missed that. And like said later, there's only one clause that actually does anything.

Dankism: Hopefully, a mod will come across this thread. If not, post it in the Moderation forum (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=1231). And Fonzoland was just kidding: it's a running joke that Resolution #8 said "rouge" (as in a kind of blusher) not "rogue".

Oh? Your people vote? For what? Which of them must be sacrificed next to Wena?
No, the sacrifices aren't left to the potentially dangerous whim of mob rule...they're drawn out of a lucky hat.

Anyway, we had a general election recently. It was free and open, and the Monarchists won, forming a ruling coalition with the Capital Conservatives.

Allegations that voters in Liberal and other non-Monarchist areas were variously detained, beaten or burned are totally scandalous, and almost certainly not very true really anyway.

Haha, I didn't even see that.

I saw the NatSov rule in the FAQ, and I hope this won't be much of a problem, as its also contradicting the UN's supposed position to be neutral on issues of country status, which I think is reason enough to repeal.

Great job. I look forward to supporting this.

Thank you all for your support. I will likely be submitting this tommrow, and look forward to your approval.

Side note: I already have Jey as a co-author... Fonzoland, would you like to be listed as one as well? I know you only made a few minor changes, but I wouldn't mind adding you.

You can only have one co-author

My personal opinions:

I like UNR #8. Yes it does shit diddly squat, but its cute - and while we're at it, absolutely harmless. There's no logical move or, really, reason to replace it, nor is it exactly hurting anything so my opinion is "why bother"

I just like the sentiment.

Forgottenlands, first, I see many resolutions with more than one co-author in the UN history. Secondly, my main arguement is that its discrimination; the UN is favoring- even demanding- democracy, when sometimes democracy is not the best option for a country.

Granted, my country is a true democracy, but my puppets aren't, and I don't like people that are too demanding :(. Then again, my puppets aren't in the UN, but if they were, I'd be mad :p

I like UNR #8. Yes it does shit diddly squat, but its cute - and while we're at it, absolutely harmless. There's no logical move or, really, reason to replace it, nor is it exactly hurting anything so my opinion is "why bother"

I just like the sentiment.
That's lovely. Write it on a Hallmark and send it to NOBODY CARES.

Bad laws are bad laws; no matter how little damage they accidentally inflict, they should always be repealed. You say it harms no one? Bullshit. It harms the credibility of the UN. And that's enough for us to support a repeal.

Forgottenlands, first, I see many resolutions with more than one co-author in the UN history.

Rules change and even when rules exist, sometimes an illegal resolution slips underneath the radar. The current rules set implemented in late May states:

Branding

Limited branding is allowed. "Limited" means that you may list one co-author by nation name only. Example:

"Co-authored by The Most Glorious Hack"

Further branding will result in the Proposal being deleted. Don't list everyone who posted in the thread for your draft, don't list yourself, don't list your Minister Of Making Proposals, and don't post the 'pre-title' of the co-author (ie: "The Republic Of...").

Link: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465

One proposal has slipped underneath this rule as the mods kinda whistled innocently as the line went by. Technically, it's still legal.

Secondly, my main arguement is that its discrimination;

Discrimination isn't a fair term

the UN is favoring- even demanding- democracy, when sometimes democracy is not the best option for a country.

False. The UN is calling for an area of life to be voted upon. It could be the local PTA meetings for crying out loud. It does little other than promote the essence of democracy - it enforces NOTHING.

Granted, my country is a true democracy,

True? Define.

but my puppets aren't, and I don't like people that are too demanding :(. Then again, my puppets aren't in the UN, but if they were, I'd be mad :p

Meh

That's lovely. Write it on a Hallmark and send it to NOBODY CARES.

I sent it to myself instead

Bad laws are bad laws; no matter how little damage they accidentally inflict, they should always be repealed. You say it harms no one? Bullshit. It harms the credibility of the UN. And that's enough for us to support a repeal.

We have credibility?

False. The UN is calling for an area of life to be voted upon. It could be the local PTA meetings for crying out loud.False. From the resolution: "just so long that all citizens have some say and control over the way they are governed." They aren't governed by the PTA, they are goverrned by the government.

True? Define.Ok, well, it's not a true democracy yet, but I'm trying. By true democracy, I mean that everyone votes on every issue, and the laws get passed by the people, not a governmental body like a Congress or a president. Essentially, true democracy is the real socialist (not Soviet Union socialist) way of viewing democracy.

False. From the resolution: "just so long that all citizens have some say and control over the way they are governed." They aren't governed by the PTA, they are goverrned by the government.

Debatable - depends on how you stretch the term "governed". Interpretations have generally said "if it's a vote, it counts".

Ok, well, it's not a true democracy yet, but I'm trying. By true democracy, I mean that everyone votes on every issue, and the laws get passed by the people, not a governmental body like a Congress or a president.

Ah, you actually are using the correct term. Good.

Essentially, true democracy is the real socialist (not Soviet Union socialist) way of viewing democracy.

False. Socialism could not hope to operate in such a state. Marxist....perhaps, but socialist isn't going to Marxist theory first. Beyond the communal level, true democracy is extraordinarily unstable - for a lot of reasons, most of which are fairly intuitive.

Beyond the communal level, true democracy is extraordinarily unstable - for a lot of reasons, most of which are fairly intuitive.Well, I'm a fairly unstable person ;)

The Republic of Krioval sees no compelling reason to repeal the resolution under discussion. It conveys the importance of allowing individuals at least some control over their fate, and we are concerned that some of our esteemed colleagues feel that this element of governance is unimportant.

Ambassador Yoshi Takahara
Republic of Krioval

The Republic of Krioval sees no compelling reason to repeal the resolution under discussion. It conveys the importance of allowing individuals at least some control over their fate, and we are concerned that some of our esteemed colleagues feel that this element of governance is unimportant.

Ambassador Yoshi Takahara
Republic of Krioval

And yet we find it odd that this resolution directly shows opposition to the governmental type--and UN category--of anarchy (by saying that individuals must have a say in the way they are "governed", being that anarchy has no gov't), where individuals have every control imaginable over their fate.

And yet we find it odd that this resolution directly shows opposition to the governmental type--and UN category--of anarchy (by saying that individuals must have a say in the way they are "governed", being that anarchy has no gov't), where individuals have every control imaginable over their fate.

It has never been the position of Krioval that people should have total control over their fate. That would put Fate out of a job, now wouldn't it?

~ Yoshi Takahara

The government of St Edmund will support this repeal, although our nation is a democracy [basically of the "parliamentary" type, but with referenda possible about various matters if the relevant petitions get signed by enough people], on the basis that getting resolutions that were as badly written as #8 was off of the list seems like a good idea...

That would put Fate out of a job, now wouldn't it?

Fate will never be out of a job, because he has a very strong union. Currently most of Fate's workload is coing up with adequate case scenarios that a co-union worker Death implements. Accidents, natural disasters, plagues, all have to be written up and prperly drafted and peer reviewed and approved by both Necessity and Chance before they can be implemented.

ANd if you don't think that is hard work, try reading the peer review comments made by Pain and Suffering. Pain is a whinner and Suffering just goes on and on.

The Republic of Zav fully endorses this repeal. Whilst we are a democracy and hope to continue to be so we recognise that not all undemocratic countries are less fair and right than those that portray themselves as democratic. A word is not a panacea for all ills.

It is the spirit of a nation's commitment to it's people and its' understanding of it's individual citizens spirituality that matters, regardless of it's political affiliation.

We feel this repeal is the right way, the spiritual way.

Son of Zav.