NationStates Jolt Archive

I think we have all lost site of what it is that the United Nations does. The purpose of the United Nations is to protect the sovereignty of all of the world’s nations, not simply to impose the will of an elitist few on countries that may be less fortunate. It is my firm belief that funding from the United Nations should be written into any bill that has potential to stifle economic growth or lead to a fiscal crisis.

Sweeping reforms should be made within the United Nations. I encourage everyone to review bills that have passed throughout history. I also strongly advise that we consider each nation a sovereign nation and act accordingly. It is foolish to presume that everyone should live by our ideals and all voting members should be slightly, if not entirely, relativists. We must only pass regulations that are humanitarian in nature, and be vigilant of those bills that force other nations to adopt there philosophies.

I hope that those nations that agree will rise up in arms against the UN and if sweeping reforms are not made, then I hope to see resignations from all those in agreement. The UN should be looking out for the interests of the world, not imposing its idealist rhetoric on the world at large. We are nations united, not one nation united.

1. Please use the basic font size. It hurts the eyes to read that, and makes it look like you are shouting. Shouting isn't polite, and nor is writing absolutely everything in a huge font size.

2. Who are you to determine what the 'purpose' of the United Nations is? 'Changing the world, one resolution at a time'. That's what we're told. Apart from some rules so that some order is preserved, that's what the UN has done. This isn't the Real World UN, it's the NSUN. Resolutions can be made on a bewildering variety of topics.

3. If the UN could fall that easily, it would have gone a long time ago. There's been attempts to destroy the UN since the game began, but as long as it remains part of the game coding, it will remain.

4. Finally, if you are going to have a poll, make sure it relates in some way to what you just posted.

I believe what my friend here is trying to say is not that he wants to destroy the UN but to make them reconsider their votes and the bills they have passed. It is true that s/he should not be dictating what the UN is, especially if they are going to insist that we all be relativists. While you have said that we will "change the world one resolution at a time," we must not ignore that some resolutions do far more harm than good to developing nations.

How is the poll not relevant? Why must it be relevant? Are you an administrator of some kind?

1. I certainly did not mean to offend anyone. I am just about legally blind and I keep the font size large enough to see it.

2. Indeed we have been told that we are ‘changing the world one resolution at a time.’ I do not dispute or deny that. It is however, the job of every voting member, every delegate and every concerned nation, to decide whether we are united for the purpose of furthering mankind or for the purpose of furthering our own agendas. If it is for the latter than we are no better than any conqueror, dictator or despot that has encouraged the creation of this organization.

I don’t understand the sentence Apart from some rules so that some order is preserved, that's what the UN has done.

3. I understand the durability of the United Nations and I am not calling for the disbanding of this organization. I am simply asking UN members to question their motives and the motives of others. If reforms cannot be made then I am encouraging a protest. Civil disobedience as civic engagement.

4. My opinion poll is entirely relevant.

I hope that those nations that agree will rise up in arms against the UNBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! "Rise up in arms"? Against us? Oh, it is to laugh.

and if sweeping reforms are not made, then I hope to see resignations from all those in agreement....thus assuring that none of the changes you wish will ever be inacted. Kinda hard to vote on UN Proposals when you're not in the UN, ya know?

We are nations united, not one nation united.Mmm... platitudes...


OOC: If you're having difficulty viewing the text, many versions of Windows has a magnifying program, and I'm sure Macs do as well. Also, if you're using Firefox (and likely others), you can hold the CTRL key and use the mouse wheel to adjust the display font.

1. I certainly did not mean to offend anyone. I am just about legally blind and I keep the font size large enough to see it.
Ah. Fair enough. Follow the suggestions from the Gnomes in that regard.

2. Indeed we have been told that we are ‘changing the world one resolution at a time.’ I do not dispute or deny that. It is however, the job of every voting member, every delegate and every concerned nation, to decide whether we are united for the purpose of furthering mankind or for the purpose of furthering our own agendas. If it is for the latter than we are no better than any conqueror, dictator or despot that has encouraged the creation of this organization.
Here we run into IC/OOC problems. Personally, I fully agree with what you say. However, my UN nation is roleplayed as having only joined the UN in order to gain. You have top deal with everyone, not just the idealists in the same mould as you.

I don’t understand the sentence Apart from some rules so that some order is preserved, that's what the UN has done.
That'll be my personal phrasing acting up, getting in the way of what I'm saying. What I meant was: As UN nations, we are allowed to do pretty much anything to change the world, unless we are actually going against the rules. And that's what has happened. Perhaps it's not the best way of doing things, but it's the way the game is set up, and most of the players are used to it.

3. I understand the durability of the United Nations and I am not calling for the disbanding of this organization. I am simply asking UN members to question their motives and the motives of others. If reforms cannot be made then I am encouraging a protest. Civil disobedience as civic engagement.
Alrighty then.

4. My opinion poll is entirely relevant.
Im still not sure how. Nothing in your original post related to resolutions hurting the economies of developing nations, except in an extremely roundabout way. Perhaps in future you could make the connection a bit clearer to others.

~~~
How is the poll not relevant?
As above, I couldn't see anythng in the original post that related to the economies of developing nations. Hence my comment about relevance.
Why must it be relevant?
Well, I'm not sure it's a rule (though it might be, I haven't checked the rulebook for quite some time). It's more about politeness and coherance. It's easier to understand a poll if the connection with the original post is clear, and vice versa.
Are you an administrator of some kind?
Ye gods, no. I'm very sorry if I left that impression. I'd be a terrible admin, and probably not great as a mod either. I've just been playing the game for a while (yes, Hack, I know you're still older), and have a general understanding for the way things happen.

Blithely handing out UN funding is all very well, but where is this funding to come from? Member states pockets - so we're back at square one. Either nations make proportional contributions to this funding, so that they're only really getting their money back minus administrative costs, or we institute progressive taxation of nations, so that richer ones end up funding poorer ones (which I'm all in favour of, but given that you want to encourage respect for national sovereignty, I suspect that global redistributive taxes might not be quite what you're looking for).

As to the wider point, some of us are neither in it for our own nation's gain or for a relativist, hands-off UN. I and many other representatives here are internationalists to greater or lesser degrees. The general feeling among the people of _Myopia_ is that there is no good reason not to force our ideals on the rest of the world. People everywhere should be given certain rights and freedoms regardless of what their governments, or even they themselves think. As far as we are concerned, neither a dictatorship nor a democratic majority in any society has the right to abridge the essential rights and freedoms of individuals, so we will do everything in our power to ensure that our vision of rights and freedoms prevails over as much of the world as possible.

Isn't this whats happening already...look at all the repeals, it seems to be nothing but repeals as far as the eye can see.

There was the drug Proposal that was voted down and the Auto Free Trade that was voted down... Both rather recently.

Rivvidia believes that:

1. The UN and its purposes are destined by those who fund it.

2. Those that choose not to fund the UN, or are unable to, will always be at a disadvantage regarding policies.

3. In particular, developing countries must go though many processes (ex. industrialization) which creates consequences many other developed countries harbor distaste for (environmental issues).

Rivvidia supports all policies that seek universal benefit, and treat other proposals with the upmost caution.

There was the drug Proposal that was voted down and the Auto Free Trade that was voted down... Both rather recently.

And a rather good one that was directed against terrorism.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! "Rise up in arms"? Against us? Oh, it is to laugh.

...thus assuring that none of the changes you wish will ever be inacted. Kinda hard to vote on UN Proposals when you're not in the UN, ya know?

Mmm... platitudes...


OOC: If you're having difficulty viewing the text, many versions of Windows has a magnifying program, and I'm sure Macs do as well. Also, if you're using Firefox (and likely others), you can hold the CTRL key and use the mouse wheel to adjust the display font.


The current United Nations would still be going by the name of 'the League of Nations' if it were not for a platform of non-involvement. Boycotts function very well, especially on the international scene.

The rising up in arms against an establishment that cannot have a military is not laughable, it’s plausible.

To the platitudes comment, I am not even going to dignify it with a response.

To the Nation of enn and the others who have put some serious thought to this: I would like to say thank you. This was not meant to bring down the UN, although I did state that, I am a realist and I understand that could never happen, (especially considering the current game mechanics) but we could all benefit from an occasional revolution.

Let us pray that the real UN never becomes what we have made it.

The current United Nations would still be going by the name of 'the League of Nations' if it were not for a platform of non-involvement. Boycotts function very well, especially on the international scene.

OOC: Eh? I was always under the impression that the League was even more hands-off than the post-war UN - that it was no more than a discussion forum. I thought that a big part of why Hitler was able to break the Versailles treaty was that the League had no enforcement powers and lacked the backing of the USA, and individual countries like Britain didn't want to take action.

The rising up in arms against an establishment that cannot have a military is not laughable, it’s plausible.

IC: What's the point? There's no need to fight back against the UN as it is not a coercive power. Nations submit to membership and the associated requirements entirely of their own volition.

Concentrate your revolutionary efforts on oppressive governments - then perhaps we wouldn't need to hold them back with mountains of internationalist legislation.

I remember going into some of the back shelves of my college library (now many many years ago) and reading an old book from the time when the League was still in its prime but when Germany was starting to rearm.

This small hardcoverd book (and I can't recall the name of the book) was a fascinating read. The amount of praise for the many accomplishments of the league could not be stated enough in the book (although I do point out it was a little book) and the military buildup of Germany was a "minor" problem that no doubt the league would be able to address shortly. :p

Come to think of it, stubborn idealistic attitudes seem to be common somewhere around here as well ... now where would I have noticed such blatent arrogant stubborness and a denial of potential threats? :p

In the current debate on the repeal of the landmine ban perhaps? Or maybe several weeks ago during the debate on the Anti-Terrorism Act?

Or maybe several weeks ago during the debate on the Anti-Terrorism Act?Why do I think someone is gearing up for a resubmission?

Why do I think someone is gearing up for a resubmission?

I haven't the foggiest what could've given you that idea... ;)

It was because the US and many nations throughout the world chose not to participate that the League of Nations fell apart. The League of Nations was started with good intentions and was effective in a very limited way due to its inability to enforce policy.

I misinterpreted when I stated that I wanted people to take up arms against the UN, it was meant to be taken figuratively. It is our memberships that I was hoping we would use as weapons, not guns.

Constantly be questioning the motives of others. Sometimes we have to allow a little temporary injustice in order to attain Utopia. I mistrust the judgment of every man in a case in which his own wishes are concerned.

The UN was not designed to be a peacekeeper or to promote peace or any number of a thousand other things. It was designed to be a body that dealt with issues at an International Level. What those issues should be is decided by each and every individual member and you will find a great variety of what people believe. We do not need universal membership nor has there been very many tears shed about the fact that our membership constitutes only a quarter of the world's nations. Losing a few more naysayers protesting the UN's choice of what it will do is no greater than the hordes that leave after every single resolution or repeal is passed. It has become a daily occurance and overall, meaningless act - especially by someone such as yourself who has made no name for themselves. Certainly, we may feel some presence if Gruenberg, Texan Hotrodders, Mikivity, or any number of other major names within the community left out of protest, but the effect would remain within this community of the few who actually follow the forums and would have little guidance on where the UN goes.

And a rather good one that was directed against terrorism.


And a rather good one about Meteorological Cooperation that did get passed... ;)

The easiest way to deal with all your problems is just to leave the UN.

The easiest way to deal with all your problems is just to leave the UN.


http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/wtf7an.jpg

The easiest way to deal with all your problems is just to leave the UN.

No. For all your problems, HotRodia Tequila is the answer. Leaving the UN fixes a lot, but not everything. :)

No. For all your problems, HotRodia Tequila is the answer. Leaving the UN fixes a lot, but not everything. :)
I'd like some of that Tequila!;)

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/wtf7an.jpg
I'm trying to save you poor souls from loosing your sovereignty to the masses

I'm trying to save you poor souls from loosing your sovereignty to the masses
So are we, and we're doing a better job of it than you are.

Bob Flibble
NSO Mafia Don

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/wtf7an.jpg

You know that really is a good question.

At one time, when I was regional deligate, and holder of the keys to the regional control I cursed and moaned and said, "I'm doing this because of the good of Niftyonia."

Then I lost the regional deligate (and then got Davane to find it) and I used to say "Well my support of Davane is important so that he could be regional deligate with regional control."

Then I dropped my support for Davane and he still kept the control, although he never noticed it until the new Regional Influence thing. (go figure.)

So now, as I sit in the Starbucks (which might still be a figment of my mind because I still don't think it's on the UN Wiki page yet) I wonder why I am still here, in this pit of madness.

Because, it's like capitalism and democracy, they all suck, but everything sucks more. And so I remain.