NationStates Jolt Archive

Repeal "Protect Historical Sites"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #15
Proposed by: Modern Mentality

Description: UN Resolution #15: Protect Historical Sites (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: All Businesses) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Nations should be allowed to do what is best for their inhabitants. Sometimes, new facilities must be built in place of historical sites in order to satisfy the demands of a nation's people.

I encourage all delegates to support this repeal and get another horrible resolution out of the UN archives.

Also, I'm new in the UN so any adivice regarding future proposals would be appreciated.

One big tip:
http://hodgelett.com/submit.png

That repeal is going to get nowhere. There's nothing but a one line statement. 'Nation knows best...that is...we want the land'.
I believe the idea is to prevent the more corporate governments putting cheap land ahead of culture - although I haven't read #15 yet.

Below is is the description for Protect Hitorical Sites:

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #15

Protect Historical Sites
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: X-tonia

Description: We cannot let historical sites go to waste, and new buildings built in their place. Tourism would lose all value and deprive all countries of a significant source of income.
We must preserve our cultures to keep this world a fascinating place to travel in.

Votes For: 15,515
Votes Against: 4,317

One big tip:
http://hodgelett.com/submit.png

That repeal is going to get nowhere. There's nothing but a one line statement. 'Nation knows best...that is...we want the land'.
I believe the idea is to prevent the more corporate governments putting cheap land ahead of culture - although I haven't read #15 yet.

I've noticed that only proposals with a lot of text seem to get through. I would hope that delegates are able to judge according to the content of a proposal and not just its length.

Also, I do support the preservation of culture, but I don't believe resolution 15 gives governments enough freedom to act if something like a hospital needed to be built in a strategic location.

There's generally a reason it's longer: structure and the complexity of a well thought out proposal.
I don't like #15 from what you've shown me for that reason, it's too short and vague. It's saying 'something needs to be done' without saying what.
You shouldn't need too long an argument for repeal, but it still needs to have more than the one argument in the one you sent.

There's generally a reason it's longer: structure and the complexity of a well thought out proposal.
I don't like #15 from what you've shown me for that reason, it's too short and vague. It's saying 'something needs to be done' without saying what.
You shouldn't need too long an argument for repeal, but it still needs to have more than the one argument in the one you sent.

Noted, thanks for the advice.

Eh. Remember, Repeals aren't laws. It doesn't say "description" it says "argument"; rhetoric gets a lot more leeway.

Personally, I think this is a pretty good Repeal. It's short and to the point, and, really, #15 is crap. You don't need a dissertation. That being said, it probably won't pass, but it's not that bad. I'd vote for it.

I agree with Hack here. Resolution #15 is not huge, and a repeal doesn't need to be. It does nothing.

However, I'd recommend waiting until World Heritage List is repealed, for fear of that one failing (which is more problematic).

Resolution 15 is fairly poor, but it needs replacing. And "World Heritage List" certainly shouldn't be repealed in my opinion, but that's another matter.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

Resolution 15 is fairly poor, but it needs replacing. And "World Heritage List" certainly shouldn't be repealed in my opinion, but that's another matter.
The entire Republic of Compadria has been added to the World Heritage List.

The entire Republic of Compadria has been added to the World Heritage List.

Our lush forests, coastal marshland and idyllic fenlands probably merit this. But could you really say the same of the blasted wasteland that is the North-Western Frontier Province Desert. I mean, nothing grows there and its only good point is the presence of uranium, plutonium and strontium. Still, we didn't mine there much anyway, we just rely on shipments from the Palentine for the most part.

<plans counter addition of Gruenberg to WHL>

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

Our lush forests, coastal marshland and idyllic fenlands probably merit this. But could you really say the same of the blasted wasteland that is the North-Western Frontier Province Desert. I mean, nothing grows there and its only good point is the presence of uranium, plutonium and strontium. Still, we didn't mine there much anyway, we just rely on shipments from the Palentine for the most part.
You are, I think, the first person I have ever encountered who would suggest the complete banning of economic activity within their nation was "probably merit[ed]". However, I would hope you can now see the necessity of a repeal.

Well our economy's a basket case anyway, so it doesn't make much difference. The tourism will probably make up for losses in other areas. Still, I appreciate your point somewhat better.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

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

Well, I'm glad to see I at least have a little support. If it doesn't get through this time, I'll probably make a draft first and let people discuss it for a while.

I agree that "Protect Historic Sites" should be repealed - Palanee is quite unsentimental about the rotting buildings that clutter its landscape. But really, the official-sounding UN-speak makes a proposal so much more convincing. Couldn't you toss in a few clauses, at least?

I agree with Hack here. Resolution #15 is not huge, and a repeal doesn't need to be. It does nothing.

However, I'd recommend waiting until World Heritage List is repealed, for fear of that one failing (which is more problematic).

Agreed. Time to dust off my WHL repeal?

I thought you were doing the terrorism proposal first?

I thought you were doing the terrorism proposal first?

Who says I can't submit two at once? ;)

It seems to me that even if this repeal fails you can still use the land because I couldn't see where the resolution defined a 'historical site'. So you could interpret it as being anything from only the most profound would changing events "This is the spot where so-and-so the great cured every disease known to man" to the most feeble events that no one really cares about "Joe Schmo's dog marked his territory on that tree last week"

It seems to me that even if this repeal fails you can still use the land because I couldn't see where the resolution defined a 'historical site'. So you could interpret it as being anything from only the most profound would changing events "This is the spot where so-and-so the great cured every disease known to man" to the most feeble events that no one really cares about "Joe Schmo's dog marked his territory on that tree last week"

The resolution that created World Heritage List (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/World_Heritage_List) is worse than this one. The WHL can be used as a weapon, as you can see.

It seems to me that even if this repeal fails you can still use the land because I couldn't see where the resolution defined a 'historical site'. So you could interpret it as being anything from only the most profound would changing events "This is the spot where so-and-so the great cured every disease known to man" to the most feeble events that no one really cares about "Joe Schmo's dog marked his territory on that tree last week"

This is exactly why it needs to be repealed: it's stupid. And I don't like the thought of allowing stupid resolutions to govern my nation. Remember, all resolutions have some effect on all UN states.

The resolution that created World Heritage List (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/World_Heritage_List) is worse than this one. The WHL can be used as a weapon, as you can see.
My god, I had heard of the horrors of that list before, but that is the first time I actually saw the resolution itself. It must be removed.

I am with you guys in the removal of this resolution and I hope we can get rid of the WHL next.

My god, I had heard of the horrors of that list before, but that is the first time I actually saw the resolution itself. It must be removed.

I am with you guys in the removal of this resolution and I hope we can get rid of the WHL next.

I've already got a repeal drafted here (http://s15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON/index.php?showtopic=63) on the DEFCON (http://s15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON) forum. However, I've got another proposal (http://s11.invisionfree.com/NatSovOrg/index.php?showtopic=264) I'll be submitting first.