NationStates Jolt Archive

Respect of Culture

A resolution to promote and establish institutions and funds pertaining to culture and the arts

Category: Education and Creativity

Area of Affect: Education

Description:



The United Nations,

ASSERTING that culture is important for the economic, material, spiritual, and overall wellbeing of humanity and any civilization;

NOTING that the definition of culture may be vague, and therefore not really have a place in a resolution;

HEREBY defines culture as follows:

1) Culture in the Visual Arts

Is defined by the carving or manipulation of inert substances, or the non-terminal manipulation of active or live substances;
Mat not defined by terminal manipulation or alteration of live substances. The terminal physical alteration of any live substances performed by an artist body over a non-consenting live subject will not be considered "Culture" and will not be the subject of this document.

2) Culture in the Musical Arts

Excludes any form of noise which is not generated with an artistic intent such as noise or sound emanating from machinery or technology which is not intentionally created as a form of art. However, Musical Arts

Include forms of sound which are generated with an artistic intent

3) Intellecual Arts such as philosophy, religion, theology and all verbal and/or conceptual arts are hereby defined as:

a) Not explicitly violating or advocating violation of any prior UN resolution
b) Having the possibility of being formalized and systematized among a group of persons; anything which cannot be formalized or comprehended in a nominal fashion and form will not be included within this document
c) Being produced by persons of average or above-average intelligence
d) Not produced by persons deemed by two thirds or more of UN members, wherein membership is over twenty-thousand, as severely ill and mentally handicapped;

NOTING that all arts must, in general, follow and advance humanity and civilization;

DEFINING advancement as not resulting in mass-murder, genocide, or other acts which are an immediate danger to the human race;

URGING nations to establish a ministry, the intent thereof, to provide funding, and assistance to producers and products of such cultures;

REQUIRING any enforcement of this document to be applied only in instances where enforcement will not pose immediate and grave material danger to a significant amount of the population;

RECOMMENDING that institutions be established to further the study of culture;

REQUIRING that a local form of encouragement and/or a small fund be established in the service of either the aforementioned recommendation or urging;

EMPHASIZING that the encouragement and/or funding of the arts be in relative proportion to the funding pertaining to the physical sciences and/or the sciences of economics;

ASSERTING that people involved in the arts should not be marginalized and receive an equal amount of respect as persons involved in economics and physical sciences in regards to their cultural and positive achievements

Yehuda Har-Nevo
Prime Minister of Nachtbergen
General Secratary of the Politburo of The Soviet Republic

Ambassador Boco coughs, and stands.

"There are some good ideas here, but...


3) Intellecual Arts such as philosophy, religion, theology and all verbal and/or conceptual arts are hereby defined as:

b) Having the possibility of being formalized and systematized among a group of persons; anything which cannot be formalized or comprehended in a nominal fashion and form will not be included within this document


Why exclude abstract art, and art that generates intellectual stimulation and requires some effort to be understood? Surely art that makes you think, that engages the viewer as an active subject rather than a passive viewer, should be encouraged, not denigrated?


c) Being produced by persons of average or above-average intelligence


How do you propose this should be measured?


d) Not produced by persons deemed by two thirds or more of UN members, wherein membership is over twenty-thousand, as severely ill and mentally handicapped;


Two points here. First, do you seriously expect this General Assembly to convene in order to determine whether a specific individual is or is not mentally handicaped? Leaving aside that this would be a huge waste of this Assembly's time, few if any of us here are qualified. If any such decision is to be made, leave it to the mental health care services of individual nations.

Second, it grieves me to see that you believe mentally handicapped persons incapable of producing artwork. There is a centre in Espérence, a city in my country, which encourages artistic stimulation and production in mentally handicapped children and adults, which among other things generates a sense of self-worth and achievement. It also produces beautiful, skilful and thought-provoking results.


NOTING that all arts must, in general, follow and advance humanity and civilization;


You reject art for art's sake? That may be your choice, but it should not be enshrined by these United Nations.


DEFINING advancement as not resulting in mass-murder, genocide, or other acts which are an immediate danger to the human race;

A very poor and vague definition. Surely 'advancement' should have positive meaning, rather than merely the absence of negative consequences? Otherwise, you need to use another word than 'advancement'."


http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/674/christophebocobnd6.jpg
Christophe Boco (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Christophe_Boco),
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Promotion of art does not require international cooporation. Art is an issue that should be decided on the national level and not by the UN. There is already an issue in NS that covers promotion of arts. It is also too difficult and broad to define. Some forms of art can be acceptable in one country, and unacceptable in other countries.

I fail to see the need for a resolution regarding arts or culture at all.

Nations that care about the arts are already spending money on them. Zyrwick certainly does. We have a Ministry of Popular Enlightenment and Culture, and a Ministry of Education.

Add to that the provisions deeming art by "mentally handicapped persons" to be valueless is just plain silly. Psychologists have used it in our country to diagnose mentally ill persons so that they could get the appropriate placement in the Mental Rehabilitation Hospitals across our Glorious Democratic Republic.

Secondly there are many examples of fine art that is appreciated world wide by persons who would now be deemed mentally ill. Anyone hear of a mythical person named Vincent Van Gogh? He would have been diagnosed with manic-depression or something today. I mean he cut his ear off and sent it to his ex-girlfriend. If that isn't at the very least disturbed...I don't know what is.

Thirdly on the topic of art by the mentally ill. When will the UN General Assembly have time to determine who is and who is not mentally ill. Furthermore who is to say that mentally ill in one nation isn't completely sane in an other? Finally we do not feel that the General Assembly is competent to determine who is and who is not mentally ill.

Now lets go on to the "above average intelligence" aspect of this proposal. Just who is going to determine who is and who is not of above average intelligence?

Also we take issue with religion being added to the list of vital arts and culture. The Democratic Republic of Zyrwick is an atheist nation, in fact the espousal of a religion publicly will land a citizen with at 1500 Leke fine. And 1500 Leke is the average worker's yearly wage. We will not and cannot support the dissemination of superstition in our nation and do not wish to have it even "urged" on us.

We can not support this poorly written proposal and doubt any revisions to it would make it palatable.

Arts and culture are better left to individual nations, with individual tastes and consciences and is not a matter for the UN to meddle in.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.

NOTING that the definition of culture may be vague, and therefore not really have a place in a resolution;

Culture does not have a place in resolutions what-so-ever. However, should the General Secretary like to learn to write better, and perhaps necessary resolutions....he might want to check Reclamation. (http://http://s15.invisionfree.com/Reclamation/index.php)

Culture does not have a place in resolutions what-so-ever. However, should the General Secretary like to learn to write better, and perhaps necessary resolutions....he might want to check Reclamation.

I disagree. While resolutions based on the arts and culture may not be able to directly influence a countries economy, government, or other issues, they do serve a greater good. This body should be willing to at least discuss issues of the development and betterment of the arts.

I do agree however that this draft is complex and miswritten in the extreme. Trying to define, or not define, too many things at once makes the entire copy cumbersome to read, understand, and vote on in good conscience. Perhaps a newer draft that states the issue at hand simply? IE, one that simply suggests all governments create institutions to develop the arts, OR that this body supports the arts thus allowing all member nations to tacitly create a supportive environment.

We disagree. Arts and culture are different for each nation. Under the rules regarding NationStates all resolutions are required to be followed by UN nations.

The UN therefore has no business dictating culture or art to the nations. Add to that there is already a daily issue dealing with the subject and the proposal of resolutions on this matter becomes redundant.

In short it is a waste of the UN's time to legislate on this matter. Indeed the fact that the ONLY proposal to reach queue on the topic is going down in defeat rapidly. I would say that while some, if not most, members of the UN support arts and culture, they view it as a matter for nations themselves, and not the UN to decide on what works best for them.

The arguments in favor of National Sovereignty on the matters of art and culture are far too strong. What one nation may view as art might be viewed as pornographic in an other. What might be considered holy and sacred in one nation, might be considered counter-revolutionary, treasonous or a whole host of other negative adjectives in an other country.

It is best therefore, to let the nations decide what is and is not art and how to fund it. Be it publicly like Zyrwick does thru the Ministry of Popular Enlightenment and Culture, or privately thru individuals buying and selling the production of the artists.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador

The representative of Edhamia said nothing about "dictating culture or art to the nations". As we read his comments, he simply objected to declaring the entire subject of the arts off-limits to this Assembly.

We do not support the resolution now at vote, nor would we support this proposal. But we believe that to close off an entire potential subject of discussion is simply closed-minded and short-sighted. It might very well be possible for someone to come up with a sound proposal concerning appropriate international measures to promote the arts. If that happens, we'll consider it as we try to do all proposals -- with an open mind and on its own merits.

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

My intent was to outline a resolution that left the definition explicitly vague - and more or less exclusive of things which would obviously be used to exploit this resolution.

I did not exclude abstract art - on the contrary - abstract art would be included within either the visual, musical, or intellectual art - provided it is something that is indeed comprehensible to some degree. One simply farting and calling it "Art" should not be entitled funding; however, farting for the sake of art is debatable.

My definition of culture was intended to be in service of individual nations, rather than my own definition of culture. According to my definition of culture and art, just about anything can fit into that category, so long as it does not physically injure non-consenting individuals or life forms.

The clause pertaining to "Above-Average intelligence" and "Mentally handicapped" was intended to exclude people who would probably be unsuccessful in their artistic endeavors.

It would be a chaotic scene if everyone would lobby for everyone to be considered an "Artist" - therefore I am setting certain limitations.

My negational definition of "Advancement" was in order not to grant certain preference to one type of artist over another, simply because such an artist may "Advance" a civilization - in which "Advancement" may mean returning to religious morals, or increasing technological production - such choices are up to the individual countries (such measures are not recommended in the resolution)

But Ambassador Boco makes a good point in highlighting that the mentally handicapped should be funded as well;

As well as the problematic definition of "Mentally handicapped" - what would be needed, perhaps, is an international collaboration of mental-health professionals who would decide the standards -- or -- a clear definition set forth in the following draft of this resolution.

The reason for this clause is, again, not to exploit this resolution - countries may decide to promote one form of art over another, and deem the art they dislike as produced by insane individuals - it is for this reason that I demand a universal definition, as opposed to a regional definition.

Respect of Culture

SECOND DRAFT

A resolution to promote and establish institutions and funds pertaining to culture and the arts

Category: Education and Creativity

Area of Affect: Education

Description:



Respect of Culture

The United Nations,

ASSERTING that culture is important for the economic, material, spiritual, and overall wellbeing of humanity and any civilization;

NOTING that all arts must, in general, follow and advance humanity and civilization;

DEFINING advancement as not resulting in mass-murder, genocide, or other acts which are an immediate danger to the human race; rather resulting in an increase of quality of life (Although the specific definition of advancement is to be determined by the individual nations/regions)

NOTING that different nationalities and locations may have varying definitions of culture and arts;

ASSERTING that people involved in the arts should not be marginalized and receive an equal amount of respect as persons involved in economics and physical sciences in regards to their cultural and positive achievements

EMPHASIZING that this document is not intended to change or revise culture in any nation, but rather to strengthen and promote existing culture, which is to be determined by individual nations;

WORRIED that this document may be used as a mechanism to favor one culture over another, or one form of art over another; to exclude different actions from being called art.

CAUTIONING against use of this document in the service of severe harm or damage to living beings;

HEREBY defines culture as follows:

1) Culture in the Visual Arts

Is defined by the carving or manipulation of inert substances, or the non-terminal manipulation of active or live substances;
Mat not defined by terminal manipulation or alteration of live substances. The terminal physical alteration of any live substances performed by an artist body over a non-consenting live subject will not be considered "Culture" and will not be the subject of this document.

2) Culture in the Musical Arts

Excludes any form of noise which is not generated with an artistic intent such as noise or sound emanating from machinery or technology which is not intentionally created as a form of art. However, Musical Arts

Include forms of sound which are generated with an artistic intent

3) Intellecual Arts such as philosophy, poetry, prose, literature, and all verbal and/or conceptual arts are hereby defined as:

a) Not explicitly violating or advocating violation of any prior UN resolution
b) Having the possibility of being formalized and systematized among a group of persons; anything which cannot be formalized or comprehended in a nominal fashion and form will not be included within this document. Forms of comprehensibility including (but not limited to):

-communication
-active interaction
-communal or group appreciation
-identification of an art as art'

RECOMMENDS nations to establish a ministry, the intent thereof, to provide funding, and assistance to producers and products of such cultures;

RECOMMENDS that institutions be established to further the study of culture;

REQUIRES that a local form of encouragement and/or a small fund be established in the service of at least one of aforementioned recommendations;

RECOMMENDS that the encouragement and/or funding of the arts be in relative proportion to the funding pertaining to the physical sciences and/or the sciences of economics;

ACKNOWLEDGING the heterogeneity and diversity of many cultures, and restating that the definitions of culture set forth in this document are precautionary measures only, and should not be used as a guide to defining culture, but as a mechanism to protect citizens and public interest when culture is defined as something detrimental;

PROHIBITS any enforcement of this document to be applied in instances where enforcement will pose immediate and grave material danger to a significant amount of the population.

One drafting thread is sufficient.

This new draft is much better; I congratulate the author for the effort put into it. However,

WORRIED that this document may be used as a mechanism to favor one culture over another, or one form of art over another; to exclude different actions from being called art.


A proposal should not state that it is worried about its own potential misuse, whether or not it then tries to correct the problem. This clause should be removed.


CAUTIONING against use of this document in the service of severe harm or damage to living beings;

'PROHIBITS' rather than 'CAUTIONING AGAINST' would be more efficient.


Christophe Boco,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Over all it is better. I still hate it. But at least its better.

Mat not defined by terminal manipulation or alteration of live substances. The terminal physical alteration of any live substances performed by an artist body over a non-consenting live subject will not be considered "Culture" and will not be the subject of this document.


This definition would make the shaving of a cat and calling it art, art. We disagree. We would consider shaving a cat to not be art but rather animal abuse. Not only that, in our Eastern Autonomous Regions it would be considered wasting food, the peoples that inhabit those regions consider cat to be a delicacy.

We would like a clearer definition of who and what can be considered to be a consenting live subject. We would oppose the use of minors (as defined by our laws--and the national laws of other nations in their respective territories), animals, and those considered by the National/local Psychological Services (or equivalent) to incapable of giving consent, to be protected from some wacko mutilating them and calling it "art".

Further, It may even be necessary to denote what is alive and what is not. The UN has many different species of sentient beings and that might open up a large gray area.


The other provisions seem acceptable to get to quorum. But we will still most likely vote against, and debate against his proposal, unless the Politburo finds that this might make it harder to pass future legislation on this matter.

Unlike our Friends in Ausserland, we feel that art and culture are so interconnected to the economic, scientific, and technological means of a given nation as to make any form of UN legislation on the issue essentially unworkable without discriminating against anyone. As such it is in the best interests of the UN and the Various Member Nations, to leave art and culture to the nations and/or their political sub-divisions and/or their citizens.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.

However

This definition would make the shaving of a cat and calling it art, art.

No, it wouldn't. Not any more so (or any less so) than is already the case, or than would be the case should this proposal fail. The proposal has no such effect.


Christophe Boco,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Ambassador Boco,

The point of our comments was there need to be clear definitions within the legislation either stating that minors, animals and persons deemed incapable of giving consent to be protected.

While Zyrwickians do not believe a cat to be able to give consent, an other nation might state that it is able to give consent.

As per the definition, Non-terminal "modification" of a living subject done with the subject's consent can be considered art. Laws mean exactly what they say, Ambassador.

I can already see a certain Federal Republic's Creative Solutions Agency having a field day with this. And mind you I respect and admire that Federal Republic's Creative Solutions Agency.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.

Ambassador Gramico,


As per the definition, Non-terminal "modification" of a living subject done with the subject's consent can be considered art.

Indeed, but my point is that this is not new. There is nothing today which prohibits a country from defining art in that way, and the proposal does not make it mandatory for a nation to recognise sheep-shearers as "culturally vital". Therefore the proposal changes nothing in this instance.


Christophe Boco,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Ambassador Boco.

[mild rant]
Please spell my name correctly. It is not Gramico. Rather it is Gramiko. The "K" sound is hard, also there is no letter "C" in the the Zyrwickian Alphabet.
[/mild rant]

So then if this resolution changes nothing what would be the purpose of passing it? Surely the UN has better things to do than to vote on a resolution which would change nothing? As a resolution that changes nothing is unnecessary as the issue that the resolution addresses not only remains unchanged, but has also been decided upon by the Various Member Nations of the UN.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.

Ambassador Gramiko,


So then if this resolution changes nothing what would be the purpose of passing it? Surely the UN has better things to do than to vote on a resolution which would change nothing?

Shall we be serious here, please? Nobody has said that the proposal changes nothing. I was responding to a very specific point which you raised regarding your interpretation of one minor aspect of the proposal.

You must surely be aware of the difference.


Christophe Boco,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

Regarding the complaints of Comrade Gramiko

The definition does not and cannot exclude minors, animals, or other sentient beings. Many countries have various arts that relate to the non-terminal manipulation of animals -

In our Country, we have Toupeed Eagle shaving, where participants attempt to make the Eagle "bald"

This is a non-terminal form of manipulation, as well as a form of art which is practiced in many countries.

However, I am taking note of what Comrade Gramiko has said pertaining to "someone can shave a cat and call it art, and it will be considered 'art'"

Perhaps a clause should be added within the definition that would state something equivalent to the following


Culture or Art is to be defined as conforming to at least one of the criteria in category I set forth below

I-1)Being practiced and/or followed by ten or more individuals, in which said individuals have given their written consent AND can verify their participation

I-2)Having a historical basis in which such a culture was practiced by twenty or more individuals, or a derivative of such which can be easily inferred by ten or more individuals

AND

Conforming to the following

1) Culture in the Visual Arts

Is defined by the carving or....


The reason for this addition would be to prevent chaos from developing. This was the original intent of including the "Average or above average intelligence" clause in the first draft. My intent is and was to prevent this document from being used by individuals who would certainly fail in their endeavor - these people should be denied funding in this respect. To put it in layman's terms - we can't have people running around calling everything and anything as art and demanding payment or funding.

Also, perhaps it would be wise to include a category pertaining to culinary arts as well.

I am also thinking about adding a few explanatory clauses explaining the importance of culture, as well as further explaining how the encouragement of culture is an international, and therefore UN-related matter, as opposed to a local matter. Perhaps such a clause would read something like this...


The United Nations,

ASSERTING that culture is important for the economic, material, spiritual, and overall wellbeing of humanity and any civilization;.......

UNDERSTANDING that culture and arts are intimately connected with daily life and daily affairs which may not have an explicit connection to arts, yet can be very much linked and understood after analysis;

WHEREAS persons and governments may tend to focus on material and/or economic aspects of society, thereby neglecting the importance of culture, and thereby subverting their region in particular and the world as a whole;

NOTING that culture brings about a development within material and economic aspects, as culture promotes and enhances quality of life and the well-being of the human race, bringing about a sound cooperation between individuals and within a given individual him/herself pertaining to economic and material development as well;

HEREBY finds it necessary to introduce a resolution with its goal to encourage culture and art as a whole;

NOTING that all arts must, in general, follow and advance humanity....

Respect of Culture

THIRD DRAFT

A resolution to promote and establish institutions and funds pertaining to culture and the arts

Category: Education and Creativity

Area of Affect: Education

Description:

The United Nations,

ASSERTING that culture is important for the economic, material, spiritual, and overall wellbeing of humanity and any civilization;

UNDERSTANDING that culture and arts are intimately connected with daily life and daily affairs which may not have an explicit connection to arts, yet can be very much linked and understood after analysis;

WHEREAS persons and governments may tend to focus on material and/or economic aspects of society, thereby neglecting the importance of culture, and thereby subverting their region in particular and the world as a whole;

NOTING that culture brings about a development within material and economic aspects, as culture promotes and enhances quality of life and the well-being of the human race, bringing about a sound cooperation between individuals and within a given individual him/herself pertaining to economic and material development as well;

HEREBY finds it necessary to introduce a resolution with its goal to encourage culture and art as a whole;

NOTING that all arts must, in general, follow and advance humanity and civilization;

DEFINING advancement as not resulting in mass-murder, genocide, or other acts which are an immediate danger to the human race; rather resulting in an increase of quality of life (Although the specific definition of advancement is to be determined by the individual nations/regions)

NOTING that different nationalities and locations may have varying definitions of culture and arts;

ASSERTING that people involved in the arts should not be marginalized and receive an equal amount of respect as persons involved in economics and physical sciences in regards to their cultural and positive achievements

EMPHASIZING that this document is not intended to change or revise culture in any nation, but rather to strengthen and promote existing culture, which is to be determined by individual nations;

PROHIBITING use of this document in the service of severe harm or damage to living beings;

HEREBY defines culture as conforming to at least one of the criteria in category I, and conforming to at least one of the criteria in category II set forth below

I-1)Being practiced and/or followed by ten or more individuals, in which said individuals have given their written consent AND can verify their participation

I-2)Having a historical basis in which such a culture was practiced by twenty or more individuals, or a derivative of such which can be easily inferred by ten or more individuals

II-1) Culture in the Visual Arts

Is defined by the carving or manipulation of inert substances, or the non-terminal manipulation of active or live substances;
Mat not defined by terminal manipulation or alteration of live substances. The terminal physical alteration of any live substances performed by an artist body over a non-consenting live subject will not be considered "Culture" and will not be the subject of this document.

II-2) Culture in the Musical Arts

Excludes any form of noise which is not generated with an artistic intent such as noise or sound emanating from machinery or technology which is not intentionally created as a form of art. However, Musical Arts

Include forms of sound which are generated with an artistic intent

II-3) Intellecual Arts such as philosophy, poetry, prose, literature, and all verbal and/or conceptual arts are hereby defined as:

a) Not explicitly violating or advocating violation of any prior UN resolution
b) Having the possibility of being formalized and systematized among a group of persons; anything which cannot be formalized or comprehended in a nominal fashion and form will not be included within this document. Forms of comprehensibility including (but not limited to):

-communication
-active interaction
-communal or group appreciation
-identification of an art as art'

II-4) Culinary arts including taste and preparation of aliments and foodstuff with the intent of art

RECOMMENDS nations to establish a ministry, the intent thereof, to provide funding, and assistance to producers and products of such cultures;

RECOMMENDS that institutions be established to further the study of culture;

REQUIRES that a local form of encouragement and/or a small fund be established in the service of at least one of aforementioned recommendations;

RECOMMENDS that the encouragement and/or funding of the arts be in relative proportion to the funding pertaining to the physical sciences and/or the sciences of economics;

ACKNOWLEDGING the heterogeneity and diversity of many cultures, and restating that the definitions of culture set forth in this document are precautionary measures only, and should not be used as a guide to defining culture, but as a mechanism to protect citizens and public interest when culture is defined as something detrimental;

PROHIBITS any enforcement of this document to be applied in instances where enforcement will pose immediate and grave material danger to a significant amount of the population.

Aside from the fact that the definitions make me cringe, surely this is going to go way over the character limit?

Regarding the complaints of Comrade Gramiko

The definition does not and cannot exclude minors, animals, or other sentient beings. Many countries have various arts that relate to the non-terminal manipulation of animals -

In our Country, we have Toupeed Eagle shaving, where participants attempt to make the Eagle "bald"


You should be glad you do not live in Zyrwick then. Should anyone attempt such an abuse of an eagle, Our National Animal, in our Democratic Republic. Our Revolutionary Proletariat would rise and string said person up.

Further the definition make me even angrier. And I imagine that Comrade General Secretary Maxim Ulyanov would personally see that you had a psychological evaluation if you were a Zyrwickian citizen.

That is not art at all. It is abuse of an animal, and however, yet again illustrates my point that "art" is best left to the various member nations.

Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador

Comrade Gramiko,

The definition of such does not override national boundaries or regulations. If the shaving of an eagle is considered offensive in your country, then you have the right to ban it, and this document does not necessarily override such regulations

The clause was intended for nations such as ours, to fund the arts in the way they deem fit. If shaving an eagle is banned by the UN, then we will promptly remove it from our cultural funding.

I was not aware of a character limit - is there one?

Nachtbergan.

Yes there is a character limit. Its located in the FAQs. the Last time I checked it was something like 30,000 characters including spaces and "hard returns".

You are aware that without this resolution your nation can still do that right? This is a pointless waste of time then. Nations that want to fund "art" are already doing so. And nations that do not wont.

Yes, but this resolution is primarily intended to require countries who are not focusing on culture and arts to change their policies.

Its located in the FAQs. the Last time I checked it was something like 30,000 characters including spaces and "hard returns".

Actually, it's not in the FAQ or any other official location. Various UN proposal authors have figured it out over the years.

I think you've vastly overstated the limit. The numbers that stick in my memory are 3500 or 5300. I'm sure somebody will come along with the correct version. Incidentally, the current count on this proposal appears to be just under 5000, and Maritime Neutrality Covention (damn, I never noticed that misspelling) comes in at 3479, so I'm thinking 3500 is closest.

Thanks Fris. I could have sworn that I read it somewhere in the UN Faq's though. And It seems I likely added a Zero. I knew it was 3,000 something.

Yes, but this resolution is primarily intended to require countries who are not focusing on culture and arts to change their policies.

And what business is it of yours what other countries focus on? Look if you want to mutalate children and animals in your country fine. Go ahead and do so. We view it as sick and will probably see if we cant draft a resolution to stop that from happening, while still being sovereignty friendly.

Other than that this proposal is nothing but filth. It is so disgusting I doubt Comrade Alexandrovich, the Zyrwickian Delegation's Janitor would pick it up with his garbage collecting stick thingy and we are afraid that shreading this document would contaminate our paper shreader.

Well, what is it?

UN resolutions by definition are somewhat of an infringement on nations' sovereignity;

There are loopholes in this resolution, however it does demand at least a minimal effort of dubbing something as 'cultural', and I think that is the most that the UN can and should do in regards to culture.

I have provided arguments as to how culture aids in world and global development, if you wish to contest this, you may issue a repeal (Should this ever pass) or you may argue against it.

What this resolution essentially does is stress that the country stress the importance of "Culture" and enrich it - the definition of "Culture" is largely up to the individual nation.

Oh if this ever reaches quorum, which I highly doubt; only one resolution reguarding arts and culture has reached quorum and its going down in flames thank Lenin, we will argue against it. And should by some miricle of stupidity on the part of the General Assembly this thing (I am not going to call it a proposal as that would cheapen the word) be passed by the General Assembly, we will immedately propose a repeal.

Well, asides for those such as Comrade Gramico (who misspelled my name, giving me the right to return the offense), who do not agree with the message of the proposal, do my esteemed colleagues feel that this proposal is ready to be submitted?

Where's your 3500 character draft? No matter how good you think your proposal is, it will look worse with a third of it truncated.

Respect of Culture

FOURTH DRAFT: <3,500 CHARACTER VERSION
A resolution to promote and establish institutions and funds pertaining to culture and the arts

Category: Education and Creativity

Area of Affect: Education

Description:


UNDERSTANDING that culture and arts are intimately connected with daily life and daily affairs which may not have an explicit connection to arts, yet can be very much linked and understood after analysis;

WHEREAS persons and governments may tend to focus on material and/or economic aspects of society, thereby neglecting the importance of culture, and thereby subverting their region in particular and the world as a whole;

NOTING that culture brings about a development within material and economic aspects;

HEREBY finds it necessary to introduce a resolution with its goal to encourage culture and art as a whole;

HEREBY defines culture as conforming to at least one of the criteria in category I, and conforming to at least one of the criteria in category II set forth below

I-1)Being practiced and/or followed by ten or more individuals, in which said individuals have given their written consent AND can verify their participation

I-2)Having a historical basis in which such a culture was practiced by twenty or more individuals, or a derivative of such which can be easily inferred by ten or more individuals

II-1) Culture in the Visual Arts

Is defined by the carving or manipulation of inert substances, or the non-terminal manipulation of active or live substances;
Mat not defined by terminal manipulation or alteration of live substances. The terminal physical alteration of any live substances performed by an artist body over a non-consenting live subject will not be considered "Culture" and will not be the subject of this document.

II-2) Culture in the Musical Arts

Excludes any form of noise which is not generated with an artistic intent such as noise or sound emanating from machinery or technology which is not intentionally created as a form of art. However, Musical Arts
Include forms of sound which are generated with an artistic intent

II-3) Intellecual Arts such as philosophy, poetry, prose, literature, and all verbal and/or conceptual arts are hereby defined as:

a) Not explicitly violating or advocating violation of any prior UN resolution
b) Having the possibility of being formalized and systematized among a group of persons; anything which cannot be formalized or comprehended in a nominal fashion and form will not be included within this document. Forms of comprehensibility including (but not limited to): communication, active interaction, communal or group appreciation, and identification of an art as art'

II-4) Culinary arts including taste and preparation of aliments and foodstuff with the intent of art

ACKNOWLEDGING the heterogeneity and diversity of many cultures, and noting that the definitions of culture set forth in this document are precautionary measures only, and should not be used as a guide to defining culture, but as a mechanism to protect citizens and public interest when culture is defined as something detrimental;

RECOMMENDS nations to establish a ministry, the intent thereof, to provide funding, and assistance to producers and products of such cultures;

RECOMMENDS that institutions be established to further the study of culture;

REQUIRES that a local form of encouragement and/or a small fund be established in the service of at least one of aforementioned recommendations;

PROHIBITS any enforcement of this document to be applied in instances where enforcement will pose immediate and grave material danger to a significant amount of the population.

The Politburo is declaring a day of national mourning for the lost parts of the proposal.

Why are there so many bills about respecting "x"? If they are not mandating anything, then why bother signing them into law, as they are just as ineffective as saying "we really wish you would be nice".

And if they ARE mandating respect, or some form of emotion, then they should be immediately repealed. As the U.N. or any government has no business mandating emotions and feelings about anyone/anything.

RECOMMENDS nations to establish a ministry, the intent thereof, to provide funding, and assistance to producers and products of such cultures;

RECOMMENDS that institutions be established to further the study of culture;

REQUIRES that a local form of encouragement and/or a small fund be established in the service of at least one of aforementioned recommendations;


The great nation of Libertiua may purchase some vision aids at Lachmania-Im-Kugel, which is known to have the finest horn-rimmed-glasses in NS.

The great nation of Libertiua may purchase some vision aids at Lachmania-Im-Kugel, which is known to have the finest horn-rimmed-glasses in NS.

A bill that requires the government to pay for studying cultures? Sounds like a complete waste of money. These U.N. bills seem to not care how much money they waste, they would spend billions of dollars mandating that no one's hair color offends anyone. And that the government set up funds to better study the effects of offensive hair colors.

Waste. Stupid. Pointless.

You may not vote for it, if you find it pointless, but I recommend that you view my response in the official thread.

I think that you need to present your argument in a more articulate fashion. Perhaps something more than two lines?

This proposal has been submitted.