NationStates Jolt Archive

It's kinda an important subject, and I feel it hasn't been touched on...

NOTING that the WA has no place interfering in a nation’s choice of government.

UNDERSTANDING that the WA has a responsibility to assist third world and undeveloped countries.

REALIZING the ease at which large and powerful countries may use such said undeveloped nations to their advantage by the heinous practice of Imperialism.

BELIEVING that the WA is obligated to form a stopper against Imperialism, while not interfering with the affairs of specific nations.

ESTABLISHING a set of restrictions to highly industrialized nations (Strong economies) and a set of rights for small (less that twenty million population) or underdeveloped (Weak economies) nations:

Restrictions to Imperialism:
1. A highly industrialized nation may only establish industry in a foreign, underdeveloped nation if the amount established is less than the size of the same industry in the industrialized nation itself.
2. If workers hired are native to the country the industry is established in, they will be treated according to the labor laws of the industrialized nation, the underdeveloped nation, and the World Assembly.
3. The total Per Capita Income of all industry established by the industrialized nation in the underdeveloped nation may not exceed that of the underdeveloped nation.
4. Factories and other industrial spaces are treated as territory of the underdeveloped nation and are under all that nations laws, as well as the laws of the industrialized nation’s laws, aside from draft and minority laws.
5. The funding or backing of a dictator or other such leader in an underdeveloped nation by a highly industrialized country is strongly frowned upon by the World Assembly.
Rights of the Imperialized Nation:
1. The underdeveloped nation has a right to refuse development of industry from any or all nations that ask, as they must ask, to globalize to their nation. Also, at any time, said underdeveloped nation may dismiss the industry of any or all industrialized nations on their soil.
2. The underdeveloped nation has a right to a taxation of the plants and their workers according to its national tax laws.
3. The underdeveloped nation has a right to rations of any material produced by industry, but no more than a 49% ration. Negotiation can be attempted to increase or decrease this percent.

wow..... lichtenstein would be screwed. only thing im going to comment on is 20 million people is a nation less than a week old, (i think) so that number may very well need to be adjusted. im about smaller compared to GMC Military Arms as the Philipenes was to the US.

Category? Strength?

Resolutions are supposed to affect all WA member-nations, at least potentially, so you might have to adjust this proposal's scope...

I may have 2 billion or so people, but I think about smaller nations. Yes, many of them in Funen have matured well above 500 million, but a good resolution should respect all levels of population, whether it's 15 million or my 2.308 billion or something like that.

However, great start and don't give up.

I have a relatively simple question: what the hell does any of this mean?

I'd also like to begin with the observation that Quintessence of Dust may only number 5 million in population, but is plenty industrialised, thank you very much.
1. A highly industrialized nation may only establish industry in a foreign, underdeveloped nation if the amount established is less than the size of the same industry in the industrialized nation itself.
What 'amount'? In the apple-picking industry, what if there are simply more apple trees in the underdeveloped nation? Besides, isn't it a good idea for industries to become specialised in suitable nations?

You are essentially prohibiting us from helping a foreign nation develop economic independence. Although I don't understand most of your operative section, to judge by the rhetoric of the introduction this is the exact opposite of what you intend. It needs rethinking.
2. If workers hired are native to the country the industry is established in, they will be treated according to the labor laws of the industrialized nation, the underdeveloped nation, and the World Assembly.
Well, which one? Some nations have a 35 hour week, some have a 40 hour week, some don't have a limitation of that form. Some provide paid leave, some don't. Whose laws take precedent in a conflict between the two nations?
3. The total Per Capita Income of all industry established by the industrialized nation in the underdeveloped nation may not exceed that of the underdeveloped nation.
So, as noted, we are committed to keeping trade partners in a permament state of underdevelopment. Dependency, here we come!
4. Factories and other industrial spaces are treated as territory of the underdeveloped nation and are under all that nations laws, as well as the laws of the industrialized nation’s laws, aside from draft and minority laws.
Well, once again, a space cannot operate according to two legal codes (nevermind what 'minority laws' are). If it is the sovereign territory of one nation, the other nation's laws can go take a hike.
5. The funding or backing of a dictator or other such leader in an underdeveloped nation by a highly industrialized country is strongly frowned upon by the World Assembly.
This is meaninglessly vague.
1. The underdeveloped nation has a right to refuse development of industry from any or all nations that ask, as they must ask, to globalize to their nation. Also, at any time, said underdeveloped nation may dismiss the industry of any or all industrialized nations on their soil.
You had me up to 'to globalize to...', but I guess that's only because you stopped using English at that point. But, for the first time in this proposal, I sort of agree with the basic sense of one your clauses.
3. The underdeveloped nation has a right to rations of any material produced by industry, but no more than a 49% ration. Negotiation can be attempted to increase or decrease this percent.
Once again: what?

Sorry, but this is absolutely terrible. Please don't confuse that for political disagreement: I might well like the idea of the proposal, but it really needs to be more comprehensible before any discussion of content can begin.

A starting suggestion, then: consider the point about national laws conflicting. Whose laws should take precedent, under what circumstances?

-- Samantha Benson
Congressional Liaison, Office of UN Affairs
Quintessence of Dust, Delegate of Wysteria

Excluded tax codes because I don't know enough about it: off to do some research. The 5 million thing is roleplayed.

What about preserving a free market? Would this not supress that by restricting nations with larger economies by telling what they can and cant spend on.