NationStates Jolt Archive

(This is the revised edition, the one submitted to the WA)

Whereas the nations of the World Assembly recognize that modern-day slavery curtails the basic human rights of those enslaved,

Whereas enslavement is recognized as a nation or business using violenceor indentured servitude to obtain productive value or economic benefit for said organization,

Whereas the nations recognize that slavery involves the sale, trade, or exchange of human persons without their consent for the use of forced labor,

Whereas the nations also recognize that this forced enslavement violates an individual’s dignity and self worth, not allowing them to exercise their natural right to free will and determination of one’s own destiny,

Whereas forms of modern-day slavery include chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labor, and other forms of forced labor,

Whereas modern-day slavery strips human beings of dignity, respect, and hope for their future and no nation or people are immune from the effects of modern-day slavery ;

Whereas the definition of slavery for the purpose of the resolution does not involve conscription into military service, and the use of forced labor in detention centers and prisons,

Be it resolved by the WA member nations here assembled that the institution of slavery be completely abolished by all members and be it

Further resolved, A member nation refusing to adhere to this resolution once passed will face an immediate trade embargo by all member nations.

Respectfully submitted, Asair Zeyergo, Minister of The Committee for the Drafting of Legislation, Zeyakistan,

(resolution co-authored between the Nations of Zeyakistan and Nursia)

While the people of Glen-Rhodes disagree with slavery, it is our opinion that slavery remain a national issue, rather than a global issue. We proclaim that a sovereign nation reserves the right to set their own forced adult labor and suffrage laws.

Furthermore, this proposal is poorly worded. One can define conscription as slavery, then where would that leave member nations who rely on conscription to protect themselves?

I'm not sure what the numbered lines and really short sentences are all about, but they're very annoying.

Here's the stretched out version, with inconsistent spelling repaired and double words removed

WHEREAS, the peoples of many WA member nations are enslaved against their own will by government, or private enterprise; and
WHEREAS, the quality of life within these member nations will suffer as a whole, and decrease the quality of life of all member nations; and
WHEREAS, some current slaves are in a poor state of being, and suffer from diseases and work related stress and the humanity of the WA member nations involved stands at a all time low,

therefore, be it RESOLVED,
By the WA member nations here assembled that, the institution of slavery be completely abolished by the WA in government and private enterprise; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, A member nation refusing to adhere to this resolution once passed will face an immediate trade embargo by all member nations

Well, that makes it readable, but it doesn't improve it.

OOC: Official legislation propositions (at least in America) have line numbers and, sometimes, the preamble uses small lines like this. Zeyakistan was probably just trying to be authentic.

While the people of Glen-Rhodes disagree with slavery, it is our opinion that slavery remain a national issue, rather than a global issue. We proclaim that a sovereign nation reserves the right to set their own forced adult labor and suffrage laws.

With all due respect, we cannot disagree more with our colleague from Glen-Rhodes; this is nothing short of a human-rights issue, and such it is EXACTLY the type of issue the WA should be dealing with.

We must also agree, however, with the opinions of several of our colleagues above in that this proposal is poorly written and so vague that it is unenforceable. We kindly suggest that the representative from Zeyakistan (and anyone else wishing to tackle this issue) look here (http://www.nationstates.net/12605/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=231) for an example of what might constitute a solid anti-slavery proposal.

I can assure you that the government of Glen-Rhodes wholly agrees that slavery is an important issue. However, we believe that it is a civil rights issue that should be dealt with by each member nation on their own accord. While poor treatment of slaves may be a human rights issue, the use of forced labor is an entirely civil issue.

Understand that Glen-Rhodes does not encourage slavery. However, a resolution banning slavery steps on the fine line of national sovereignty. The abolishing of slavery could very well send many of the smaller members nation in to economic and social disarray. Does it not occur to you that some member nations simply cannot afford to pay people to work? What about the ramifications of taking slaves away from their owners? Have you thought of that?

It is more than a issue of human or civil rights. It is an issue of whether or not we dismiss the destruction of smaller, slavery-based nations just to further a political ideology.

We the people of Benedict of Nursia support the complete abolition of slavery. We disagree with our esteemed colleague from Glen-Rhodes on the point that slavery itself is a civil rights issue. It is also a human rights issue.

By definition, human rights entail all those basic rights entitled to all humans, justified by a moral standard higher than that of a certain nation's laws.

Let's look at slavery. This violates the natural law. A person in slavery is restricted from free expression. They are restricted from using their own free will in all matters.

The use of free will itself is a natural human right, and any institution that curtails an individual's free will is violating the most basic of sensibilities.

We believe that nations will not crumble due to this resolution. With the abolition of slavery, more people will be able to earn livings for themselves. This means they will buy more goods to bolster their economies from the initial loss of slavery. With the economic boost, there will be more jobs, and hence, more ex-slaves will be able to obtain employment, and so on and so forth. It is a win win situation for all.

The Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia will support this proposal, as long as the suggestion of Scotchpinestan is taken into account, and the wording is improved.

Pax et bonum.

I can assure you that the government of Glen-Rhodes wholly agrees that slavery is an important issue. However, we believe that it is a civil rights issue that should be dealt with by each member nation on their own accord. While poor treatment of slaves may be a human rights issue, the use of forced labor is an entirely civil issue.

Understand that Glen-Rhodes does not encourage slavery. However, a resolution banning slavery steps on the fine line of national sovereignty. The abolishing of slavery could very well send many of the smaller members nation in to economic and social disarray. Does it not occur to you that some member nations simply cannot afford to pay people to work? What about the ramifications of taking slaves away from their owners? Have you thought of that?

It is more than a issue of human or civil rights. It is an issue of whether or not we dismiss the destruction of smaller, slavery-based nations just to further a political ideology.

Sorry we cannot agree on this with the government of Glen-Rhodes. There can be nations who economical depends on child labour. But if the (majority of) the WA members think it should be abolished, and a resolution is made against child labour, it will be abolished in all WA nations. If a nation wants to go on with child labour, it can do so outside the WA. The same is with a fair trial, if you do not want that, maybe because it takes time or money, you can leave the WA. For me the same with slavery. Correct me if I am wrong.

But of course only a well written proposal will get the support from Intelligentsia Islands.

Greetings,
Cocoamok
WA delegate for Intelligentsia Islands

The League of Dictatorships wholy supports its use of slavery and the trading there of. While other nations might consider this appalling, we find the practice very useful. Moreover, while this might be considered an international problem, we feel that it is within our civil rights, or lack there of, to continue the practice.

Peace through oppression,

Praetor Gogarty,
Of The Holy Empire Of Ettomn
WA Delegate To The WA

You shouldn't be worrying that some other nations are supporting slavery and/or having slaves. The nations have a right to do as they will, and they shouldn't be bothered by people who want to force such things upon them. Let the nations attend to their own matters, and don't interfere in such a way. You need to realize that not every country works the same so, let them do what they want at their own expense.

We are wholly opposed to this proposal and are disappointed by the views of the Ambassadors of Intelligentsia Islands and the Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia. The dividing issue is the definition of civil and human rights, and whether or not the World Assembly has and deserves the authority to exercise decisions of civil rights. The Chancellor of Glen-Rhodes and I, his appointed Ambassador, think it is beyond the scope of authority and responsibility of the World Assembly, its delegates, and its member nations.

We must separate what is a civil right and what is a human right. Forced labor is an issue of civil rights, and should not be impeded on by the World Assembly. Had Glen-Rhodes been a member of the World Assembly at the time Resolution #4 was on the floor, we would have expressed great distraught that the World Assembly was disregarding several issues that arise from banning any form of labor.

Understand, though, that we do not condone child labor, slave labor, or any other forced labor. We believe that, instead of abolishing labor, a proposal be written for the adequate treatment of forced laborers. That would be a human rights issue, and would be in the scope of authority and responsibility of the World Assembly.

Need I ask whether or not you would support a ban on conscription? This proposal is the same idea.

We the members of the CLRD (Civil Liberties Resource Department) of the Commonwealth of Scottorium, whole-heartedly agree with our friends and neighbors of Glen-Rhodes.

This is not an issue for the WA to discuss. It is a matter for nations themselves. This proposal will drastically affect our nation’s defense as we have conscription. Unless other wise noted in a revision of the proposal, the people of Scottorium reject its contents.

Regards,
Jon Estevez, Secratary of the CLRD

The High Council of Desh-Shrik whole-heartedly supports the essence of this act. These are basic human rights that should go for each and every individual.

However, in its current form the act is vague and not fit to be turned into legislation. We ask for it to be rewritten, and we shall be sure to cast our vote once a proper version is proposed.

Also, the High Council would be willing to compromise in the fact that while slave labour not be abolished, the proper treatment of slaves will be enforced, as the W.A community sees fit.

As ambassador for The Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia, we have been asked by our Prime Minister to express our nation's disappointment at the opinions held by Glen-Rhodes, Scottorium, and Steadfest. We continue to assert the fact that slavery is in fact a human rights issue, and not a civil rights issue.

Whether it is for selfish, ideological, commercial, or totalitarian reasons, the act of human enslavement is immoral and wrong. To reduce a person, through the use of violence, to obtain profit or productivity out of said persons, is a violation against their rights as free human beings and a violation against their own personal dignity and self-worth.

Regarding military registration and conscription, we hold reservations about this as well. However, we recognize the fact that in a national emergency, a country has the right to defent itself using the means availible to it. For this reason, a nation may enact conscription. But this must be looked at very carefully. First of all, in our nation, we have established the use of conscientious objection, where by if a person has valid moral or spiritual reasons for not participating in a conflict, then they will not be forced to do so. A person's free will is honored in this situation. And for those who do enter service under conscription are given the same rights and privileges as any other member of our military.

Benedict of Nursia and our citizens continue to support this resolution, if the language were cleared up. No nation has the right to trample on basic human dignities for any reason. If a resolution such as this were to pass, if a country so desires to continue to these practices, then they may withdraw from this respectable body.

OK, this is weird. I'm agreeing with the Scotchpineistan delegation. Who put what in my beer?

On the proposal, it needs a lot of expansion. What happens to newly freed slaves? Are they compensated for their lives of slavery? If so, who by? If not, why not? And so on.

When our predecessor Organisation Which Must Not Be Named did for slavery, it did for it very thoroughly, using several resolutions. The idea of banning slavery properly in just two lines, by contrast, is absurb.

We the members of the CLRD of the Commonwealth of Scottorium, respectfully acknowledge The Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia has a valid point in asserting a human rights issue on their own accord, thusly as this forum thread is a testament to the fact that the real issue is that “slavery” should be a national issue not an international one.

Currently, we are reworking the resolution as it stands in order to form it as formal proposal in the correct format. Current legislation is pending upon approval and advice from supporting nations.

The Confederacy of KaeZoo takes no official position on the issue of forced labor within WA member nations. However, we would support a ban on the trade of conscripted workers between nations. Under such a proposal, a WA member nation would be prohibited from allowing residents of other nations to be imported for the purpose of forced labor, or consenting to the removal of its own residents to be used as conscripted labor in other nations.

A resolution such as this must not be submitted to the world assembly on the grounds that many nations, such as my own, have a highly powerful, and slavery based economy. The economic losses nationstates wide would be astronomical, such a resolution can only do harm.

The trustworthy people of Kendall Park believe it is unethical and immoral to keep human beings as possesions. Even though it may bring in needed stimulus to some economies, it should never be an option we it considers sellin, trading, and bargaining for a human being's soul.
We wholeheartedly agree to this WA proposition.

The trustworthy people of Kendall Park believe it is unethical and immoral to keep human beings as possesions. Even though it may bring in needed stimulus to some economies, it should never be an option we it considers sellin, trading, and bargaining for a human being's soul.
We wholeheartedly agree to this WA proposition.

The Confederacy of KaeZoo takes no official position on the issue of forced labor within WA member nations. However, we would support a ban on the trade of conscripted workers between nations. Under such a proposal, a WA member nation would be prohibited from allowing residents of other nations to be imported for the purpose of forced labor, or consenting to the removal of its own residents to be used as conscripted labor in other nations.

No problem if a proposal will come to an on the trade of conscripted workers between nations. Our region will support that. It will be seen by us as a first step to abolish slavery.

Every WA proposal has opponents who are fiercely against that proposal. It has never been in the short history that all WA nations did support a resolution, so it will not be in the future. I should say focus on arguments to improve a proposal against slavery so it can get a majority in the WA. In the past it got a majority from the delegates in NationStates.

Sadly you cannot convince everyone that slavery is to be condemned. The WA is, sadly again, a tyranny by majority. This is the world we live in, this is the world we try to improve.

Greetings,
Cocoamok
WA delegate for Intelligentsia Islands

Whether it is for selfish, ideological, commercial, or totalitarian reasons, the act of human enslavement is immoral and wrong.

The trustworthy people of Kendall Park believe it is unethical and immoral to keep human beings as possesions. Even though it may bring in needed stimulus to some economies, it should never be an option we it considers sellin, trading, and bargaining for a human being's soul.

May I hope that you feel as strongly about the potential of ursine enslavement?

The Emissaries of Scottorium, request revisions to this proposal. Civil Rights among the leaders of our fellow nations can not be turned upside down. Slavery in, slave trade out, conscription in.


Jose Estevez
CLRD, Commonwealth or Scottorium

This issue has been a hot button topic on news stations in Glen-Rhodes. The Chancellor would like to relay the message he told our citizens: the treatment of human beings as slaves is immoral and unethical. However, it is our duty to ensure that each nation in the world has the right to preserve its sovereignty and its livelihood. Any proposal, wherein the ramifications include economic instability and potential civil war, will be highly protested by the government of Glen-Rhodes.

We are in agreement with the Civil Liberties Resource Department of the Commonwealth of Scottorium. Forced labor should not be legislated. Any attempt to do so by the World Assembly, is a willing offensive act against the many nations that practice forced labor. The World Assembly would be responsible for the economic destruction of many nations, and any civil and international war that ensues.

We refer to the proposal put forth by the Glen-Rhodes government two days ago: mandate that slaves must be provided food, shelter, and health care. That is a human rights issue.

It might be an idea to wait until the author actually posts his current set of revisions before making more incomprehensible ideological rants. That way it might be easier for the rest of us to tell what you're actually talking about.

the treatment of human beings as slaves is immoral and unethical.

Then is it not our duty in the WA to take a "willing offensive act" against it?

The Scotchpine delegation is, quite frankly, puzzled at the level of opposition to the idea of an anti-slavery resolution. As we have previously pointed out, the WA's predecessor body, the UN, had such a proposal on the books, and it never caused a stir untio it was repealed and replaced with an even stronger anti-slavery resolution (which is the one we posted the link to).

Your nation's economies did well enough during the UN days, did they not?

It might be an idea to wait until the author actually posts his current set of revisions before making more incomprehensible ideological rants. That way it might be easier for the rest of us to tell what you're actually talking about.
We are extremely disappointed that you've dismissed the legitimate concerns of our government as "ideological rants". It is extremely hypocritical of you, and highly unprofessional.

Then is it not our duty in the WA to take a "willing offensive act" against it?

The Scotchpine delegation is, quite frankly, puzzled at the level of opposition to the idea of an anti-slavery resolution. As we have previously pointed out, the WA's predecessor body, the UN, had such a proposal on the books, and it never caused a stir untio it was repealed and replaced with an even stronger anti-slavery resolution (which is the one we posted the link to).

Your nation's economies did well enough during the UN days, did they not?
Mandating that slaves be given food, shelter, and medical care is within the scope of human rights, and is thus within the scope of the World Assembly's authority. Mandating the nations turn their governments and economies upside down based on the ideological views of some WA member nations -- views that do not take in to account the ramifications of the actions of this act -- is well outside the World Assembly's authority. It seems that many WA member nations are turning a willful, ignorant eye when it comes to the social and economic issues of this topic.

Furthermore, the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes did not exist under the United Nations.

The new proposal is still awaiting approval by supporting nations so that we as a whole may submit this legislation together, now the arguments of whether or not this legislation should be submitted to the WA is irrelevent in the forum, here we should be discussing the ideals of slavery and its pros - cons. Let those who wish to say it should not even be allowed as a proposal say so by turning down this proposal before it turns into a resolution, as that is its correct place. However before further ridicule of this proposal continues I would inform you that the new proposal be posted at 10:00 pm Central time.

Thank you.

Whereas the nations of the World Assembly recognize that modern-day slavery curtails the basic human rights of those enslaved,

Whereas enslavement is recognized as a nation or business using violenceor indentured servitude to obtain productive value or economic benefit for said organization,

Whereas the nations recognize that slavery involves the sale, trade, or exchange of human persons without their consent for the use of forced labor,

Whereas the nations also recognize that this forced enslavement violates an individual’s dignity and self worth, not allowing them to exercise their natural right to free will and determination of one’s own destiny,

Whereas forms of modern-day slavery include chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labor, and other forms of forced labor,

Whereas modern-day slavery strips human beings of dignity, respect, and hope for their future and no nation or people are immune from the effects of modern-day slavery ;

Whereas the definition of slavery for the purpose of the resolution does not involve conscription into military service, and the use of forced labor in detention centers and prisons,

Be it resolved by the WA member nations here assembled that the institution of slavery be completely abolished by all members and be it

Further resolved, A member nation refusing to adhere to this resolution once passed will face an immediate trade embargo by all member nations.

Respectfully submitted, Asair Zeyergo, Minister of The Committee for the Drafting of Legislation, Zeyakistan,

(resolution co-authored between the Nations of Zeyakistan and Nursia)

Your nation's economies did well enough during the UN days, did they not?


So well infact the the UN dissapated!

We are extremely disappointed that you've dismissed the legitimate concerns of our government as "ideological rants". It is extremely hypocritical of you, and highly unprofessional.

Sorry for not making the context clearer; I was in fact responding to the incomprehensible gibberish of the Scottorium delegation. I didn't hear what you said, since I was busy talking at the time (OOC: i.e. our posts crossed).

You, on the other hand, are just wrong. If you refuse to let the WA legislate on civil rights, you are allowing any nation with any kind of civil rights setup into the WA. You are implicitly saying that it's OK for them to (say) keep slaves by refusing to stop them. I don't know about you, but I'd call myself a hypocrite if I did that.

I formally request at the behest of the Prime Minister of Scottorium, theat the Delegation Gobbennan(OOC - Sorry for the misspelling) issue an apology. It is not the purpose of this forum to smite people, regardless if you can not read their so called gibberish.

Allowing the resolution to pass will completely upturn the economies of our follow WA members. Again revisions muist be made.

OOC: having some issues posting the new proposal to this thread, says waiting for approval by a mod, does this generally take a very very long time? its been 3 hours.

A resolution such as this must not be submitted to the world assembly on the grounds that many nations, such as my own, have a highly powerful, and slavery based economy. The economic losses nationstates wide would be astronomical, such a resolution can only do harm.Whaaa! Whaaa! Cry me a God damn fraking river. I'm a fraking soverigntist and I support the WA banning slavery.

Further resolved, A member nation refusing to adhere to this resolution once passed will face an immediate trade embargo by all member nations.

Respectfully submitted, Asair Zeyergo, Minister of The Committee for the Drafting of Legislation, Zeyakistan,Cut out these two clauses, the first one is unneeded due to the WA's mandatory compliance, and the second will get the proposal deleted for branding.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

OOC: having some issues posting the new proposal to this thread, says waiting for approval by a mod, does this generally take a very very long time? its been 3 hours.

OOC: You're new, it'll pass.

So well infact the the UN dissapated!

And the fact that slavery was banned did not contribute one iota to the UN's collapse.

Whereas the nations of the World Assembly recognize that modern-day slavery curtails the basic human rights of those enslaved,

Whereas enslavement is recognized as a nation or business using violence or indentured servitude to obtain productive value or economic benefit for said organization,

Whereas the nations recognize that slavery involves the sale, trade, or exchange of human persons without their consent for the use of forced labor,

Whereas the nations also recognize that this forced enslavement violates an individual’s dignity and self worth, not allowing them to exercise their natural right to free will and determination of one’s own destiny,

Whereas forms of modern-day slavery include chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labor, and other forms of forced labor,

Whereas modern-day slavery strips human beings of dignity, respect, and hope for their future and no nation or people are immune from the effects of modern-day slavery ;

Whereas the definition of slavery for the purpose of the resolution does not involve conscription into military service, and the use of forced labor in detention centers and prisons,

Be it resolved by the WA member nations here assembled that the institution of slavery be completely abolished by all members and be it

Further resolved, A member nation refusing to adhere to this resolution once passed will face an immediate trade embargo by all member nations.


Co-Authored by the Nations of Zeyakistan and his eminence Benedict of Nursia

OOC: the odd thing i can post a reply like this and it will go straight through, however when i try to post the new proposal it has still been six hours and nothing has went through (maybe if i try to edit it in) ----

Whereas the nations of the World Assembly recognize that modern-day slavery curtails the basic human rights of those enslaved,

Whereas enslavement is recognized as a nation or business using violence or indentured servitude to obtain productive value or economic benefit for said organization,

Whereas the nations recognize that slavery involves the sale, trade, or exchange of human persons without their consent for the use of forced labor,

Whereas the nations also recognize that this forced enslavement violates an individual’s dignity and self worth, not allowing them to exercise their natural right to free will and determination of one’s own destiny,

Whereas forms of modern-day slavery include chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labor, and other forms of forced labor,

Whereas modern-day slavery strips human beings of dignity, respect, and hope for their future and no nation or people are immune from the effects of modern-day slavery ;

Whereas the definition of slavery for the purpose of the resolution does not involve conscription into military service, and the use of forced labor in detention centers and prisons,

Be it resolved by the WA member nations here assembled that the institution of slavery be completely abolished.



Co-Authored by the Nations of Zeyakistan and his eminence Benedict of Nursia

haha it worked...ok folks there is the new proposal.

Our proposal has now been formally introduced to WA, we implore all who wish to, please go in support of human rights and do the right thing. Bring this resolution to vote!

With the revisions written to date Scottorium officially changes its stance on the proposal.

Our proposal has now been formally introduced to WA, we implore all who wish to, please go in support of human rights and do the right thing. Bring this resolution to vote!

The government of the emperor of Urgench has read the proposal the respected ambassador for Zeyakistan has submitted for approval and we have one question, does the respected ambassador actually know what the compound word "Whereas" means? If so then why have they used it so liberally and so wrongly throughout their proposal? If not then we suggest they find out and then rewrite their proposal. This fault makes the effect of your proposal very difficult to descry.

yours e.t.c. ,

OOC: I implore you to look at real legislation submitted through congress, you will find that whereas is a very very very very almost ridiculously common word throught any resolutions passing through the house.

It's clear, it's pretty definite, and it does actually ban slavery. That's a pretty good start. Unfortunately it doesn't address any of the consequences, and there are quite a lot of them. I seriously suggest that you have a look at the three historical resolutions "Repeal 'End Slavery'", "Abolition of Slavery" and "Abolition of Forced Labour" (http://www.nationstates.net/30290/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=230). Then imagine the consequences for the ex-slaves just being cut loose with no other support.

It's probably for the best if you change that last line to something like "Co-authored by Benedict of Nursia" with whatever extra flowery language you like. Otherwise the Powers That Be might have some words to say about branding. They might not, but you can always use the spare characters for something else anyway.

The Scottorium delegation isn't going to get an apology any time soon, not when it carried on insisting that "revisions must be made" with no more helpful comment than that after the authors had said "revisions are being made." That's just whining, and it doesn't help anyone.

4

The Scottorium delegation isn't going to get an apology any time soon, not when it carried on insisting that "revisions must be made" with no more helpful comment than that after the authors had said "revisions are being made." That's just whining, and it doesn't help anyone.



To be frank the Scottorium Delegation refuses to acknowledge the nation of Gobbannaen. These negative retorts to everything we propose and say is disgusting and does not belong in a place that is supposed to hold intellectual conversation.

I digress, the CLRD Delegation of Scottorium have changed their stance with this issue, regardless of any nation who tries to bait our nation into a conflict. I will again re-itterate, with the proposed revisions, this proposition is accepted.


CLRD of the Commonwealth of Scottorium

OOC: I implore you to look at real legislation submitted through congress, you will find that whereas is a very very very very almost ridiculously common word throught any resolutions passing through the house.


The government of the emperor of Urgench imagines that the respected ambassador for Zeyakistan is making a reference to the mythical land of the United States of America in mentioning "congress". We are not terribly impressed by the standards of legislative ability of this "congress" and would not use it's standards as a benchmark for drafting statutes.
Of course the word "whereas" may be used as liberally as one wishes as long as it makes sense it does not function as legalese decoration nor does it lend a statute gravitas or any extra legality purely by it's presence in a sentence.

yours e.t.c. ,

Co-Authored by the Nations of Zeyakistan and his eminence Benedict of Nursia

"Co-Authored by Benedict of Nursia" is the maximum allowed under the branding rules.

The name "Zeyakistan" will automatically be included (and linked) when the proposal is posted.

The Emir of Oiland believes that every great nation ever founded has at some point relied on some form of slavery. Whether it is physical slavery or philosophical slavery coercion is a necessary part of any developing power. As such a developing power, the Emir refuses to back a motion that would only strengthen the strong and weaken those trying to make their way in the world. :hail::hail::soap:

Let it be known that the phrasings of the co-author bits were corrected when we set the formal proposition in motion, also let it be known, that the the government of Zeyakistan does not care for the grammatical corrections by the nation of Ugrench, if that really is their only attack on the legislation anymore, we are sorry you can find nothing else to talk about, but about the consequences for those nations, a ban on slavery must be made, consequences cannot be implemented into a resolution because no global police force or army or prison can be made by a Resolution, therefore through the technicalities of the WA's own rules, there is no enforcement for any legislation. So therefore we must live in a world where if a resolution is passed it is followed other wise every nation who wishes to disobey could, and they would be found pointing at the WA and saying "You and what army?" to which the WA would reply... "Oh yeah.....ooops."

To be frank the Scottorium Delegation refuses to acknowledge the nation of Gobbannaen. These negative retorts to everything we propose and say is disgusting and does not belong in a place that is supposed to hold intellectual conversation.

Things you couldn't be expected to know and probably don't care about: the nation's name is Gobbannium. "Gobbannaen" is the adjectival form. This Mission represents Gobbannium in the WA because the nation itself withdrew after the national security disaster we just passed.

At some point I probably will say something negative about something you propose. I do it to everyone else after all; why should you get special treatment? Mind you, you do have to actually propose something first.

As the starter of this thread, and the original Author of this Resolution in question, I would prefer that any disagreement between the esteemed nations of Scottorium and Gobbannium be restrained to private discussions and and any personal attacks by the two said nations unless directly involving this proposal please be left out of this thread. Thank you.

Frezia Treaste' - Minister of Public Relations -Commonwealth of Zeyakistan.

As the starter of this thread, and the original Author of this Resolution in question, I would prefer that any disagreement between the esteemed nations of Scottorium and Gobbannium be restrained to private discussions and and any personal attacks by the two said nations unless directly involving this proposal please be left out of this thread. Thank you.

Frezia Treaste' - Minister of Public Relations -Commonwealth of Zeyakistan.

I have to agree with my fellow colleague from Zeyakistan on this one. If your two nations have a disagreement, it would be best to take it to some other place or held in private, as this forum should be for the debate of the proposal at hand.

Also, I feel I must point out that we are all respected representatives of the international community, and so should behave in a way that fits our station in the world.

Blessings and peace to all your peoples.

-Ambassador Marshall
Holy Republic of Saint Benedict

The Emir of Oiland believes that every great nation ever founded has at some point relied on some form of slavery. Whether it is physical slavery or philosophical slavery coercion is a necessary part of any developing power. As such a developing power, the Emir refuses to back a motion that would only strengthen the strong and weaken those trying to make their way in the world. :hail::hail::soap:

As I said to the delegation from Vilnirus (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13841927&postcount=35), "Whaaa! Whaaa! Cry me a God damn fraking river. I'm a fraking soverigntist and I support the WA banning slavery."

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

As I said to the delegation from Vilnirus (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13841927&postcount=35), "Whaaa! Whaaa! Cry me a God damn fraking river. I'm a fraking soverigntist and I support the WA banning slavery."

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

We thank all of those nations in support of this proposal! If you are Assembly Delegates, we urge you to cast your vote. If not, please contact your regional delegate and bring this pressing matter to their attention.

Pax et bonum.

Blessings,
Ambassador Marshall
Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia

Also, I feel I must point out that we are all respected representatives of the international community [...]

You really haven't been here long, have you?

Still, noted. Also noted is that neither author has yet deigned to indicate why they think seven lines of justification and one line of action in any way do the job that was done last time with two carefully written, long argued resolutions.

Perhaps because thats the way we wanted it written, really if you look to the WA charater no real enforcement exists, the only thing that we can do is ban slavery and assume that the WA is an all perfect being and everyone will follow, because there is no ENFORCEMENT it doesnt exist.

slavery is just as bas as child labor. it's creul, it's harsh, the living quarters are horrible, they have no time for rest, they have little food and water, it's just wrong. I mean, who would want slavery at all? NOTE: if you say you waNT SLAVERY, I will find you and stab you in the jaw! then I'll :gundge: you, then I'll :mp5: you, then finally, I'll :sniper: you in the head. Then I'll be like :soap::upyours:

The department of health services of Zeyakistan wishes to inform Citizen Soldier that is unhealthy to consume such a large quantity of Coffee.

I'll approve and vote for this resolution. It's time to say Adios to slavery!

if you look to the WA charater no real enforcement exists, the only thing that we can do is ban slavery and assume that the WA is an all perfect being and everyone will follow, because there is no ENFORCEMENT it doesnt exist.

There is no WA charater, nor is there a WA Charter. So you can't actually look at it and say that it doesn't define enforcement.

The WA does in fact enforce the fact that all members must adopt these laws on passage. National law is instantly modified to include the exact text of each resolution as it passes, and nullifies any contradictory laws you might have had before. (Mind you, it does so only on the in-game copy of your laws, as codified in your nation's technical description. The WA gnomes won't seek out older copies on your wiki page or private forum - it's up to your national government to maintain that sort of archival stuff.)

As for enforcing the laws within your nation, that's up to your national police or equivalent. Please note that citizens have a bad habit of ignoring certain laws, and simply making slavery illegal won't immediately deposit all slavers in your local jails. You still have to chase them down, catch them, try them in court (or equivalent) and find a way to punish them.

Authors who attempt to define punishments in their proposals typically discover that there is more resistance to passage when you start enforcing specifics. Proposals with that sort of language rarely make it to the voting floor. Consequently, most sensible authors leave those details to the individual nations.

My apologies for misspelling charter, however I guess what i was trying to say is that no resolution may create world police, prisons or army, so enforcement is not really possible other than being automatic.

I feel that the above issue is an important topic, however I feel that with out a clear definition of Slavery I can not support this resolution. Without the rest of the details I fell that this decision should be left up to the individual nations.

Have you seen the amended version, the new proposal, or did you just read the first page? how much more clear can you wish for?

I want to use slaves!
if i capture enemy soldiers of civilians, i use them in mines, and to work!
It is crazy to ban slaves! Than all our nations economy will be way smaller!
I use them, they help me win wars, and gain food and making weapons!
EVEN if they dont want to!

I want to use slaves!
if i capture enemy soldiers of civilians, i use them in mines, and to work!
It is crazy to ban slaves! Than all our nations economy will be way smaller!
I use them, they help me win wars, and gain food and making weapons!
EVEN if they dont want to!

Bearing in mind that there are nations represented here whose armed forces outnumber your nation's complete population, that seems a rather foolish viewpoint...

Have you seen the amended version, the new proposal, or did you just read the first page? how much more clear can you wish for?

It's considered polite to edit final versions into your first post ... for precisely this reason. Rather than slapping down detractors, you could actually make it easier for people to figure out what you were trying to say.

Yes, I have had trouble searching through the two pages of this thread for the current revision. Each post you've submitted has an edit button no matter how old it is.

As for the resolution itself, it's going well with the approvals but maybe it needs slight improvement. If this current edition is in quorum I'd accept it, but I might be able to help in improving it further...

The people of TRI highly oppose the slavery of other ethnic and colored groups. However, forcing POWs to be slaves (REGARDLESS of ethnicity or color) is allowed, albeit looked down upon.

Whereas enslavement is recognized as a nation or business using violence or indentured servitude to obtain productive value or economic benefit for said organization, Does this mean that a slave owned by an individual is not covered?

Whereas the nations recognize that slavery involves the sale, trade, or exchange of human persons without their consent for the use of forced labor, Not sure if you need the first "the" in these paragraphs, it seems a little....clunky. I've not done legislation writing in a long time, however and I might be missing a few things.

Whereas forms of modern-day slavery include chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labor, and other forms of forced labor, I spy a potential loop hole. Why the change from slavery to "modern-day slavery"? Does this mean good ol' fashioned slavery is fine?

Be it resolved by the WA member nations here assembled that the institution of slavery be completely abolished.Ahhh, maybe that closed the loophole, still a little bemused about the change of tack, and this change back.

But that's it, nothing too serious.

You've got to say that the WA has a purpose to promote human rights. You also need a better definition of slavery. Better still urge them to provide hope for the victims of slavery. Something along the lines of:

The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING that one of its roles is to promote human rights;

DEFINING Slavery as a form of forced labour against civilians, including, but not limited to:
- Member Nations, organizations or individuals using violence or indentured servitude in order to gain productive value or economic benefit for any purpose;
- The sale, trade, or exchange of persons without their consent for the purpose of slavery, and;
- The use of chattel slavery, human trafficking, indentured or bonded labour against the will of the victim, but;

NOT DEFINING Slavery as conscription into military service, or the use of forced labour in places of detention.

APPALLED that the institution of Slavery:
- Falls foul of the basic human rights of the victims;
- Suppresses the victim's dignity, natural right of free will, self-worth, respect, determination of their destiny and hopes for their future;

MANDATES that:
- The institution of slavery be completely abolished and prohibited, and;
- Member Nations may not institute or allow any form of slavery, as defined, to take place in their territory.

URGES all Member Nations to provide support, hope and rehabilitation to victims of Slavery.

PRAISES Member Nations that oppose and discourage the institution of Slavery.

Co-authored by Zeyakistan.

And then you've got to mass-telegram as many delegates as possible. The target of reaching 102 out of the 1,695 isn't difficult.

Perhaps because thats the way we wanted it written[.]

You haven't read the old resolutions that I and others point you at, have you? Yes, what you're proposing is simple. No, it doesn't cover anything. In particular, even assuming that what's written is interpreted as meaning that existing slaves have to be freed (which is a bit more questionable than I originally thought), there are consequences to that which you simply haven't thought about. A slave-owning nation could trivially turn freeing slaves into a humanitarian crisis if they didn't care about them, and frankly how many former slavers are going to care?

Whether you agree with it or not, learn from history.

My apologies for misspelling charter, however I guess what i was trying to say is that no resolution may create world police, prisons or army, so enforcement is not really possible other than being automatic.
If you're saying that you don't need to spell out what happens to nations who break WA resolutions, you're right. If you're saying that apart from always happening, enforcement can't happen, then words fail me. Polite words, at least.

There's also nothing stopping us from creating prisons apart from not wanting to. The rule of thumb is that the WA doesn't get to field an armed force, civilian or military, but we can police to the extent that we can inspect, observe, and report back for automatic enforcement.

Does anyone have any idea as to why this proposal disappeared this morning and while every other proposal expiring on the twentieth is still up?