[DEFEATED] Repeal "National Economic Freedoms"

[Anozia]

A repeal not ending by "Hereby repeals [resolution identification]"?
HERESY!
Voting against.
That's a tradition I'm attached to.

[Mundiferrum]

Um, what? Isn't voting on this resolution, and the resolution being repealed, a matter of nationstate democracy and international interference?


Again, what? "Void" and "in effect" are complete antonyms....

Mundiferrum has tentatively voted FOR, though we are considering deferring our support. We shall make a more official statement sometime later.

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, I find it amusing that you're criticising my point, yet you aren't even sure whether it not to vote for or against this resolution. Make your mind up first, then and only then come talk to me.

I'm criticizing your point because your point is, quite frankly, stupid. I may not have made up my point yet, but that sure as hell does not blind my reasoning from your obvious self-contradictions. What you're doing is akin to considering the scientific community as "stupid" if they're yet to make a conclusion on something.

That said, before you is our conclusion. We do want to eliminate the possible legal pitfalls and actual legislative redundancies maintained by NEF, but since this assembly doesn't seem to care about maintaining the general spirit of the resolution anymore, we do not see any immediate necessity in eliminating it. That said, pitfalls are pitfalls, and redundant things are, er, redundant things, and though we aren't specifically compelled to repeal NEF, simply feeling that way shouldn't push us to voting, as deemed by our judgement so far, unreasonably. Hence, the Benevolent Dominion of Mundiferrum shall be voting FOR, and duly so. We do hope, however, that if this repeal ever passes, someone would propose another, less ridiculous, and more inclusive blocker for ridiculous economic proposals, one that would not be ignored, and one that would be duly considered by the mods the next time proposals are submitted here.

Ooh, neat, the universal translator thingy didn't spaz out. Me and King Ozy took about a long-hour preparing that little speech. A long hour! Do you know how many mealtimes that is? One! ONE! Oh, but I do hope we didn't end up making daft conclusions, like, well, the ambassador I addressed before my-er, our little speech.

[Louisistan]

A repeal not ending by "Hereby repeals [resolution identification]"?
HERESY!
Voting against.
That's a tradition I'm attached to.

That has always been the most weak of arguments (same goes for people in the silly proposal thread claiming that a repeal doesn't have an operative clause). The very first line in any repeal is

"WA General Assembly Resolution #XX: Foobar (Category: Foo; Strength: Bar) shall be struck out and rendered null and void."

That is operative enough.

[The Dark Star Republic]

That has always been the most weak of arguments (same goes for people in the silly proposal thread claiming that a repeal doesn't have an operative clause). The very first line in any repeal is

"WA General Assembly Resolution #XX: Foobar (Category: Foo; Strength: Bar) shall be struck out and rendered null and void."

That is operative enough.

I do agree...I'm not sure when that particular ruling came in (though I can guess who's responsible) but it definitely didn't used to hold any weight.

[Coroscent]

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, I agree with you! My reasons are contradictory! But they are contradictory to the resolution to repeal the National Economic Freedoms bill. I address the WA in general here, not just you Mr Ambassador for Defwa: in what way is it the duty and responsibility of the WA to monitor and control economic activity in any one of its member states? Whatever legitimate activity takes place within a member state's borders is the sole responsibility of the relevant government to control, not the international community. It's a bit like me sticking my nose into someone else's country and telling them they're not allowed to swap trading cards because they don't pay tax on them to the WA's benefit! The economic activity inside a sovereign state, WA member or not, is the responsibility of national, nationstate democracy and not of the delegates of the WA; not me, not you. And that, Mr Ambassador for Defwa, is your "contradictory" statement. But of course, you can't argue much really as the majority of voters agree with me and have voted AGAINST this resolution, and have therefore voted for free market economies as opposed to state regulated international communism.

Ambassador and Maestre Wizard Angela Landfree, whose information is clearly identifiable at the bottom of any correspondence from the Defwean Delegation in the form of a convenient fact book hyper link, allows her head to fall to the side out of exhaustion.

"That's not exactly what contradictory means. Your statements contradict each other. You're disputing yourself. And its quite sad that you don't realize that. Perhaps the assembly room translation matrix is being spotty if English is not your primary language or perhaps you have elected to attend drunk today but have not yet mastered drinking on the job."

"To your last statement, I would like to remind you where you are. The world assembly is a group of nations that agree to operate in full compliance with whatever the assembly deems I necessary. Its motto is to improve the world one resolution at a time and thus this assembly with legislate on every topic it can. Every nation in the assembly, by virtue of membership, agrees to comply in full with anything the assembly says and thus in those nations the subjects the assembly has authority on is limited only by what the assembly wants. And i want to reiterate- via being a member, you submit yourself to the authority of this organization. you agree to obey anything the majority says."

"Now were you to read the repeal, you would note that you share an agenda with the author. The author wants the World Assembly to have less control economically, however as written NEF has failed to do its intended duty. It cannot be reinforced because of legal precedent and thus in order for any blanket restriction on WA legislation, NEF must be replaced."

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, I find it amusing that you're criticising my point, yet you aren't even sure whether it not to vote for or against this resolution. Make your mind up first, then and only then come talk to me.

I'm criticizing your point because your point is, quite frankly, stupid. I may not have made up my point yet, but that sure as hell does not blind my reasoning from your obvious self-contradictions. What you're doing is akin to considering the scientific community as "stupid" if they're yet to make a conclusion on something.

That said, before you is our conclusion. We do want to eliminate the possible legal pitfalls and actual legislative redundancies maintained by NEF, but since this assembly doesn't seem to care about maintaining the general spirit of the resolution anymore, we do not see any immediate necessity in eliminating it. That said, pitfalls are pitfalls, and redundant things are, er, redundant things, and though we aren't specifically compelled to repeal NEF, simply feeling that way shouldn't push us to voting, as deemed by our judgement so far, unreasonably. Hence, the Benevolent Dominion of Mundiferrum shall be voting FOR, and duly so. We do hope, however, that if this repeal ever passes, someone would propose another, less ridiculous, and more inclusive blocker for ridiculous economic proposals, one that would not be ignored, and one that would be duly considered by the mods the next time proposals are submitted here.

Ooh, neat, the universal translator thingy didn't spaz out. Me and King Ozy took about a long-hour preparing that little speech. A long hour! Do you know how many mealtimes that is? One! ONE! Oh, but I do hope we didn't end up making daft conclusions, like, well, the ambassador I addressed before my-er, our little speech.

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, forgive me for my somewhat "intoxicated" rambling as you say, but the way I see it, YOU are the drunk one for voting FOR this resolution! You start drunkenly spattering on about the duties of WA membership, now let me make one thing clear: the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice. But I'm sure that many people in this chamber will agree with me that that common goal won't be achieved through all this interference and Soviet-style restriction. The economic matters of the sovereign state are a matter for nationstate democracy and not of the international community. The WA resolution #68 protects the sovereign economic interests of the state and I would hate to see a WA without it. And on that note, I fail to see where I am contradicting anything, but the minority voting FOR this resolution.

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, firstly I'd like to congratulate you for voting. But unfortunately you made the wrong decision. You say that the majority of people on this council don't care for maintaining the "spirit of this resolution" by which I presume you mean resolution #68, the National Economic Freedoms resolution. But last time I looked which was mere seconds ago, most of the voters in this council have voted to kick this resolution into touch and keep the NEF. So are you honestly trying to tell me that this council has grown tired of economic freedom? Are you seriously telling me that people here want to appoint their own dictators? Are you seriously telling me that these member nations want to hire their own executioners for their own economies? It's absolute chutzpah! This is the WA, not the international Soviet council! I say passionately, keep your noses out of our economies and mind your own beeswax! I hope you enjoyed that meal you mentioned Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, because like your statement it is cold and stale.

[Normlpeople]

"Easily voted FOR. The constant ignoring of this resolution while drafting, and passing, several other resolutions that regulate and restrict economic freedom in direct contradiction of this one (seemingly with the secretariats approval) make this completely useless. Either it is obsolete, in which case it should be removed from the books, or it is ignored, which is cause for its removal as well"

[Mundiferrum]

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, firstly I'd like to congratulate you for voting. But unfortunately you made the wrong decision. You say that the majority of people on this council don't care for maintaining the "spirit of this resolution" by which I presume you mean resolution #68, the National Economic Freedoms resolution.

By "maintaining the spirit of the resolution", I meant that most of this council does not care about voting against or repealing the resolutions contradicting this one, which is a point rather openly discussed in the repeal. Yes, people still care about economic freedom, but people don't try to work with "National Economic Freedoms". I was either unclear on that point, or you're strawmanning me.

But last time I looked which was mere seconds ago, most of the voters in this council have voted to kick this resolution into touch and keep the NEF. So are you honestly trying to tell me that this council has grown tired of economic freedom? Are you seriously telling me that people here want to appoint their own dictators? Are you seriously telling me that these member nations want to hire their own executioners for their own economies? It's absolute chutzpah! This is the WA, not the international Soviet council! I say passionately, keep your noses out of our economies and mind your own beeswax! I hope you enjoyed that meal you mentioned Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, because like your statement it is cold and stale.

Hmm, are you suggesting that me voting FOR this resolution is me going against economic freedom in general? Are you suggesting that this resolution aims to remove people of economic freedoms, instead of removing a massive inconsistency in World Assembly legislature? Well, now you seem to be misunderstanding the whole resolution.

[Coroscent]

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, just for your benefit:

Description: The World Assembly,

RECOGNIZING that industry and commerce are vital to national and international prosperity,

NOTING that capitalist, socialist, communist, and other economic systems are fully capable of providing for industrial and commercial development,

DEFINES "commerce" to include the sale, production, and consumption of a product or service,

FURTHER DEFINES "jurisdiction" as the reach of a national government's authority, including any internationally recognized land, sea, space, or other material claims,

ENCOURAGES individuals, groups of individuals, and national governments to engage in commerce with other willing individuals, groups of individuals, and national governments as allowed in their respective jurisdictions,

ALLOWS national governments to regulate commerce within their jurisdiction,

REQUIRES national governments to compensate any individual, group of individuals, or national governments for any physical property or money seized by that national government, excepting those assets used for criminal enterprise,

CREATES the Impartial Mediation Foundation to investigate, mediate, and arbitrate any conflicts that arise,

NOTES that this legislation does not affect economic protective devices or domestic taxation,

REQUIRES that no commerce be generally restricted by the WA unless:

1. Restricted by prior legislation, or
2. The enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations

Votes For: 4,748 (78%)
Votes Against: 1,365 (22%)

[Coroscent]

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, firstly I'd like to congratulate you for voting. But unfortunately you made the wrong decision. You say that the majority of people on this council don't care for maintaining the "spirit of this resolution" by which I presume you mean resolution #68, the National Economic Freedoms resolution.

By "maintaining the spirit of the resolution", I meant that most of this council does not care about voting against or repealing the resolutions contradicting this one, which is a point rather openly discussed in the repeal. Yes, people still care about economic freedom, but people don't try to work with "National Economic Freedoms". I was either unclear on that point, or you're strawmanning me.

But last time I looked which was mere seconds ago, most of the voters in this council have voted to kick this resolution into touch and keep the NEF. So are you honestly trying to tell me that this council has grown tired of economic freedom? Are you seriously telling me that people here want to appoint their own dictators? Are you seriously telling me that these member nations want to hire their own executioners for their own economies? It's absolute chutzpah! This is the WA, not the international Soviet council! I say passionately, keep your noses out of our economies and mind your own beeswax! I hope you enjoyed that meal you mentioned Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, because like your statement it is cold and stale.

Hmm, are you suggesting that me voting FOR this resolution is me going against economic freedom in general? Are you suggesting that this resolution aims to remove people of economic freedoms, instead of removing a massive inconsistency in World Assembly legislature? Well, now you seem to be misunderstanding the whole resolution.

Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, let me share a fact with you. Of all the countless WA resolutions that have been passed since this organisation was created, it would be fair for me to say that resolution #68 is my favourite one of them all. Now I know I probably sound a bit sad saying this, but the reason for that is that resolution #68 is one that promotes international free market economy freedom, and THAT is a resolution worth keeping. And what you failed to mention in your last statement is that the majority of this council is AGAINST this resolution and FOR maintaining the NEF. Now Mr Ambassador for Mundiferrum, what do you say to that? I say let the people speak for freedom! Let nationstate democracy prevail!

[Araraukar]

The world assembly is a group of nations that agree to operate in full compliance with whatever the assembly deems I necessary.

Janis had decided to take a drink from her water bottle, and couldn't help but choke, splutter and cough when hearing that claim. Angela must've been drunk again... or intentionally ignoring all the nations bickering about what "full compliance" meant.

[OOC: I damn near choked on my drink with laughter irl when reading that.]

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, forgive me for my somewhat "intoxicated" rambling as you say
*snip*
the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice.

Eee-yup, "intoxicated" sounds about right here.

...or else you're very, very new here. I'm not 100% sure which.

[OOC: Also, Angela (Defwan ambssador) is a woman, so either "Mrs" or "Miss".]

[Defwa]

The world assembly is a group of nations that agree to operate in full compliance with whatever the assembly deems I necessary.

Janis had decided to take a drink from her water bottle, and couldn't help but choke, splutter and cough when hearing that claim. Angela must've been drunk again... or intentionally ignoring all the nations bickering about what "full compliance" meant.

[OOC: I damn near choked on my drink with laughter irl when reading that.]

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, forgive me for my somewhat "intoxicated" rambling as you say
*snip*
the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice.

Eee-yup, "intoxicated" sounds about right here.

...or else you're very, very new here. I'm not 100% sure which.

[OOC: Also, Angela (Defwan ambssador) is a woman, so either "Mrs" or "Miss".]

OOC: The idea that compliance is required has never been under debate, to my knowledge. The debate is only around if noncompliance is theoretically possible. So nations must agree to obey but they don't always follow through.

Either Coroscent is not listening or is not role playing (which makes his claims of soviet incursion both amusing and frightening).

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, forgive me for my somewhat "intoxicated" rambling as you say, but the way I see it, YOU are the drunk one for voting FOR this resolution! You start drunkenly spattering on about the duties of WA membership, now let me make one thing clear: the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice. But I'm sure that many people in this chamber will agree with me that that common goal won't be achieved through all this interference and Soviet-style restriction. The economic matters of the sovereign state are a matter for nationstate democracy and not of the international community. The WA resolution #68 protects the sovereign economic interests of the state and I would hate to see a WA without it. And on that note, I fail to see where I am contradicting anything, but the minority voting FOR this resolution.

"Soviet style restrictions? No body is talking about soviet style restrictions. To my knowledge here are no resolutions on the books even vaguely soviet. Just minor regulation of some pursuits. However, I want to make it clear, if the nations of the Assembly vote for soviet style restrictions, then the Assembly is fully with it's right to place them.
"Arguing national sovereignty is not valid in this organization because this is an organization that by its very nature violates national sovereignty. Resolutions on abortion and gay marriage violate national sovereignty. Nations are not allowed to have slaves or use certain weapons in war- that violates national sovereignty. If you want to debate a topic, you need to come up with something better than a need for independence and red scare.
"NEF does nothing to protect nations from interference. Its interpretation by the Secretariat says that the potential for environmental damage constitutes an extreme hazard to national populations. This includes GAR #199, #249, #263, #267, #290, and #291. GAR #113 and #256 can't even claim that- apparently sub par diamonds are an extreme danger? This sets a legal precedent that the Secretariat can't go back on and thus NEF is unenforceable. I'll say it again- if you want the assembly to be be restricted in what it can legislate on, you need to repeal and replace GAR #68."

[Krioval]

Despite our having written "National Economic Freedoms", the Imperial Chiefdom is not opposed to strengthening its provisions. That said, many proposals that escape the attention of the Secretariat while containing (or failing to contain) language that puts it at odds with NEF could be more vigorously challenged by national delegations, either through direct appeals to the Secretariat or through traditional lobbying and debate. Just because a proposal says that it addresses "extreme hazard to national populations" does not mean that such a statement need go unchallenged, and while it is illegal to a repeal to argue for the illegality of its target resolution*, there are repeal arguments that could center around how "extreme hazard(s) to national populations" are no longer alleviated by a certain resolution. The Imperial Chiefdom, and most Kriovallers, find that NEF is about as strong a restriction on commercial restrictions by this Assembly as we can get in the current legislative environment, and as such, Krioval is against this repeal.

We do hope that this repeal leads to more fruitful discussions on how to continue the expansion of international trade.

Tau Kriov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

*OOC: Just to be clear, this is not directed at this repeal. I am referring to how one might use NEF to justify the repeal of some other resolution.

[The Dark Star Republic]

This is all OOC:

...many proposals that escape the attention of the Secretariat while containing (or failing to contain) language that puts it at odds with NEF could be more vigorously challenged by national delegations, either through direct appeals to the Secretariat...

They do not "escape the attention" of the mods. This all resulted from a proposal being directly challenged, and while the response (contained within this thread) may have been four months in coming, it was not for a lack of notice. Furthermore, I am really not sure how much more "vigorous" I could possibly have been. Setting aside the recent warning that players challenging proposals are guilty of "using mods as weapons", I repeatedly brought the issue up and was flamed by other players for doing so, given the cold shoulder via TG by the mods, with the usual dose of ArdSnark that of course accompanies those terribly good faith replies we have come to expect, and after four months the answer was given - a six word reply. Six words in four months; at that rate, it would have taken Abraham Lincoln four score and seven years just to deliver the Gettysburg Address.*

Your contention completely ignores the reality of the situation. This repeal is simply trying to face the WA to face that reality.

* Actually only about 6, but meh.

[The Dark Star Republic]

I could have sworn I replied from my phone, but my apologies if that didn't actually happen.

It didn't. As it was a group TG, maybe you hit Reply to Abacathea rather than Reply to All.

the author of this repeal has been ... less than flattering of our region in the TRR Times.

[citation needed]

I honestly don't remember saying a single negative thing about Europeiea in any of my articles, and in fact being rather admiring of their vote stacking prowess. I'm not saying you're wrong, I've called just about everyone something at some point in my NS career - not that that stops me voting for their proposals on their merits - so I may have forgotten some slur about Europeiea I made. If that's the case, I'm sure you'll be able to provide evidence of it. :) :)

[Separatist Peoples]

I'm reliably informed that "Mousebumples has convinced Europeia to vote against your resolution purely out of unadultered spite".

OOC: Interesting that...Last I checked, Mousey stepped down as Delegate of MI due to a number of reasons, as I recall, but desire to become Delegate of a larger, more powerful reason was not one so stated. Seeing the politics unfold is, ah, illuminating.

[Coroscent]

The world assembly is a group of nations that agree to operate in full compliance with whatever the assembly deems I necessary.

Janis had decided to take a drink from her water bottle, and couldn't help but choke, splutter and cough when hearing that claim. Angela must've been drunk again... or intentionally ignoring all the nations bickering about what "full compliance" meant.

[OOC: I damn near choked on my drink with laughter irl when reading that.]

Mr Ambassador for Defwa, forgive me for my somewhat "intoxicated" rambling as you say
*snip*
the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice.

Eee-yup, "intoxicated" sounds about right here.

...or else you're very, very new here. I'm not 100% sure which.

[OOC: Also, Angela (Defwan ambssador) is a woman, so either "Mrs" or "Miss".]

Mr/Ms Ambassador for Araraukar, I notice you haven't really been following this debate very closely; you appear to be referring to a statement that is both irrelevant and expired.

[Defwa]

Janis had decided to take a drink from her water bottle, and couldn't help but choke, splutter and cough when hearing that claim. Angela must've been drunk again... or intentionally ignoring all the nations bickering about what "full compliance" meant.

[OOC: I damn near choked on my drink with laughter irl when reading that.]


Eee-yup, "intoxicated" sounds about right here.

...or else you're very, very new here. I'm not 100% sure which.

[OOC: Also, Angela (Defwan ambssador) is a woman, so either "Mrs" or "Miss".]

Mr/Ms Ambassador for Araraukar, I notice you haven't really been following this debate very closely; you appear to be referring to a statement that is both irrelevant and expired.

OOC: Araraukar was referring to one of your inane comments made just a few posts ago. Not exactly irrelevant or expired. Due to the wibbly wobbly temporal nature of this chamber, not everyone is in the room at the same time. Calm the frack down.

[Coroscent]

Mr/Ms Ambassador for Araraukar, I notice you haven't really been following this debate very closely; you appear to be referring to a statement that is both irrelevant and expired.

OOC: Araraukar was referring to one of your inane comments made just a few posts ago. Not exactly irrelevant or expired. Due to the wibbly wobbly temporal nature of this chamber, not everyone is in the room at the same time. Calm the frack down.

IC: *The Yakusan Ambassador awaits a response*

[Araraukar]

Mr/Ms Ambassador for Araraukar

Janis grabs her name plaque¹ from the desk and stalks to the Coroscent ambassador's place - deftly avoiding her ambassadorial aide's attempt to tackle her to the ground to minimize damages - and waves it in front of their eyes.

"What does it say my title is? What does it say my title is?!" She shoves the name plaque within millimetres of the other ambassador's ocular organs. "Does it say Mister? Does it?! It says MISS, right here. MISS. And if you miss that "miss" one more time-"

Having acquired emergency assistance, her ambassadorial aide manages to drag her away at this point, before political fallout becomes bad enough to reach the eager ears all the way back home.

¹Statement from Araraukarian ambassadorial staff: It was later discovered that ambassador miss Leveret had managed to sharpen the edge of her metallic name plaque to make it into a makeshift knife. It was confiscated and replaced with a wooden one, a donation from the PPU. We are fairly certain she will not be willingly picking it up again.

[OOC: In real life I'm not at all ruffled - but there's a reason it's separately mentioned in my forum siggy. It's because my ambassador is fiercely proud of being "miss". ]

IC: *The Yakusan Ambassador awaits a response*

[OOC: An IC response may not always end up being what you expect it to be.]

[Araraukar]

OOC post. Apparently something ate my reply to you, in favour of Janis's IC rant.

OOC: The idea that compliance is required has never been under debate, to my knowledge.

Oh, I know that it's in the gameside WA rules, and inescapable due to game mechanics, and that outright noncompliance is frowned upon on this forum, and that DSR will growl at me for repeating that one again, but...

So nations must agree to obey but they don't always follow through.

...this was more the cause of my amusement and IC reaction, as creative compliance has been around an age and a half.

Either Coroscent is not listening or is not role playing (which makes his claims of soviet incursion both amusing and frightening).

What did you expect? He's a confused newbie (and most likely a teen from USA who's only read the propagandist material of how Soviet Russia was the embodiment of evil - sorry, Coros, but that's how you come off with your statements) that thinks, to literally quote:

the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice.

He's just confusing NS with RL, as most newbies do.

[Coroscent]

OOC post. Apparently something ate my reply to you, in favour of Janis's IC rant.

OOC: The idea that compliance is required has never been under debate, to my knowledge.

Oh, I know that it's in the gameside WA rules, and inescapable due to game mechanics, and that outright noncompliance is frowned upon on this forum, and that DSR will growl at me for repeating that one again, but...

So nations must agree to obey but they don't always follow through.

...this was more the cause of my amusement and IC reaction, as creative compliance has been around an age and a half.

Either Coroscent is not listening or is not role playing (which makes his claims of soviet incursion both amusing and frightening).

What did you expect? He's a confused newbie (and most likely a teen from USA who's only read the propagandist material of how Soviet Russia was the embodiment of evil - sorry, Coros, but that's how you come off with your statements) that thinks, to literally quote:

the WA is a cooperation of nations in the name of economic progress and common justice.

He's just confusing NS with RL, as most newbies do.

OOC:
1. I'm British. How dare you call me an American surely you can tell from mine spelling "organisation" not "organization", the correct way.
2. I'm most likely older than you.
3. I am not a newbie. Oh no.
4. I actually agree with some of the USSR's policies, but it's too bad they didn't work out.
5. Please stay in character; OOC posts ruin debates.

IC:
I'm glad that the Ararakuaran Ambassador has been removed from the chamber to calm down, hopefully he... I mean she can rejoin us when calmed down a little. But again I have to reiterate myself here: this resolution is being defeated without mercy! We the voters in favour of free market economies and nationstate democracy are winning, and it's inevitable that we will win this fight. The iron fist PC do-gooders as they probably like to think of themselves have lost this argument and there is no way that you can win this either. The majority of voters agree with me, and THAT is that.

[Coroscent]

Mr/Ms Ambassador for Araraukar, I notice you haven't really been following this debate very closely; you appear to be referring to a statement that is both irrelevant and expired.

OOC: Araraukar was referring to one of your inane comments made just a few posts ago. Not exactly irrelevant or expired. Due to the wibbly wobbly temporal nature of this chamber, not everyone is in the room at the same time. Calm the frack down.

OOC: It's time relevant to the debate I'm referring to.

[Scavara]

*The representative of Scavara cleared his throat and casually ignored the circus side show that had been transpiring*

"The Republic of Scavara has decided in favor of the repeal and has cast it's vote accordingly. Although, it does appear to have a heavy slant against it we feel that the aims of this repeal were correct. I find it questionable policy for the General Assembly to put forth something like the National Economic Freedoms resolution and then attempt to castrate it with other resolutions later on...I have to wonder if the writers and supporters of the other resolutions brought up in this repeal ever actually bothered to read the NEF before they began imposing things upon it and us."

*He waited a moment before making a further statement.*

"My government has a large reactionary element that I have to wrangle with every time the General Assembly sticks it's international nose in our national business. Points six and seven, which state: 'Conclude that the guarantees of "National Economic Freedoms" have been rendered utterly worthless by virtue of revisionist reinterpretation of its mandates and that the Resolution in fact does nothing whatsoever to defend national rights to regulate commerce, nor to check the powers of the WA to restrict commerce; Understand that the WA will undoubtedly continue to legislate on matters of commerce in the name of social justice, environmental protection, and other areas of legislation it deems worthy of consideration, while functionally ignoring the existence of "National Economic Freedoms";' are very accurate and factual statements that I have to consider in the future. Why even have "National Economic Freedoms" when the only value it has any longer is a nice sounding name?

I have to go back and tell my government that this body (by the evidence of it's voting) continues to desire the restriction of our economic interests by virtue of resolutions past for the "common good" of nation's not currently impacted by our activities. Nor will they ever be. Things like how we mine uranium has no impact on a country on the other side of the globe. When a resolution is passed that promises the nations of the World Assembly something, I get to go back and tell my people what was promised. When the General Assembly then passes resolutions that hamper, interfere with, or others make that promise invalid...I get asked a lot of pointed questions. There are times when I have had to eat a lot of crow defending resolutions like 'Uranium Mining Standards Act' because this institution made me a liar. "

[Defwa]

OOC post. Apparently something ate my reply to you, in favour of Janis's IC rant.

Oh, I know that it's in the gameside WA rules, and inescapable due to game mechanics, and that outright noncompliance is frowned upon on this forum, and that DSR will growl at me for repeating that one again, but...


...this was more the cause of my amusement and IC reaction, as creative compliance has been around an age and a half.


What did you expect? He's a confused newbie (and most likely a teen from USA who's only read the propagandist material of how Soviet Russia was the embodiment of evil - sorry, Coros, but that's how you come off with your statements) that thinks, to literally quote: He's just confusing NS with RL, as most newbies do.

OOC:
1. I'm British. How dare you call me an American surely you can tell from mine spelling "organisation" not "organization", the correct way.
2. I'm most likely older than you.
3. I am not a newbie. Oh no.
4. I actually agree with some of the USSR's policies, but it's too bad they didn't work out.
5. Please stay in character; OOC posts ruin debates.

IC:
I'm glad that the Ararakuaran Ambassador has been removed from the chamber to calm down, hopefully he... I mean she can rejoin us when calmed down a little. But again I have to reiterate myself here: this resolution is being defeated without mercy! We the voters in favour of free market economies and nationstate democracy are winning, and it's inevitable that we will win this fight. The iron fist PC do-gooders as they probably like to think of themselves have lost this argument and there is no way that you can win this either. The majority of voters agree with me, and THAT is that.

Ambassador Landfree, being forces to leave the office requests a defwean telepresense drone. With one not being available, an intern puts his phone on the table and puts the Ambassador on speaker.

"The only thing you and the voters have in common is a lack of understanding about what's going on. The only difference is the majority of voters are not here and thus not learning. I don't know what your problem is. First we're soviet and now were politically correct? Are you just throwing out buzzwords hoping one will stick and be considered an insult? Would you mind addressing my last statement regarding the fact that political precedent makes this resolution do nothing? It needs to be replaced so its intent can be enforced."

[Coroscent]

OOC:
1. I'm British. How dare you call me an American surely you can tell from mine spelling "organisation" not "organization", the correct way.
2. I'm most likely older than you.
3. I am not a newbie. Oh no.
4. I actually agree with some of the USSR's policies, but it's too bad they didn't work out.
5. Please stay in character; OOC posts ruin debates.

IC:
I'm glad that the Ararakuaran Ambassador has been removed from the chamber to calm down, hopefully he... I mean she can rejoin us when calmed down a little. But again I have to reiterate myself here: this resolution is being defeated without mercy! We the voters in favour of free market economies and nationstate democracy are winning, and it's inevitable that we will win this fight. The iron fist PC do-gooders as they probably like to think of themselves have lost this argument and there is no way that you can win this either. The majority of voters agree with me, and THAT is that.

Ambassador Landfree, being forces to leave the office requests a defwean telepresense drone. With one not being available, an intern puts his phone on the table and puts the Ambassador on speaker.

"The only thing you and the voters have in common is a lack of understanding about what's going on. The only difference is the majority of voters are not here and thus not learning. I don't know what your problem is. First we're soviet and now were politically correct? Are you just throwing out buzzwords hoping one will stick and be considered an insult? Would you mind addressing my last statement regarding the fact that political precedent makes this resolution do nothing? It needs to be replaced so its intent can be enforced."

Before I address the Ambassador for Defwa, I'd like to address the chamber here. Now this ambassador has just insulted the majority of the people in this room; the Ambassador has effectively called us stupid and says we don't understand what we're voting for, and I find it both sad and alarming that the only thing that the Ambassador can try to argue with is the fact that a while back I mentioned the word "Soviet" which as we all know is a reference to an example of a totalitarian style economic system, the type which we are hopefully voting against. The Ambassador seem to think that we are all far right-wing fascists and are shedding hate on the Soviet policies. But as we the majority voters know is that we don't want liberal-lefty PC do-gooders sticking their noses into our independent economies. We are independent, fledged sovereign states and we are strong together in our decision to vote AGAINST this resolution and maintain the benefits of nationstate democracy. But now it's our turn to call them stupid; what they are failing to realise is something so plainly obvious, that again, the MAJORITY of member states on this council are AGAINST this resolution. The WA for freedom and nationstate democracy is standing tall! And Mr Ambassador for Defwa, I really must add that I found that your last statement made as much sense as this dreadful resolution. The voters have spoken and it really doesn't matter if they don't understand every detail of these two relevant resolutions; the voters know what they want and they have chosen just that.