NationStates

OOC: Please feel free to leave feedback, it'd be much appreciated.

The General Assembly,

Perceiving the World Assembly as an exemplar of guaranteed Freedom and Security;

Fearfully stating that despite this proclaimed goal of freedom, Representative Ambassadors to the World Assembly are often appointed without election,

Announcing that if the World Assembly would truly like to pursue its goal of freedom, Representative Ambassadors should be democratically elected to ensure that the national population of a nation shall have their views heard,

Working to resolve this problem,

The World Assembly HEREBY;

1. Defines, for the purpose of this resolution;

1. Representative Ambassador as a national representative who votes and debates on behalf of their nation within the World Assembly;

2. Declares that all member-nations of the World Assembly must:

1. Conduct a nationwide election every fourth year, which will decide the Representative Ambassador. The minimum voting age shall be the mean age of the nation in question.
2. Allow eligible voters to vote in the election,
3. Allow any resident of their nation to become a candidate for Representative Ambassador;

3. Affirms that Representative Ambassadors may employ staff under their command to help in their duties.

“I am completely opposed to the idea behind this proposal. For starters, it would undoubtedly get me fired and condemned to a job in retail. On a more practical note, there simply isn’t a reason why ambassadorial staff should be democratically-elected. This is an occupation where an understanding of law and language is the decider of success, not appeasing the population.”

Kenmoria wrote:“I am completely opposed to the idea behind this proposal. For starters, it would undoubtedly get me fired and condemned to a job in retail. On a more practical note, there simply isn’t a reason why ambassadorial staff should be democratically-elected. This is an occupation where an understanding of law and language is the decider of success, not appeasing the population.”

"While it's true we cannot expect every member of the population to make a good and rational choice, it would be true to say that in most cases, a capable candidate will be elected."

Attancia wrote:The minimum voting age shall be the mean age of the nation in question

GA#299 says hi

Kenmoria wrote:“I am completely opposed to the idea behind this proposal. For starters, it would undoubtedly get me fired and condemned to a job in retail. On a more practical note, there simply isn’t a reason why ambassadorial staff should be democratically-elected. This is an occupation where an understanding of law and language is the decider of success, not appeasing the population.”

Absolutely agreed, Ambassador. Fundamentally opposed.

--Saint Gabriel the Archangel, patron of the ambassadors and diplomats
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii. Cardinalis Secretarius Status.

"The general populace not only has literal interest in the matters of the World Assembly, but they are entirely unqualified to make decisions as to the leadership of the nation. Irredeemably opposed."

Attancia wrote:

Kenmoria wrote:“I am completely opposed to the idea behind this proposal. For starters, it would undoubtedly get me fired and condemned to a job in retail. On a more practical note, there simply isn’t a reason why ambassadorial staff should be democratically-elected. This is an occupation where an understanding of law and language is the decider of success, not appeasing the population.”

"While it's true we cannot expect every member of the population to make a good and rational choice, it would be true to say that in most cases, a capable candidate will be elected."

“This is not necessarily true. The reason that democracy works is because the measure of how well a leader has performed is how well the interests of the people have been met; clearly, citizens do generally know what their interests are.

However, ambassadorship is about commenting on proposals and passing international law, neither of which are linked to what the population think. Whereas democracy is usually necessary to guarantee respect for the people and their rights, ambassadors don’t have the same level of power so don’t need such safeguards.”

Ambassador Arthur looks shocked "Oh god, this is... leave my job alone!" After composing himself, he says "Besides, this is a waste of our people's time. I simply act as a messanger, whether our nation votes for or against a proposal is completely in the hands of the national delegation committee jointly headed by the prime minister and the Kaiser. The former is elected by the people and the latter can't be. We stand opposed."

"The Imperium does not practice 'election', at all, Ambassador," said Feren, "And quite frankly, Ambassador, I do not care to be losing my position to some... pop-star or whatever comes up in a vote, and I believe I speak for the rest of the Imperial delegation, with, perhaps the exception of Jasot, but frankly she's more tolerable than half the soldiers I've met, and I don't care to have her replaced.

The Imperium is opposed."

"Barfleur stands opposed to this proposal. As far as most Barfleurians are concerned, diplomats are just nameless, faceless things that live and work in foreign nations. Our work is low-profile and often thankless. And, quite frankly, you can choose a head of state with a popularity contest, but a diplomat requires in-depth knowledge of international law and the ability to conduct relations with foreign interests.

Naturally, if this did come to pass, I'm sure I would be handily re-elected."

"I was elected, Ambassador. I was elected to the People's Assembly. It is neither my constituency nor the People's Assembly who decides what I say and how I vote here, though. That task falls on the Foreign Relations Committee, whose members are actually interested and insightful enough to support all diplomatic postings and decide on the best interests of the populace at large. If they disagree, we hold plenty of elections for them to vote us out. They haven't. Why on Earth should we change this system, which enables us to have a thoughtful and consistent foreign policy, when the alternative is at best equal in merits and at worst a fickle contest for populists to ruin our work?"

OOC: I would call this an ideological ban.

“Against. This legislation would end the time honored tradition of nations sending their worst to the WA. Hell if I had to stand for election I’d end up in prison!!”

Thermodolia wrote:“Against. This legislation would end the time honored tradition of nations sending their worst to the WA. Hell if I had to stand for election I’d end up in prison!!”

"Been there and done that.

"Also opposed. Diplomats are generally appointed by governments to best represent the nation abroad in accordance with an overarching strategy. Representation at the WA is no different but is incredibly more important given how the decisions made here can impact domestic policy."

[REDACTED] sits down in his bathroom office. Noticing the proposal copy at the top of his stack of papers, he chuckles to himself. How nice that his staff slipped in this good piece of humor! The smile leaves his face as he realizes that the document is not, in fact, a joke. His expression sours even further as he remembers that he fired his entire staff yesterday after that unfortunate incident in his old office, which he can no longer use as a result.

“Ambassador, I fear I must voice my complete and unequivocal opposition to your proposed legislation. Ambassadors are not politicians; we are professionals. Attempting to turn diplomatic postings into a popularity contest either reflects naïveté or insidious motive on your part. Heads of state can be elected without any complaint from us, and it is up to them to appoint the professionals best suited for more specialized work. Too little democracy is a bad thing, as is too much. You wouldn’t want to hold an open election for each janitor working for the government, would you?

We are also concerned by your proposal’s attempt to dictate how we are to hold elections. You cannot make rigid assumptions about the structure or composition of every national government.”

You have got to be kidding, right? Its bad enough to be a soul damned to serve here in the Festering Snakepit. The only good thing about service here is the Stranger's Bar, the Thessadorian Ambassador on Tight T-Shirt Thursdays, and the ability to suppliment one's salary by offering one's vote for sale to the highest bidder. Its too late for those of us serving now, we're already damned. But now you want each nation to hold elections to select a new sucker...err...Ambassador to the Festeting Snakepit.

at this point the good but unwholesome Sulla puts his head in his hands for a moment until he can regain his composure. After recomposing himserlf he looks right over at the Ambassador

Are you that callous and heartless? Have you have no shred of human decency left, Ambassador? Are you that cruel? Have you no shame?

Excelsior,
Sen Horatio Sulla

"Good God, sir. Leave my damn job alone, otherwise I'll be condemned to a life in accounting. Besides, I don't hold any independent power, I am closely tied to the executive branch and the branch itself is tied to the legislature, which makes policies for the nation. I fail to understand the idea behind democratisation of the ambassador seat, given that I am merely a representative of Picarnians' will. And for one, they don't like being hassled with constant elections.

Also given how my people are exceedingly intelligent and cultured, but also rude and arrogant, they are likely to elect an ambassador who would eloquently tell you their thoughts on this proposal with creative insults."

Picairn wrote:"Also given how my people are exceedingly intelligent and cultured, but also rude and arrogant, they are likely to elect an ambassador who would eloquently tell you their thoughts on this proposal with creative insults."

"You mean along to the lines of the author having such a hard-on for reality television shows where voting solves everything despite the shows being completely scripted behind the scenes, that their tiny shriveled brain cannot comprehend that reality does not work that way, and that a popularity contest win does not equal actually having the mental capacity to understand language, nevermind having the mental capacity to understand the intricacies of international law. As the author seems to be demonstrating."

OOC disclaimer: The above is the IC character's opinion. She's a career diplomat with a master's degree on international diplomacy. She might have an alternative career choice of a cage fighter, if it came to that, but prefers to rip proposals to shreds rather than people. Usually.

Stands up and addresses the room

Honourable Ambassador,

On behalf of the Federal Republic, I applaud your efforts in taking time to work on a proposal.

Unfortunately we cannot support such a proposal due to our knowledge that it cannot carry the weight desired to achieve this goal.

We know there are nations that exist and do not undertake in the Democratic process of voting.

We hope that you will rework the proposal and provide us with a proposal that acknowledges the requirements for all nations.

Takes a seat back down and places papers neatly on the desk

OOC: I think this proposal is legal, as WA Ambassadors are not a game mechanic, but I may be wrong. Do check before you submit it.

Barfleur wrote:OOC: I think this proposal is legal, as WA Ambassadors are not a game mechanic, but I may be wrong. Do check before you submit it.

OOC: It should be legal, yes.

Pope Saint Peter the Apostle wrote:

Barfleur wrote:OOC: I think this proposal is legal, as WA Ambassadors are not a game mechanic, but I may be wrong. Do check before you submit it.

OOC: It should be legal, yes.

OOC: Ideological ban, so no, not legal.

Grays Harbor wrote:OOC: Ideological ban, so no, not legal.

OOC: To those at the back, mandating elections is the problem. Take that out. Well, take that out and then bury the rest or burn it, but taking it out would help with ^that particular issue.

Araraukar wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:OOC: Ideological ban, so no, not legal.

OOC: To those at the back, mandating elections is the problem. Take that out. Well, take that out and then bury the rest or burn it, but taking it out would help with ^that particular issue.

OOC: The proposal does not "wholly outlaw, whether through direct or indirect language, (...) political (...) ideologies", but instead "target[s] specific practices", namely the selection of WA ambassadors. At least, that would be my 2¢.

Pope Saint Peter the Apostle wrote:

Araraukar wrote:OOC: To those at the back, mandating elections is the problem. Take that out. Well, take that out and then bury the rest or burn it, but taking it out would help with ^that particular issue.

OOC: The proposal does not "wholly outlaw, whether through direct or indirect language, (...) political (...) ideologies", but instead "target[s] specific practices", namely the selection of WA ambassadors. At least, that would be my 2¢.

My memory isn't perfect, but I seem to recall that mandating elections at all has been considered an ideological ban before?