[DEFEATED] Peace and Sustainable Development

[Apeiros Evimeria]

I have noticed that many people say that we cannot put this into effect as this is a period of war, and this does not prevent war. I disagree. Given the number of people in the world assembly, if the motion were passed, it would inevitably lead to near complete world peace.

[Figu]

I have noticed that many people say that we cannot put this into effect as this is a period of war, and this does not prevent war. I disagree. Given the number of people in the world assembly, if the motion were passed, it would inevitably lead to near complete world peace.

"We respectfully disagree. Our nation is currently in a war, and teaching our citizens pacifism whilst we fight for our very existence as a nation is rather counter-productive. As well as this, despite the number of nations within the World Assembly, many more aren't. This isn't some mega-defensive pact, this is a 'we'll put our guns down, disarm, and hope nobody takes advantage of it.' Every nation outside the WA has no obligation to follow this resolution. It would not lead to world peace, due to ideological disagreements. Many ideologies, including ours, see invading countries with incompatible ideologies as justified (and sometimes even necessary), due to the current or (likely) future oppression of the people there. It's why we don't tolerate socialist countries that border us, and have rather frosty relations with those that don't. So long as there are conflicting ideologies, world peace is impossible."

- Chief Delegate Rodgers

[Separatist Peoples]

I have noticed that many people say that we cannot put this into effect as this is a period of war, and this does not prevent war. I disagree. Given the number of people in the world assembly, if the motion were passed, it would inevitably lead to near complete world peace.

"Member states not only can, but have the right to go to war with each other. This is an absurd claim."

[Amerion]

The South Pacific's World Assembly Delegation has cast the Coalition's vote FOR this proposed resolution, Peace and Sustainable Development, and warmly encourages fellow member regions to vote FOR.

The at-vote resolution "Peace and Sustainable Development" offers a well-written, albeit criticised by some as not strong enough, mandate on encouraging sustainable development. It enforces the right to sustainable development and aid for peace. A more important aspect of the resolution, the "World Assembly Peace Prize", is a good mandate that will establish an award for those who have significantly advanced world peace. Along with the power to rescind the status of a winner of the WA Peace Prize, ensuring that past winners get removed if they violate the intent of the Peace Prize, this will provide an unbiased mandate for an award similar to the Nobel Prize in real life. For these reasons, the Office of WA Legislation recommends a vote FOR "Peace and Sustainable Development".

[Unified Communist Councils]

"We are unquantifiably for this development. War and violent means of reaching a resolution should not be encouraged for the harm and damage it has caused upon untold worlds. Should this resolution pass, it will be a historical moment toward intradimensional solidarity." – First Among Equals, Yan Sooyoung.

[Croanique]

Croanique votes AGAINST this resolution, because as far as we can tell, it doesn't accomplish much of anything. While we are a pacifist nation who always encourages both peace and sustainable development, we see absolutely no way this resolution promotes or serves to further either. We are happy to vote in favor of future, stronger legislation regarding this matter.

[Figu]

"We are unquantifiably for this development. War and violent means of reaching a resolution should not be encouraged for the harm and damage it has caused upon untold worlds. Should this resolution pass, it will be a historical moment toward intradimensional solidarity." – First Among Equals, Yan Sooyoung.

"With all the... respect... you are due, I feel the need to point out your hypocrisy. All communist revolutions necessarily come about through violence. Even if the regime comes about through democracy, people are going to resist having their things taken away for 'redistribution' by the party. To be quite frank, war and violence are how you, and all communists, spread your ideology, if people refuse to buy into it. Hah, as if we're any different. Unlike you, however, we do not pretend otherwise. We freely admit that if bordering Marxist powers do not change their ways, then they will face... unfortunate consequences. A necessary step to ensure our security, due to the internationalist nature of communist ideology. If we thought they'd be happy just staying in their little backwater, we'd leave them alone, but they aren't. They never are. 'Workers of the World Unite!', right? The point is, you are blatantly hypocritical. One of the main reasons Figu has distanced herself from the World Assembly is due to the constant issue of people not being honest with each other here. You're perfectly happy to use force if it's to your benefit, same as anyone else. You're fine with imperialism, because in your eyes it's liberating the Proletariats of other countries, not the brutal conquest it really is. Don't play the good guy; you communists are just as bad as we are, if not worse. Hell, you probably see this as a way to disarm the remaining non-communist powers in the World Assembly. It won't stop you and your ilk, though. After all, communists aren't known for keeping promises. Also, we aren't interested in your 'solidarity'. Detente was one of the biggest mistakes the Old World made, and we have no desire to repeat it."

- Chief Delegate Rodgers

OOC: Apologies for any rudeness, but I'm trying to stay in character. Figu is a radically anti-communist nation (think McCarthyism times 10, complete with helicopter rides over a certain ocean).

[Setne]

The Creatopia Assembly Board has cast their votes, we vote FOR GA : "Peace and Sustainable Development" we encourage other members to vote in favor of the resolution aswell.

We vote in favor of the Peace Prize, we understand how this may appeal to others, though we believe that the mandate to cut military spending is not satisfactory, but in agreement with the other members of the board, we vote in favor of the resolution. Though we deemed clause C, "Promotion of non-aggression" to be overly vague and in result, would not assist us in any way.

[Separatist Peoples]

"It appears that, perhaps, the World Assembly electorate is not as excited about a peace prize scheme as the author believed. I, for one, sincerely hope we put this frivolous notion of pagentry to rest and focus on direct improvements on the lives of those living within member states. The GA has enough circlejerking already without adding literal gilding."

[Rosmana]

IC: "The fact all Stalinist's, Maoists and other Communist nations fervently want to push this resolution proves it is nothing more than a communist ploy to use diplomacy in order to disarm the free nations of the world so they can install their little dictatorships under the guise of "the will masses'', and anybody that can not see this needs to have their eyes examined, and their soul while they are at it''

-Representative Manfred Wouters-

OOC: I hope this is allowed.

[Hustlertwo]

A vote against this measure; all right-thinking people know that the Prize is not something won through peace but by the systematic elimination of all other immortals through ritualistic combat. There can be only one!

[Pan-Asiatic States]

I have no idea why this bill is so divisive, I'm all for it.

[Unified Communist Councils]

"It's not surprising that the reactionary elements of the General Assembly oppose both peace and sustainable development in-favor of their rampant militarism and unfettered productivism. But I implore to all open-minded nay-sayers, to look past the prize and acknowledge that this resolution— should it pass— will increase the effectiveness of non-aggressive soft power diplomacy to make realizable and tangible results.

There are many, many Proletariat out there in our cosmos. Those who are left behind because of this preconceived notion that the weak, like a leaf pruned from the hedge bush, should be scattered by the wind and wither away. There is more to gain by preserving life, be it in terms of productivity, growth, creativity and innovation. Peace begins when people feel safe and secure, we as nations united under General Assembly should accept that we are all in this together.

That being said, I would suggest that this resolution should be revisited. The possibility of unknown powers and rogue actors besieging compliant nations should be addressed. Fundamentally, most conservative talking points are concerned with the threat that the unknown faces. This running rationale is ostensibly a fact of history, so they think themselves justified to hold a wary viewpoint. Therefore, this resolution can be made more persuasive by going to greater lengths to providing security in peace-time, such as ruling out complete disarmament for self-defense forces bolstered by a basic mutual aid system." – Board Secretariat, Dokja Kim.

[Texkentuck]

This is not a bad resolution. It makes sense it's well made and would benefit world relations. So why am I against it?
It's simple war is fun big military is fun nation states is intended to be fun and this proposal would make nation states more boring so i vote against.

!


This proposal will only make it in which nations that are building a defense will have a depleted budget and for nations with a big budget have one that is sustainable. This proposal won't prevent war because have some nations ever seen a nation supply arms to a nation with a weak budget. Has the nations for this proposal ever seen an unprofessional militarized force?..... For peace and sustainability arms control is the way to go. Also not every nation is of the WA. This proposal will put all nations of the WA at the mercy of larger forces who don't abide in WA affairs. Our nation in the WA wouldn't support this proposal. We are thankful to see many nations of the WA see that this proposal will just make them a depleted nation that can not win on the international stage. How can tyranny be stopped if no nation but a few of the WA hold a budget. Real peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of justice.

We are thankful that nations have kept this international organization from entering into it's decision of deciding it's Defense Budget. We admire the proposals that our very much good for nations internationally and frown upon domestic policy which is not one size fits all solution passed by the WA. The majority of the WA has made the right decision to defend their nations defense policy. It's a strong decision which we admire.

Also it's evident in international incidents our budget and military force with allies serves as a deterrent. Texkentuck Civil War is a perfect example of allies and military might......Because of our military and budget and allies we regained our states and deterred the adversary nations for the opposition.

Sonakion, your nation dedicates 17% to the budget and that's a growing budget. If this proposal passes your budget would be depleted or maybe go down to just 5% as for nations with 22% to the military budget will probably have 17%. "I REALLY LIKE THE ONE SIZE FITS ALL PROPOSALS" Your nation made the right vote....
But maybe this vote was to bring everyones budget to 0% which I doubt and that would be interesting by the way it's worded to cut the defense budget and not deplete it.....Some nations with a budget of just 5% would probably then be at 0%

Statement to the WA by a nation of the World Wide Accord of Nations-

President Bram W. Schirkophf
Texkentuck Monarchy Republic Federation
Union Conservative Capitalist Republic
World Wide Nations In Accord

[Aingard]

In an attempt to win points from the country's youth, President Jugemu Jugemu said "Using the word 'sapient' is pure cringe."

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

I agree that using "sapient" in place of human is a bit played out at this point. OCC: The game itself refers to "worldwide human and civil rights" - it's the stated effect of every Civil Rights proposal. The fact that some people insist on avoiding the word "human" in proposals - using instead a term NO ONE actually uses in their daily lives - is one of the baffling and absurd examples of political correctness in the WA. No offense to the ponies but get over it already.

I'm generally in favor of a well written Global Disarmament proposal. But I do think that most nations understand, on a very basic level, that people don't pursue world peace or avoid armed conflict just to win a shiny prize. The premise of this proposal is a extremely paternalistic: treating nations as if they were children who can earn a lollipop if they will just sit still for the doctor's visit.

Peace prizes IRL work as a form of recognition for something good that was already done; not as an incentive to do good. This proposal tries to flip that dynamic, and that is the conceptual flaw here.

[The Housatonic Syndicates]

"It appears that, perhaps, the World Assembly electorate is not as excited about a peace prize scheme as the author believed. I, for one, sincerely hope we put this frivolous notion of pagentry to rest and focus on direct improvements on the lives of those living within member states. The GA has enough circlejerking already without adding literal gilding."

"Oh, but darling that's the best part!"

[Croanique]

I agree that using "sapient" in place of human is a bit played out at this point. OCC: The game itself refers to "worldwide human and civil rights" - it's the stated effect of every Civil Rights proposal. The fact that some people insist on avoiding the word "human" in proposals - using instead a term NO ONE actually uses in their daily lives - is one of the baffling and absurd examples of political correctness in the WA. No offense to the ponies but get over it already..

Agreed that the word "sapient" is somewhat clunky, but also understanding that some folks roleplay as nations of non-humans. This was a point I saw brought up in the thread for GAR#582, "Access to Effective Medications", if I recall correctly. As a nation of humans, I don't feel strongly either way about the issue. The word "sapient" doesn't bother me and the word "human" would apply no more or less to Croaniquaise specifically.

[Apatosaurus]

I agree that using "sapient" in place of human is a bit played out at this point. OCC: The game itself refers to "worldwide human and civil rights" - it's the stated effect of every Civil Rights proposal. The fact that some people insist on avoiding the word "human" in proposals - using instead a term NO ONE actually uses in their daily lives - is one of the baffling and absurd examples of political correctness in the WA. No offense to the ponies but get over it already.

OOC: Lmao, I roleplay as a nation of dinosaurs in the WA. Using "human" instead of "sapient" excludes other species because not all sapients are humans, and may even exclude non-humans from GA regulation.

[Imperium Anglorum]

and may even exclude non-humans from GA regulation.

Does it now? viewtopic.php?p=27310640#p27310640

[Apatosaurus]

and may even exclude non-humans from GA regulation.

Does it now? viewtopic.php?p=27310640#p27310640

Ah ok, I missed that. Well, the rest of my point stands :P

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

Does it now? viewtopic.php?p=27310640#p27310640

Ah ok, I missed that. Well, the rest of my point stands

I appreciate a good, fun role play. I'm glad you have fun role playing a nation of human-like dinosaurs. But people getting bent out of shape about the human/sapient distinction always struck me as dumb and distracting.

[Figu]

"It's not surprising that the reactionary elements of the General Assembly oppose both peace and sustainable development in-favor of their rampant militarism and unfettered productivism. But I implore to all open-minded nay-sayers, to look past the prize and acknowledge that this resolution— should it pass— will increase the effectiveness of non-aggressive soft power diplomacy to make realizable and tangible results.

There are many, many Proletariat out there in our cosmos. Those who are left behind because of this preconceived notion that the weak, like a leaf pruned from the hedge bush, should be scattered by the wind and wither away. There is more to gain by preserving life, be it in terms of productivity, growth, creativity and innovation. Peace begins when people feel safe and secure, we as nations united under General Assembly should accept that we are all in this together.

That being said, I would suggest that this resolution should be revisited. The possibility of unknown powers and rogue actors besieging compliant nations should be addressed. Fundamentally, most conservative talking points are concerned with the threat that the unknown faces. This running rationale is ostensibly a fact of history, so they think themselves justified to hold a wary viewpoint. Therefore, this resolution can be made more persuasive by going to greater lengths to providing security in peace-time, such as ruling out complete disarmament for self-defense forces bolstered by a basic mutual aid system." – Board Secretariat, Dokja Kim.

"Hah, when your nation is at war, throwing militarism in the garbage is the fastest way to lose. Militarism is a necessary component of any nation, for those who lack it will fall to those who don't. In regards to productivism, for us, it's a means to an end. We simply need more war materials to continue the fight. Resources are necessary to fight wars, and we are currently in one. Unfortunately, minerals deplete from mines eventually, so it probably doesn't fall under 'sustainable development'. Oh well, most agree that this proposal is stupid, thankfully."

"Come now, it's quite bold of you to assume we leave our people behind. Everyone has a use in our nation. Prosthetic limbs can replace those that have been lost. Those unfit or unwilling to fight can find work in the factories, producing the war material necessary to continue the battle for freedom. Taking care of children to raise the next generation of patriots. Everyone has purpose in our Republic. The people of our country know full well what will happen if we lose, and they know that such a thing is unacceptable under any circumstance. We suffered for a long and painful decade under socialist rule, before the workers themselves, the Proletariats you claim to stand for, overthrew their communist oppressors and established the United Republic of Figu. We know we will never be safe so long as threats like YOU exist. Communist Solidarity, right? It is not fear of the unknown, but fear of the very known threat of communism. Due to the internationalist nature of the beast known as socialism, so long as even one nation follows this cancerous ideology, our Republic, and the free nations of the world, will never be safe."

- Chief Delegate Rodgers

[Apatosaurus]

Ah ok, I missed that. Well, the rest of my point stands :P

I appreciate a good, fun role play. I'm glad you have fun role playing a nation of human-like dinosaurs. But people getting bent out of shape about the human/sapient distinction always struck me as dumb and distracting.

Ok, makes sense. For the record, I assume you are a returning older player?

[Astrobolt]

OOC: Just call everyone “individuals” and “persons” and call it a day.