NATION

PASSWORD

[ABANDONED] The Rights Of Tribal Groups & Areas

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

[ABANDONED] The Rights Of Tribal Groups & Areas

Postby Makko Oko » Mon May 09, 2022 8:38 am

Greetings Everybody,

I know I already have 2 other proposals in the works, but I also have no guarantee I'll end up proposing them in the end. You can say I'm dedicated to NS as a whole, and learning every day, and with that learning, comes a proposal sure to be deemed an international issue. I propose, the Rights Of Tribal Groups & Areas.

At this time, this resolution is pretty barebones, I know that myself, but I'm hoping with the WA's cooperation, we can expand this and really make it a good resolution.

THE RIGHTS OF TRIBAL GROUPS & AREAS

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Realizing that tribes are commonly discriminated against on a daily basis, by both government and person, and understanding that there is no current WA resolution establishing official rights of tribes, this resolution enacts the following provisions:

  1. The following is hereso defined under this resolution:

    1. A tribe is any group of people that are directly related to original settlers of territory, either by ancestry or by blood, and currently live on land that was originally settled and owned by those settlers in question, until the development of civilization, living the ways of that tribe if chosen. One example are Native Americans, who are considered indigenous peoples and have 'reservations' which tend to be originally settled territory that is respected by the civilization.
    2. Tribal land is defined as any land that any tribe lives on, and is either designated as such by a government or is unofficially recognized.
    3. A protected tribe is any tribe that was the last one or is the current one to live in the designated area, and is henceforth protected under this resolution.
    4. A non-tribal person is any individual who is not a part of the tribe controlling the land in question.
  2. The International Tribal Rights Council (ITRC) shall be established with the following stipulations:

    1. The ITRC shall have international authority to look into rights abuses of tribes and tribal groups in any WA member nation.
    2. The ITRC shall be funded via yearly WA member dues.
    3. The ITRC shall establish an official list of all tribes, tribal groups and tribal areas to be followed by each WA member nation as specified.
    4. The ITRC shall support tribes that are their own territory with funding, upgrades, infrastructure, etc. as requested by the tribe and as approved by the WA.
  3. Member nations shall:

    1. Enact laws protecting "protected tribes" and tribal people from discrimination and harassment.
    2. Be recommended to consider granting stolen land, if possible, back to the protected tribes.

      1. Protected tribes shall have the full right of a sovereign nation, including the right to authorize and deauthorize individuals into and out of their land as seen fit if the protected tribe in question is granted full autonomy of their land.
    3. Provide security as requested by the protected tribes, so that non-tribal people may not enter their area and disturb it.

      1. Laws shall also be enacted protecting any trees and other environmental resources in their area from destruction and usage without their express consent.
      2. WA member nations may decide the procedures on who may and may not enter protected tribes land as seen fit, unless the tribe is granted full autonomy.
    4. File yearly tribal rights reports with the ITRC for review and study.
    5. Allow all tribal peoples to be citizens of the respective nation should they so choose, and allow the process to be easy.
    6. Fund and support protected tribes in their way of life and help them to survive.

      1. If a protected tribe is granted full autonomy of their land, this provision is nullified and support is declared optional.
  4. If a tribe goes extinct throughout the lifespan of this resolution, the following provisions shall apply:

    1. The ITRC shall document as much that is left of the tribe as possible, and investigate how the tribe in question became extinct.
    2. WA member nations shall be encouraged and recommended to declare the place of the tribal land a cultural heritage site where history of the tribe can be established, etc.
Last edited by Makko Oko on Sat Jun 04, 2022 7:36 am, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Mon May 09, 2022 9:14 am

Draft History:

THE RIGHTS OF TRIBAL GROUPS & AREAS

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Realizing that tribes are commonly discriminated against on a daily basis, by both government and person, and understanding that there is no current WA resolution establishing official rights of tribes, this resolution enacts the following provisions:

  1. The following is hereso defined under this resolution:

    1. A tribe is a social group composed chiefly of numerous families, clans, or generations having a shared ancestry and language. Tribes typically include leaders and indigenous species.
    2. Tribal land is defined as any land that any tribe lives on, and is either designated as such by a government or is unofficially recognized.
    3. A protected tribe is any tribe that was the last one or is the current one to live in the designated area, and is henceforth protected under this resolution.
    4. A non-tribal person is any individual who is not a part of the tribe controlling the land in question.
  2. The International Tribal Rights Council (ITRC) shall be established with the following stipulations:

    1. The ITRC shall have international authority to look into rights abuses of tribes and tribal groups in any WA member nation.
    2. The ITRC shall be funded via yearly WA member dues.
    3. The ITRC shall establish an official list of all tribes, tribal groups and tribal areas to be followed by each WA member nation as specified.
    4. The ITRC shall support tribes that are their own territory with funding, upgrades, infrastructure, etc. as requested by the tribe and as approved by the WA.
  3. Member nations shall:

    1. Enact laws protecting "protected tribes" and tribal people from discrimination and harassment.
    2. Be recommended to consider granting stolen land, if possible, back to the protected tribes.

      1. Protected tribes shall have the full right of a sovereign nation, including the right to authorize and deauthorize individuals into and out of their land as seen fit if the protected tribe in question is granted full autonomy of their land.
    3. Provide security as requested by the protected tribes, so that non-tribal people may not enter their area and disturb it.

      1. Laws shall also be enacted protecting any trees and other environmental resources in their area from destruction and usage without their express consent.
      2. WA member nations may decide the procedures on who may and may not enter protected tribes land as seen fit, unless the tribe is granted full autonomy.
    4. File yearly tribal rights reports with the ITRC for review and study.
    5. Allow all tribal peoples to be citizens of the respective nation should they so choose, and allow the process to be easy.
    6. Fund and support protected tribes in their way of life and help them to survive.

      1. If a protected tribe is granted full autonomy of their land, this provision is nullified and support is declared optional.
  4. If a tribe goes extinct throughout the lifespan of this resolution, the following provisions shall apply:

    1. The ITRC shall document as much that is left of the tribe as possible, and investigate how the tribe in question became extinct.
    2. WA member nations shall be encouraged and recommended to declare the place of the tribal land a cultural heritage site where history of the tribe can be established, etc.


THE RIGHTS OF TRIBAL GROUPS & AREAS

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Realizing that tribes are commonly discriminated against on a daily basis, by both government and person, and understanding that there is no current WA resolution establishing official rights of tribes, this resolution enacts the following provisions:

  1. The following is hereso defined under this resolution:

    1. A tribe is any group of people that live in a either unique or native way and live in a special area, rather or not it is designated as tribal land.
    2. Tribal land is defined as any land that any tribe lives on, and is either designated as such by a government or is unofficially recognized.
    3. A protected tribe is any tribe that was the last one or is the current one to live in the designated area, and is henceforth protected under this resolution.
    4. A non-tribal person is any individual who is not a part of the tribe controlling the land in question.
  2. The International Tribal Rights Council (ITRC) shall be established with the following stipulations:

    1. The ITRC shall have international authority to look into rights abuses of tribes and tribal groups in any WA member nation.
    2. The ITRC shall be funded via yearly WA member dues.
    3. The ITRC shall establish an official list of all tribes, tribal groups and tribal areas to be followed by each WA member nation as specified.
    4. The ITRC shall support tribes that are their own territory with funding, upgrades, infrastructure, etc. as requested by the tribe and as approved by the WA.
  3. Member nations shall:

    1. Enact laws protecting "protected tribes" and tribal people from discrimination and harassment.
    2. Be recommended to consider granting stolen land, if possible, back to the protected tribes.

      1. Protected tribes shall have the full right of a sovereign nation, including the right to authorize and deauthorize individuals into and out of their land as seen fit if the protected tribe in question is granted full autonomy of their land.
    3. Provide security as requested by the protected tribes, so that non-tribal people may not enter their area and disturb it.

      1. Laws shall also be enacted protecting any trees and other environmental resources in their area from destruction and usage without their express consent.
      2. WA member nations may decide the procedures on who may and may not enter protected tribes land as seen fit, unless the tribe is granted full autonomy.
    4. File yearly tribal rights reports with the ITRC for review and study.
    5. Allow all tribal peoples to be citizens of the respective nation should they so choose, and allow the process to be easy.
    6. Fund and support protected tribes in their way of life and help them to survive.

      1. If a protected tribe is granted full autonomy of their land, this provision is nullified and support is declared optional.
  4. If a tribe goes extinct throughout the lifespan of this resolution, the following provisions shall apply:

    1. The ITRC shall document as much that is left of the tribe as possible, and investigate how the tribe in question became extinct.
    2. WA member nations shall be encouraged and recommended to declare the place of the tribal land a cultural heritage site where history of the tribe can be established, etc.


THE RIGHTS OF TRIBAL GROUPS & AREAS

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Realizing that tribes are commonly discriminated against on a daily basis, by both government and person, and understanding that there is no current WA resolution establishing official rights of tribes, this resolution enacts the following provisions:

  1. The following is hereso defined under this resolution:

    1. A tribe is any group of people that live in a either unique or native way and live in a special area, rather or not it is designated as tribal land.
    2. Tribal land is defined as any land that any tribe lives on, and is either designated as such by a government or is unofficially recognized.
    3. A protected tribe is any tribe that was the last one or is the current one to live in the designated area, and is henceforth protected under this resolution.
  2. The International Tribal Rights Council (ITRC) shall be established with the following stipulations:

    1. The ITRC shall have international authority to look into rights abuses of tribes and tribal groups in any WA member nation.
    2. The ITRC shall be funded via yearly WA member dues.
    3. The ITRC shall establish an official list of all tribes, tribal groups and tribal areas to be followed by each WA member nation as specified.
  3. Member nations shall:

    1. Enact laws protecting "protected tribes" and tribal people from discrimination and harassment.
    2. Be recommended to consider granting stolen land, if possible, back to the protected tribes.
    3. Provide security as requested by the protected tribes, so that non-tribal people may not enter their area and disturb it.

      1. Laws shall also be enacted protecting any trees and other environmental resources in their area from destruction and usage without their express consent.
    4. File yearly tribal rights reports with the ITRC for review and study.
    5. Allow all tribal peoples to be citizens of the respective nation should they so choose, and allow the process to be easy.


THE RIGHTS OF TRIBAL GROUPS & AREAS

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Realizing that tribes are commonly discriminated against on a daily basis, by both government and person, and understanding that there is no current WA resolution establishing official rights of tribes, this resolution enacts the following provisions:

  1. The International Tribal Rights Council (ITRC) shall be established with the following stipulations:

    1. The ITRC shall have international authority to look into rights abuses of tribes and tribal groups in any WA member nation.
    2. The ITRC shall be funded via yearly WA member dues.
    3. The ITRC shall establish an official list of all tribes, tribal groups and tribal areas to be followed by each WA member nation as specified.
  2. Member nations shall:

    1. Enact laws protecting tribes and tribal people from discrimination and harassment.
    2. Give back stolen tribal land to the tribes in question.
    3. Provide security as requested by the tribes, so that non-tribal people may not enter their area and disturb it.

      1. Laws shall also be enacted protecting any trees and other environmental resources in their area from destruction and usage without their express consent.
    4. File yearly tribal rights reports with the ITRC for review and study.
    5. Allow all tribal peoples to be citizens of the respective nation should they so choose, and allow the process to be easy.
Last edited by Makko Oko on Thu Jun 02, 2022 4:36 pm, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16760
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon May 09, 2022 10:21 am

"2.B provides a potentially untenable remedy, as the lands inhabited in the entirety of some current member states may have changed possession by force between numerous prior entities. This essentially mandates national suicide for certain governments, often to groups no longer in existance. Truly. Can anybody claim that the Samnites exist in a sufficient capacity to receive Campania and Molise from the Romans?

"And what of the right of self determination of the current locals? They may have had nothing to do with forcible dispossession, why are they to be similarly dispossessed of their right to chose their government? Disenfranchising locals by giving their locality over to a new master without consulting them is as much a wrong as the original dispossession. Two wrongs hardly make a right."

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Mon May 09, 2022 10:24 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:"2.B provides a potentially untenable remedy, as the lands inhabited in the entirety of some current member states may have changed possession by force between numerous prior entities. This essentially mandates national suicide for certain governments, often to groups no longer in existance. Truly. Can anybody claim that the Samnites exist in a sufficient capacity to receive Campania and Molise from the Romans?

"And what of the right of self determination of the current locals? They may have had nothing to do with forcible dispossession, why are they to be similarly dispossessed of their right to chose their government? Disenfranchising locals by giving their locality over to a new master without consulting them is as much a wrong as the original dispossession. Two wrongs hardly make a right."


"Much agreed Ambassador. We already know some changes we need to make, such as defining who or what exactly is a tribe. Without this definition in place, the entire resolution is meaningless. In addition to what you've stated, 2b will be changed as I believe we already planned on doing so previously, and as for your second feedback on the 'right of self determination', do you have a suggestion as to how to fix this?"

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16760
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon May 09, 2022 10:31 am

Makko Oko wrote:[ as for your second feedback on the 'right of self determination', do you have a suggestion as to how to fix this?"

"Yes. Don't try to mandate ceding occupied territory at all. Such an endeavor is hideously complex and involves serious negotiation even as a cooperative bilateral effort between two entities seeking a mutually beneficial outcome. Forcing the same thing by fiat between parties with adverse interests promises unrest at besr and open conflict at worst."
Last edited by Separatist Peoples on Mon May 09, 2022 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Mon May 09, 2022 10:38 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Makko Oko wrote:[ as for your second feedback on the 'right of self determination', do you have a suggestion as to how to fix this?"

"Yes. Don't try to mandate ceding occupied territory at all. Such an endeavor is hideously complex and involves serious negotiation even as a cooperative bilateral effort between two entities seeking a mutually beneficial outcome. Forcing the same thing by fiat between parties with adverse interests promises unrest at besr and open conflict at worst."


"Your feedback has been duly noted for the next draft. The article in question will be modified to make it a recommendation. Here's an example we've come up with:

'Be recommended to consider granting stolen land, if possible, back to the affected tribes.'

As it is a recommendation, it is not a mandate, and as such, will not cause such problems you have spoken of Ambassador."

User avatar
Attempted Socialism
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1359
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Attempted Socialism » Mon May 09, 2022 10:44 am

I don't think this is a workable topic; it's hardly a workable topic IRL either. But if you want to pursue it: What's a definition of tribe that works without having every single nation ever obligated to return all land to tribes, who are then obligated to return it to the earlier tribe they themselves dispossessed?
What happens if several tribes previously lived on the same land, or now claim it?
What should happen if a tribe indisputable was in control of an area, but has since been dispossessed and largely eradicated? What happens to the people now living on the land?
How is tribal membership defined?
Who owns the land if a tribe was once displaced, a new tribe settled the area, the old tribe returned, and they're now displacing the new tribe?

Or, in other words and to refer explicitly to real life for a second, questions of tribal and ethnic claims are fairly varied, and cover many situations that aren't easily solved:
Tribal displacement -- current and historical -- in Canada, USA, Mexico, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, etc. to take just the Americas.
The varied policies -- including genocide, displacement, "civilising mission" -- towards Australian Aboriginals, Greenlandic Inuits, Sami people in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, taking just some of the examples I know enough about.
The Israel-Palestine conflict, unless you can craft a definition that excludes both the ancient tribes of Israel and the Arab tribes.
Long-since exterminated or absorbed tribes in Europe that modern people with no ties to or knowledge of the old tribes attempt to revive (See the modern Druidic fandom, for instance) unless you can craft a really good definition for when tribes are no more, and any revival is a new tribe without claim.

And to be blunt, if you haven't already thought about this (Your draft doesn't give me the impression you have), this is not a draft you should attempt.


Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide
Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated.
Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt?Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 11504
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue May 10, 2022 7:25 am

Attempted Socialism wrote:Long-since exterminated or absorbed tribes in Europe that modern people with no ties to or knowledge of the old tribes attempt to revive (See the modern Druidic fandom, for instance) unless you can craft a really good definition for when tribes are no more, and any revival is a new tribe without claim.

This land is forever claimed in the name of the Roman empire!
Ibid the British empire.
Ibid the Norse.
Ibid the Anglo-Saxons.
Ibid the Iceni celts.
Ibid the pre-Celtic Britons.
Ibid the pre-pre-Celtic Britons.
Ibid the pre-pre-pre-Celtic Britons.
Ibid ...
Ibid the Neanderthals.

Let's have a big televised 1-v-1 battle royale for this hectare of East Anglia. It'll be like the Horatii. Then we can have another event for every other hectare. It'll make fantastic television and a great NS Issue.

Author: 1 SC and 47 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Gaius Marcius Blythe
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Bistritza
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: Apr 20, 2022
Capitalizt

redemption

Postby Bistritza » Tue May 10, 2022 7:30 am

ok this is one based
support
proves how everyone has potential, the human capital just need be guided towards the right path.
Main Nation | General Info | The Constitution | NSEconomy Stats | Military Info, Main and Puppets
Other nations | BeeStreetz, Political Parties, More Info | Bistritza TSP-MP Representative, The Regional Alliance
Mediums: Hard OOC; Soft OOC; Soft IC; Hard IC | The accounts' posts are rarely Hard OOC.

User avatar
Anne of Cleves in TNP
Envoy
 
Posts: 226
Founded: Aug 12, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Anne of Cleves in TNP » Tue May 10, 2022 2:42 pm

Besides from the land-ceding issue already addressed above (since tribal groups are not so keen on ‘ownership’ unlike how other countries are), everything seems good. :bow:
IC Name: The Clevesian Empire
Capital: New Cleves
Leader: Empress Anne of Cleves III
Failed WA Proposals: “Repeal: Comfortable Pillows for All Protocol”
IC WA Ambassador: Ms. Charlotte Schafer
“Give me a proposal, I’ll give you some criticism.”
[RIP Technoblade]

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Tue May 17, 2022 1:14 pm

Bump. I've posted a new draft (look right above the draft history post).

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22091
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Tue May 17, 2022 1:26 pm

A tribe is any group of people that live in a either unique or native way and live in a special area, rather or not it is designated as tribal land.

This is so vague as to render itself capable of including whatever range of people you wish. True "unique" lifestyles do not exist, as living beings necessarily have common needs, so we are actually talking about degrees of uniqueness, which member states are free to decide on for themselves. I also take issue with segregating "tribes" into separate jurisdictions away from other groups. Not only does this contradict multiple existing resolutions, but also it just plain has bad outcomes. Ethnostates are bad.
I want to improve.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Arbiter for The East Pacific

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Tue May 17, 2022 1:45 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
A tribe is any group of people that live in a either unique or native way and live in a special area, rather or not it is designated as tribal land.

This is so vague as to render itself capable of including whatever range of people you wish. True "unique" lifestyles do not exist, as living beings necessarily have common needs, so we are actually talking about degrees of uniqueness, which member states are free to decide on for themselves. I also take issue with segregating "tribes" into separate jurisdictions away from other groups. Not only does this contradict multiple existing resolutions, but also it just plain has bad outcomes. Ethnostates are bad.


"We appreciate your concerns Ambassador, may you suggest a replacement for this definition that better fits and is more defined?" - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

User avatar
Barfleur
Diplomat
 
Posts: 690
Founded: Mar 04, 2019
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Barfleur » Tue May 17, 2022 1:50 pm

"In clause 3(c), the exclusion of 'non-tribal people' is ambiguous in terms of what, exactly, it demands. Are tribes allowed to exclude all persons from their land who are not members of that tribe, or do they have to include members of other tribes? A 'non-tribal person' could be a person who is a member of a tribe, just not the tribe that controls the land in question."
B A R F L E U R
Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno
"A god among men when it comes to statistics"
“Sweatpants are a sign of defeat. You lost control of your life so you bought some sweatpants.”
― Karl Lagerfeld
Ambassador: Edmure Norfield
Military Attaché: Colonel Lyndon Q. Ralston
Author, GA#597, GA#605, and GA#609.
Co-author, GA#534.
The Barfleurian World Assembly Mission may be found at Suite 59, South-West Building, WAHQ.

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Tue May 17, 2022 1:54 pm

Barfleur wrote:"In clause 3(c), the exclusion of 'non-tribal people' is ambiguous in terms of what, exactly, it demands. Are tribes allowed to exclude all persons from their land who are not members of that tribe, or do they have to include members of other tribes? A 'non-tribal person' could be a person who is a member of a tribe, just not the tribe that controls the land in question."


"Ah, thank you for this feedback Ambassador. In our case, we meant to include anybody who was not a part of the tribe that controlled the land in question, as all people are unauthorized under that specificity, however, tribes can authorize whoever they wish anyhow. Regardless, we will be sure to signify this in our next draft. Thank you." - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

User avatar
Attempted Socialism
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1359
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Attempted Socialism » Tue May 17, 2022 2:09 pm

The definitions and edited provisions do not adequately address my concerns. Tribe, tribal land, and protected tribe are all effectively statuses granted by WA governments which means only governments with an existing interest in protecting tribes will do so; I cannot see any tribe that would become protected under this resolution. I find it telling that my concerns were not specifically addressed. I don't think this is a fruitful endeavour for the author to continue, blunt as it may sound.


Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide
Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated.
Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt?Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes

User avatar
Barfleur
Diplomat
 
Posts: 690
Founded: Mar 04, 2019
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Barfleur » Tue May 17, 2022 3:08 pm

Makko Oko wrote:
Barfleur wrote:"In clause 3(c), the exclusion of 'non-tribal people' is ambiguous in terms of what, exactly, it demands. Are tribes allowed to exclude all persons from their land who are not members of that tribe, or do they have to include members of other tribes? A 'non-tribal person' could be a person who is a member of a tribe, just not the tribe that controls the land in question."


"Ah, thank you for this feedback Ambassador. In our case, we meant to include anybody who was not a part of the tribe that controlled the land in question, as all people are unauthorized under that specificity, however, tribes can authorize whoever they wish anyhow. Regardless, we will be sure to signify this in our next draft. Thank you." - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

"Even accepting this understanding, would tribal governments have near-total control over their borders in the same manner that member nations do? Would their border controls be subject to WA law, such as the joyously now-repealed Resolution No. 564? And would they be allowed to discriminate in terms of who they let in? Those are all things that need to be considered."
B A R F L E U R
Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno
"A god among men when it comes to statistics"
“Sweatpants are a sign of defeat. You lost control of your life so you bought some sweatpants.”
― Karl Lagerfeld
Ambassador: Edmure Norfield
Military Attaché: Colonel Lyndon Q. Ralston
Author, GA#597, GA#605, and GA#609.
Co-author, GA#534.
The Barfleurian World Assembly Mission may be found at Suite 59, South-West Building, WAHQ.

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Tue May 17, 2022 3:44 pm

Barfleur wrote:
Makko Oko wrote:
"Ah, thank you for this feedback Ambassador. In our case, we meant to include anybody who was not a part of the tribe that controlled the land in question, as all people are unauthorized under that specificity, however, tribes can authorize whoever they wish anyhow. Regardless, we will be sure to signify this in our next draft. Thank you." - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

"Even accepting this understanding, would tribal governments have near-total control over their borders in the same manner that member nations do? Would their border controls be subject to WA law, such as the joyously now-repealed Resolution No. 564? And would they be allowed to discriminate in terms of who they let in? Those are all things that need to be considered."


"Your new feedback is very fair in simplicity, which is of a good deed to us to allow us to best pursue it. In regards to tribal borders under the stipulation that the government grants the land back to them, it would, internationally speaking, be its own 'nation' and as such, would have as much control as is acceptable over their borders. In regards to WA law, if a border is a border, then it shall be held accountable under WA law, otherwise, we don't see it as a resolution that is worth pursuing.

In regards to discrimination and those policies held deep by the WA, international law is a very tricky concern when it comes to things such as this, but if a tribe is its own nation in consideration, then it is not automatically bound to WA rules and regulations, meaning, legally speaking, if a tribe were to join the WA, then they would be legally applicable to be held to the resolutions that this fair assembly has established in itself, but otherwise, are free to regulate and create laws within themselves, even if they violate WA resolutions, as they're not WA members.

Some resolutions, such as GAR#583 "Homelessness Mitigation and Protections Act", do establish some policies which may seem hard to establish in a tribe, and may require substantial changes to their way of life, but again, that's only if a tribe is granted their land back, and if they choose to join the WA, with which we enjoy the privilege of not being forced to join.

Member nations must establish local housing agencies tasked with providing homeless inhabitants or inhabitants at risk of homelessness with housing resources and case management services.


This is just one example from GAR#583 with which we in the Makko Okoan Government deem to be 'hard to implement' in tribal life. Tribal life has many differences to the lives that regular nations' people live, such as in terms of healthcare, housing, employment, etc.

Finally, in terms of concerns over unaddressed concerns, we in the Makko Okoan Government do sincerely apologize for the error, and will be establishing tribal membership status officially in the next draft, and in addition to that, will work on what happens to tribal land if the tribe in question is 'extinct' and/or no longer exists." - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

User avatar
Barfleur
Diplomat
 
Posts: 690
Founded: Mar 04, 2019
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Barfleur » Tue May 17, 2022 5:21 pm

"So, Ambassador, this proposal would force member nations to allow tribal governments to set up shop, secede from their nation, close their borders, and withdraw from the WA?"

OOC: I doubt it is legal for the WA to ICly take territory or population from member nations and to retroactively provide that international law does not apply to certain parts of member nations.
B A R F L E U R
Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno
"A god among men when it comes to statistics"
“Sweatpants are a sign of defeat. You lost control of your life so you bought some sweatpants.”
― Karl Lagerfeld
Ambassador: Edmure Norfield
Military Attaché: Colonel Lyndon Q. Ralston
Author, GA#597, GA#605, and GA#609.
Co-author, GA#534.
The Barfleurian World Assembly Mission may be found at Suite 59, South-West Building, WAHQ.

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Tue May 17, 2022 5:27 pm

Barfleur wrote:"So, Ambassador, this proposal would force member nations to allow tribal governments to set up shop, secede from their nation, close their borders, and withdraw from the WA?"

OOC: I doubt it is legal for the WA to ICly take territory or population from member nations and to retroactively provide that international law does not apply to certain parts of member nations.


"Not in any regard Ambassador. Nothing is 'forced', and even with borders, they don't even HAVE to give their land back, it is merely a recommendation as stipulated in the resolution. Besides, member nations do not have to withdraw from the WA, even if they give up land, and if they do give up land, then legally speaking, that land isn't even theirs anymore, so it would be its own governing sovereign territory, with the right to exercise WA membership as they please." - The Makko Oko Ministry Of Diplomatic Affairs, World Assembly Affairs Division

OOC: I agree with you on this, but this resolution doesn't enforce that. It recommends WA member nations to give back territory if possible, but it is not required, and in addition to that, even if territory is given back, that territory is no longer a part of that member nation, so saying that 'international law does not apply to certain parts' is inaccurate and incorrect, as that territory would be its own sovereign nation and can exercise WA membership as it pleases.

If I may add onto this, there is actually nothing stating that WA member nations cannot give up territory and that territory is therefore its own sovereign nation, so I think it's okay. If you are confused however, please feel free to clarify your question so I can clear it up to the best of my ability.

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Sat May 21, 2022 11:42 am

Bump. New draft posted. Made multiple changes, including the addition of what happens to extinct tribes.

User avatar
The New Nordic Union
Diplomat
 
Posts: 586
Founded: Jul 08, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The New Nordic Union » Sun May 22, 2022 8:44 am

Makko Oko wrote:A tribe is any group of people that live in a either unique or native way and live in a special area, rather or not it is designated as tribal land.


'People in fenced communities and homeless people living under a bridge are now tribes, apparently. 'unique or native way' is much to vague and unspecified. What even is a native way' of life? And what's unique?'
Permanent Representative of the Nordic Union to the World Assembly: Katrin við Keldu

User avatar
Attempted Socialism
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1359
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Attempted Socialism » Sun May 22, 2022 9:05 am

I will just reiterate that "tribe" can include both everyone and nobody, depending on what "unique" and "native" means. "Special area" can be a city (Are all cities tribal land?), countries, and what we would understand as tribes. The definitions provided avoids successively returning land to non-existing tribes (Or suggesting to do so), but that is the only concern of mine that I see alleviated. Since the only firm definition of tribal land is the one where tribe/land is recognised by individual governments, this means the resolution would only protect those tribes who are already recognised and presumably protected. The effect is a feel-good resolution without any effect. I am firmly opposed.


Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide
Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated.
Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt?Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes

User avatar
Makko Oko
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Jan 20, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Makko Oko » Thu May 26, 2022 7:33 am

Bump. As requested by multiple people, I have updated the definition of a tribe, so it should now better fit the target of this resolution. If I don't get any additional feedback by this weekend, I will likely submit my resolution to the proposal chambers.

User avatar
Attempted Socialism
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1359
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Attempted Socialism » Thu May 26, 2022 11:17 am

Can you give me an example of a RL country that is not composed chiefly of numerous families, clans, or generations having a shared ancestry and language, and of a RL tribe that is? How did you figure it out? What criteria did you use for evaluation?
For instance, I would guess Scotland easily qualifies with all your criteria, but then I came to think about other nations; depending on timeframe, British colonisers in New Zealand or Australia could claim tribal status; they fit with some 6-8 generations. Next, if you go all-in on the clan part, you can exclude a lot of nations, but you'd still include Scotland and Ireland. You'd also include the Iroquois Confederacy. But to my knowledge, most Central and Southern American tribes are not clan-based. The Mexican tribal villages were not, for instance, and I don't think the Zapatista would be thrilled if you told them they weren't protected because of the clan criterion.

As a minor grammatical thing, your definition reads as an enumerated list, but there are at least two ways to read it, as demonstrated:
1) numerous families, (or) 2) clans, (or) 3) generations having a shared ancestry and language
Alternatively:
1) numerous families, (or) 2) clans, (or) 3) generations (any of which has to have) a shared ancestry and language

The reason why anthropologists generally have abandoned "tribe" as a term is because almost any definition is either overinclusive (Includes European nations or settler colonies, for instance) or plays into outdated and infantilising ideas of the Indian as a noble savage lower on the civilisational development ladder. But ethnic group has the issue here that it includes both the victims and the perpetrators of colonisation and imperialist conquest. So would a better definition include some kind of analysis of the histories and relative power-relationships between ethnic groups? Possibly. You could also draw more explicitly on RL history and protect conquered ethnic groups, but there might be flaws in that approach as well.
When I initially said...
Attempted Socialism wrote:I don't think this is a workable topic; it's hardly a workable topic IRL either.
... it wasn't to insult you, but to warn you that the topic is hard even for RL scholars before politics enter into it.


Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide
Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated.
Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt?Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aegeonia, Divinusland, Free Ravensburg, Kaprein, Simone Republic

Advertisement

Remove ads