[Complete]At Vote:[SC] Repeal "Condemn the Pacific"

Mousebumples

Mousebumples

TNPer
Repeal "Condemn the Pacific"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal
Resolution: SC#177
Proposed by: Cormactopia II

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #177: Condemn the Pacific shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council:

Acknowledging that the Pacific Order, formerly known as the New Pacific Order (NPO), the regional government against which the charges of SC#177 were made, continues to govern The Pacific;

Recognizing, however, that under the leadership of Pierconium, the Pacific Order has issued a public apology for past wrongdoing against other regions, most recently including its involvement in the 2015 conflict in Lazarus;

Recalling that senior nations involved in the Lazarus conflict have been expelled from leadership positions in the Pacific Order, and in several cases expelled from the Pacific Order altogether, by Pierconium;

Noting that the Pacific Order has conducted its affairs with other regions in a responsible and respectful manner in the year since condemnation of The Pacific;

Citing the precedent set by SC#71: Repeal "Condemn Unknown," in which the resolution of condemnation against Unknown for much greater offenses than those committed by The Pacific was repealed, following a change in both leadership and behavior in Unknown similar to that which has occurred in The Pacific;

Respecting the ideological and political diversity that characterizes regional governments chosen by their regional populations throughout the world, and recognizing the sovereign right of these regional populations to self-determination in selecting their forms of government;

Observing that, contrary to the claims made by SC#177, the regional government of The Pacific has enjoyed the support of its regional population for more than a decade, and that many nations actively involved in The Pacific's regional affairs find the long-term stability provided by the Pacific Order conducive to national, international, and regional development, rather than finding it oppressive;

Asserting that the attempt made by SC#177 to impose foreign ideological and political proclivities on the regional population of The Pacific is imperialistic in nature, disrespecting the sovereign right of the nations of The Pacific to choose their regional form of government; and

Repudiating the imperialistic approach undertaken by SC#177, to spread interregional peace and goodwill through rigid conformity and uniformity rather than through mutual respect and tolerance, as inconsistent with the values and aims of this Security Council:

Hereby Repeals SC#177: Condemn The Pacific.
Click to expand...

Please vote For, Against, Abstain, or Present.

As a reminder, a vote For this repeal means that you would like to remove the current Condemnation from the record.
 
MoWAA Recommendation
The existing condemnation rightly notes the actions that NPO has taken against TNP. ("Recalling the strong support of the NPO for consecutive coups d'etat led by UPS Rail and Great Bight in 2004 against the legitimate government of The North Pacific, preying upon the inactivity of much beloved former Delegate Magicality in order to bring The North Pacific under NPO hegemony") As a result, we recommend a vote Against the repeal. No matter the actions of members of The Pacific over the last year, that does not make up for years of condemn-worthy behavior within NationStates for the previous decade.

The Delegate, Lord Ravenclaw requests that Eligible Voters of The North Pacific read his post on the matter further below. This recommendation will be revised as soon as possible.
 
It was deserved. It was also poorly written from the onset and included some (many?) factual errors.

I also believe the current government of the Pacific has been emphatic in its attempts to reconcile some of those past actions, particularly in regards to TNP.

If I were a member of the WA I would vote For this repeal, not only because of the poor quality of the original document, but because the idea of condemning an entire region for the actions of a few nations, most of which are no longer in the region at all, just seems petty.

But, I have never been surprised by the pettiness of nations in NS.
 
Gracius Maximus:
It was also poorly written from the onset and included some (many?) factual errors.
Click to expand...
Ah. We're not repealing because of a certain Osiran couper's latest foibles.. are we? Any factual clarifications couldn't hurt..
 
falapatorius:
Gracius Maximus:
It was also poorly written from the onset and included some (many?) factual errors.
Click to expand...
Ah. We're not repealing because of a certain Osiran couper's latest foibles.. are we? Any factual clarifications couldn't hurt..
Click to expand...
I am guessing that voting against a resolution purely because of authorship is not something that the government of the Pacific will view as justification for what is basically a slap in the face of everything they have tried to do to reconcile over these past months. But, who am I to say?

The author in question is indeed involved in ridiculousness elsewhere, but I fail to see how that negates his own admission of error in the original condemnation or what that has to do with our vote being based upon actions that took place over a decade ago which have been apologised for to this region both personally and officially on multiple occasions stretching far beyond the last year.

It seems like a petty vote.
 
Gracius Maximus:
The author in question is indeed involved in ridiculousness elsewhere, but I fail to see how that negates his own admission of error in the original condemnation or what that has to do with our vote being based upon actions that took place over a decade ago which have been apologised for to this region both personally and officially on multiple occasions stretching far beyond the last year.
Click to expand...
Talk is cheap. Plus, the author changes sides more often than not.
 
falapatorius:
Gracius Maximus:
The author in question is indeed involved in ridiculousness elsewhere, but I fail to see how that negates his own admission of error in the original condemnation or what that has to do with our vote being based upon actions that took place over a decade ago which have been apologised for to this region both personally and officially on multiple occasions stretching far beyond the last year.
Click to expand...
Talk is cheap. Plus, the author changes sides more often than not.
Click to expand...
Indeed, talk is cheap. Did you have a point to make with that, because it does not seem to follow?

What does the author have to do with the resolution? Voting in favor does not somehow legitimise Cormac's actions in Osiris. That is a ridiculous position in my opinion.
 
I have discussed the matter with the Delegate of the Pacific, and would like to add the following to the record:

Actions have consequences. When you overthrow a region, when you illegally strip and eject nations in violation of an established constitutional document, when you slander, character assassinate, lie, and cheat the region out of its democratic processes, you should expect to receive consequences. All too often there are no consequences for actions in NationStates, especially when you are popular. I am a Diplomat, which I am often reminded of, and should be prepared to do the "harder" thing. Now is one of those times.

Where military options are not available, diplomatic options should be used. The author of this proposal has blatantly (and unrepentantly) disregarded and disrespected the democratic processes of a region that had been in established law since early January 2014. Laws that he wrote, supported and advertised to the interregional community that Osiris was now cleansed of what he referred to of "toxic elements", and was starting a new era. Those words were proven false with their actions not two weeks ago. This is the interregional community's first real test to decide whether the author of this proposal will face any form of censure for his actions, or whether our various murmurs of disapproval were just that: murmurs.

I have apologised to the Emperor of The New Pacific Order for the recommendation's wording. At the time, when I and my Minister discussed the wording, I was overly concerned with accusations of being petty coming from the author, and did not think at the time, of the wider picture. The Emperor reminded me, and rightfully so, that he did apologise to The North Pacific in my predecessor's (SillyString) term for past events between us and The Pacific, as well as to Lazarus at the start of his reign for the actions of the New Lazarene Order.

I regret that The Pacific should have to be party to the first interregional challenge, when I could, and would, support an effort to repeal the Condemnation citing its more recent changes and the work it has done to make amends for past transgressions against us and other states. I further regret, and apologise for, the wording in the current recommendation. I will contact the Minister and we will amend the wording to be more suitable and specific to our actual concerns.

Joshua Ravenclaw
Delegate of The North Pacific
 
It seems to me that a more appropriate response to Cormac would be to have him condemned, not automatically vote against a resolution simply because he is the author. The logic in your position seems skewed to me.
 
falapatorius:
You're escalating this GM. I'll just vote against. Nighty..
Click to expand...
No, I don't believe so. I believe actively working to make certain a poorly written resolution remains on the books to negatively effect 10000 nations just because of who the author on the repeal happens to be is escalation enough.
 
A condemnation for him, is effectively worthless. He'd wear it as a badge of honour and use it to improve his own position. No, the more effective tactic against him in this arena is to block his efforts on a larger scale using the game mechanics.
 
Lord Ravenclaw:
A condemnation for him, is effectively worthless. He'd wear it as a badge of honour and use it to improve his own position. No, the more effective tactic against him in this arena is to block his efforts on a larger scale using the game mechanics.
Click to expand...
We will just have to agree to disagree.
 
"Recalling the strong support of the NPO for consecutive coups d'etat led by UPS Rail and Great Bight in 2004 against the legitimate government of The North Pacific, preying upon the inactivity of much beloved former Delegate Magicality in order to bring The North Pacific under NPO hegemony"
Click to expand...

On a factual note, the NPO did not "strongly support" the coup. they WERE the coup.


i vote against, but I am pretty indifferent to this repeal. I find the whole Condemn / repeal a condemnation business gives naughty children far more attention than they deserve. The only do what they do so that people will notice them, so i do not believe in giving them what they crave.
 
flemingovia:
"Recalling the strong support of the NPO for consecutive coups d'etat led by UPS Rail and Great Bight in 2004 against the legitimate government of The North Pacific, preying upon the inactivity of much beloved former Delegate Magicality in order to bring The North Pacific under NPO hegemony"
Click to expand...

On a factual note, the NPO did not "strongly support" the coup. they WERE the coup.


i vote against, but I am pretty indifferent to this repeal. I find the whole Condemn / repeal a condemnation business gives naughty children far more attention than they deserve. The only do what they do so that people will notice them, so i do not believe in giving them what they crave.
Click to expand...
I'm fairly certain the current government of the Pacific would rather just be left alone than have the attention.

And you are correct, the NPO was the impetus for UPS Rail and ALSO.
 
This resolution was never about the Pacific. It is nothing but an attempt by Cormac to justify his actions in Osiris. Unequivocally against.
 
Syrixia:
This resolution was never about the Pacific. It is nothing but an attempt by Cormac to justify his actions in Osiris. Unequivocally against.
Click to expand...
I disagree, as noted above, with the logic of this argument. If this resolution were to pass how would it justify anything Cormac has (or has not) done in Osiris?

I am genuinely interested in this. I believe most here would acknowledge that on a personal level, Cormac and I are not exactly 'friends', so I would not necessarily want to support his agenda. But at the end of the day, this passing would just be him authoring a repeal, not any sort of referendum on his activities elsewhere.

If certain parties wish to read that into it, I dare say that is on you, and not based on the facts of the situation. It is unprecedented to claim that authorship of a WA resolution justifies unrelated Gameplay activities.

And since I know most of you to be more intelligent than that, I can not help but see it as a red herring. Oh well, does not really matter so much and I guess I should just give it a rest.
 
Gracius Maximus:
Syrixia:
This resolution was never about the Pacific. It is nothing but an attempt by Cormac to justify his actions in Osiris. Unequivocally against.
Click to expand...
I disagree, as noted above, with the logic of this argument. If this resolution were to pass how would it justify anything Cormac has (or has not) done in Osiris?

I am genuinely interested in this. I believe most here would acknowledge that on a personal level, Cormac and I are not exactly 'friends', so I would not necessarily want to support his agenda. But at the end of the day, this passing would just be him authoring a repeal, not any sort of referendum on his activities elsewhere.

If certain parties wish to read that into it, I dare say that is on you, and not based on the facts of the situation. It is unprecedented to claim that authorship of a WA resolution justifies unrelated Gameplay activities.

And since I know most of you to be more intelligent than that, I can not help but see it as a red herring. Oh well, does not really matter so much and I guess I should just give it a rest.
Click to expand...
This resolution is a red herring. The reason I pointed out who wrote the resolution is because it's suspicious.
 
I wonder why Cormac feels the need, at this time, to osculate the posterior of the Pacific? Could he be feeling the need to suck up to whoever will give him the time of day?
 
flemingovia:
I wonder why Cormac feels the need, at this time, to osculate the posterior of the Pacific? Could he be feeling the need to suck up to whoever will give him the time of day?
Click to expand...
^ This. I was just about to ask this.

And for the record/vote count, Against.
 
flemingovia:
I wonder why Cormac feels the need, at this time, to osculate the posterior of the Pacific? Could he be feeling the need to suck up to whoever will give him the time of day?
Click to expand...
Maybe. Then again.. it could be part of a larger plan. Gain Pierconium's favor by showing that Delegate supremacy has it's merits, work his way into the inner circle, then.. bam. Regional officer banning spree. I think we all know the best way to coup a GCR as entrenched as TP is from the inside (not that I'd support such treachery :P ). Cormac gets to take the credit for unseating Pierconium. Dayum. :clap:

(wait.. I see some tin foil coming loose)
 
falapatorius:
flemingovia:
I wonder why Cormac feels the need, at this time, to osculate the posterior of the Pacific? Could he be feeling the need to suck up to whoever will give him the time of day?
Click to expand...
Maybe. Then again.. it could be part of a larger plan. Gain Pierconium's favor by showing that Delegate supremacy has it's merits, work his way into the inner circle, then.. bam. Regional officer banning spree. I think we all know the best way to coup a GCR as entrenched as TP is from the inside (not that I'd support such treachery :P ). Cormac gets to take the credit for unseating Pierconium. Dayum. :clap:

(wait.. I see some tin foil coming loose)
Click to expand...
That is a good plan.

One only hopes that Pierconium isn't quite that gullible. Who knows?
 
If the Pacific is serious about getting their condemnation repealed they might consider getting one authored by someone less toxic than Cormac. Govindia, perhaps?
 
flemingovia:
If the Pacific is serious about getting their condemnation repealed they might consider getting one authored by someone less toxic than Cormac. Govindia, perhaps?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it was solicited by the Pacific, as there has been historical backlash against self-proposals.
 
Frozentophat:
Against.

Am I just really late or is this one getting more attention than usual?
Click to expand...
No, I just talked about it more than I probably should have here. It isn't everyday that the Condemnation of a GCR is discussed after all.
 
flemingovia:
If the Pacific is serious about getting their condemnation repealed they might consider getting one authored by someone less toxic than Cormac. Govindia, perhaps?
Click to expand...
I don't think this comment was called for, at all.



Against.

The repeal seems to be predicated on the assertion that the NPO is achieving institutional change that has somehow fundamentally changed their foreign policy direction. Firstly, I don't believe that changes in their membership are governed by a change in policy direction - I believe it's an attempt to shore up Pierconium against internal dissent.

Secondly, the last three clauses are nonsensical. Cultural imperialism is what the Security Council does. In addition, it has not been empirically proven that "many nations actively involved in The Pacific's regional affairs find the long-term stability provided by the Pacific Order conducive to national, international, and regional development". In contrast, for example, one can empirically demonstrate that keystone policies of r3n's Home Affairs doctrine (generally assumed to be the WADP) led to high WA retention rates in TNP, by way of comparing endorsement counts and WA memberstates to other regions. There have been no attempts to survey or otherwise quantify the effects of GCR stability in NS. Indeed, there is no significant distortion between Osiris and Balder's nation count - one being notoriously instable, and the other being extraordinarily stable. From the Pacific to the West Pacific (2nd to last largest Feeder), there is a difference of about 650 nations (10.3k to 9.6k). This difference is statistically significant, but my understanding of NS history leads me to assume this would be because of the Pacific's significant age advantage, and not its governance. TSP, TEP, and TWP are within 400 nations of each other. The difference from the Pacific to TNP (11.6k) is an additional 1.3k - quite obviously statistically significant.

Thirdly, the Repeal Unknown condemn was, in my opinion, buoyed by the fact that the agent who committed the actions for which Unknown was condemned then couped Unknown. The equivalent would be Feux or Milograd or Stuj or Krull or anyone who was in the NPO leadership at the time couping the NPO and being replaced by Pierconium.

Based on what estimates are available
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top