GA Resolution:Repeal A Promotion of Basic Educatio

[Ananke II]

This is the discussion thread. Please go here to cast your vote.

Repeal "A Promotion of Basic Education"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation

Category: Repeal
Resolution: GA#80
Proposed by: Glen-Rhodes


Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #80: A Promotion of Basic Education (Category: Education and Creativity; Area of Effect: Educational) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: DETERMINED to secure the right of education to all persons in all nations,

REGRETTING that "A Promotion of Basic Education" carries with it considerable flaws that hamper that goal,

OBSERVING that the resolution requires that nations provide only "some sort of variation of edification", which is entirely too vague, too weak, and easily subverted by nations that do not wish to provide a decent, serious education to their populace, but instead would gladly receive funding under the guise of "educating" their citizens,

SADDENED that the resolution only requires that nations "attempt" to provide a decent education to the mentally handicapped, which is again too weak and easily subverted by nations that have no intentions of providing an education to the mentally handicapped,

DISAPPOINTED that the resolution even acknowledges this fact, but has chosen to not address it,

NOTING that the resolution only requires nations to provide an education for their citizens, leaving it acceptable for nations to deny vast numbers of non-citizen access to a decent education,

APPALLED by this outright discrimination against non-citizens, who oftentimes have fled violent and oppressive homelands in search for opportunities in a more safe, welcoming home,

EXCLAIMING that the World Assembly does not value the worth of a person based upon their citizenship status, when dealing with fundamental human rights issues, such as the right to an education,

DETERMINED that a comprehensive education resolution should not allow nations to pick and choose who is worthy and who is not worthy of having an education, through the use of arbitrary determinants of human worth, but instead should establish the right of all persons, child or adult, citizen or not, to have access to an education,

OPPOSED that the World Assembly has very little oversight on how nations use the funds given to them, leading to unlimited wasteful spending,

SEEKING to replace "A Promotion of Basic Education" with a better, more solid resolution that corrects the flaws above,

The World Assembly hereby repeals "A Promotion of Basic Education".

[Ananke II]

Something to keep in mind in regards to this resolution is that 10ki previously voted for A Promotion of Basic Science and against Glen-Rhodes' Primary Education Act. So people might want to read both proposals before deciding on whether to support the repeal. If the repeal is successful I expect to see either or both of the proposals in question to get resubmitted.

[Walabamba]

I could see there being some improvements made in future Education based resolutions, so Yes.

[Guy]

You can build on past resolutions, no need to repeal.

[Ananke II]

Glen-Rhodes sent me a clarification regarding what his intentions after a repeal is, which I promised to post.

The Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes
4 hours ago Hello,

I was looking at the 10000 Islands forums and noticed that there was a discussion about my attempted repeal of A Promotion of Basic Education. In one of your posts, you stated that it would be likely that I would resubmit the failed Primary Education Act. Because that would likely play a part in how people decide to vote on the repeal, I'd like to address that. I have no plans to resubmit the Primary Education Act. I've expressed an interest in working with other delegations, such as Sionis Prioratus and Charlotte Ryberg, to craft a hopefully permanent and efficient education resolution.

I don't want there to be an impression that I'm trying to repeal A Promotion of Basic Education so that I can give the Primary Education Act another shot. I want to reassure the World Assembly members of 10000 Islands that that is not my intention nor has it ever been.

(I would post this on the forums, but I couldn't tell if the forums are restricted to region members.)

Thanks for reading,
Glen-Rhodes

[Unibot]

May 10, 2010 1:37:07 GMT -5 Guy said:

You can build on past resolutions, no need to repeal.

^^ This. Extensive funding to allow handicapped students an education was not provided in the text of the resolution because that subject deserves its own resolution. GA#80 stipulates that a nation must provide an education to a mentally handicaped person (or whatever euphanism you want to use there), and a further resolution to help provide the means to do so, is deserving of its own resolution.

Glen-Rhodes's other argument in this resolution is that this resolution doesn't mandate to member nations that they must provide an education to ALL who seek it, like his resolution did. Mine, chose only to mandate that citizens needed to recieve an education. The World Assembly is not telling you that you cannot provide an education to someone who is not a citizen of your nation -- the World Assembly has stated that it will not obligate you to. Another resolution promoting the proliferation of education to stateless people, and poorer non-member nations was on the horizon.

[Clearly I'm biased though, being the author of GA#80 (with Sionis submitting it for me.]

[Oh, and Ananke asked me to speak here]

[Unibot]

I have no plans to resubmit the Primary Education Act. I've expressed an interest in working with other delegations, such as Sionis Prioratus and Charlotte Ryberg, to craft a hopefully permanent and efficient education resolution.

Oh, and that's a bold lie. Sionis Prioratus wouldn't touch Glen-Rhodes with a ten foot pole -- and it was Charlotte Ryberg's original education proposal (involving 'Magic') that made me cringe and write GA#80. The thought of those two working together again, frightens me.

[Markanite]

Well If a proposal on extra funding for disabled people was on the horizon then this doesn't need repealed.

[The Theban Legion]

That magic thing is pretty funny though.

[Glen-Rhodes]

May 10, 2010 1:37:07 GMT -5 Guy said:

You can build on past resolutions, no need to repeal.

That is not always the case. For instance, A Promotion of Basic Education contains extremely weak language that allows nations to side-skirt actually providing an education. For example, the "some sort of variation of edification" is not fixable with another resolution. What is to stop a nation from providing 5 minutes of 'edification' on each topic, and calling it good? Absolutely nothing. They would receive World Assembly funds for doing so, to boot.

May 11, 2010 11:21:31 GMT -5 Markanite said:

Well If a proposal on extra funding for disabled people was on the horizon then this doesn't need repealed.

(As a preface, the argument isn't just about providing extra funding. It's providing a right for those people to be educated in the first place.)

The problem with thinking that other proposals can 'build upon' A Promotion of Education is two-fold. First, it clearly states that nations must only attempt to educate the handicapped. That is a positive right of nations, according to A Promotion of Basic Education. To pass another resolution stating that they must is of questionable legality. Which would it be? Must nations provide educations to the handicapped, or are they only required to attempt to do so? Remember, an attempt does not require a follow-through.

The second problem is with the idea of multi-tiered resolutions in the first place. Imagine a piece of paper. This piece of paper represents the collection of separate education resolutions, as Unibot suggests is a better model. Cut a few holes in that paper. It's still somewhat useful, but not as much as before. Cut out a few more, and then a few more. You have more empty space than you do paper. This is what could happen to the 'collection'. The World Assembly would have a pock-marked, swiss-cheese education policy. It's much easier to repeal a resolution that only provides funding for infrastructure, than it is to repeal the right of an education altogether. It is possible to include everything into a single resolution, which would be unlikely to be easily repealed. What Unibot suggests leaves massive weaknesses in a coherent, comprehensive right to education.

May 11, 2010 8:16:24 GMT -5 Unibot said:

I have no plans to resubmit the Primary Education Act. I've expressed an interest in working with other delegations, such as Sionis Prioratus and Charlotte Ryberg, to craft a hopefully permanent and efficient education resolution.

Oh, and that's a bold lie. Sionis Prioratus wouldn't touch Glen-Rhodes with a ten foot pole -- and it was Charlotte Ryberg's original education proposal (involving 'Magic') that made me cringe and write GA#80. The thought of those two working together again, frightens me.

If Sionis Prioratus does not wish to work with me, then that it his choice. I have still extended the offer, as I have extended it to you. Unfortunately, he has some silly schoolyard dislike for me, which is evident by how he has reacted to anything I post, and how the mods have handled those reactions. I have no problem with him and I do believe that we could work well together.

[Unibot]

May 12, 2010 15:06:32 GMT -5 Glen-Rhodes said:

May 10, 2010 1:37:07 GMT -5 Guy said:

You can build on past resolutions, no need to repeal.

That is not always the case. For instance, A Promotion of Basic Education contains extremely weak language that allows nations to side-skirt actually providing an education. For example, the "some sort of variation of edification" is not fixable with another resolution. What is to stop a nation from providing 5 minutes of 'edification' on each topic, and calling it good? Absolutely nothing. They would receive World Assembly funds for doing so, to boot.

Absolute Bull, the 'extremely weak' language is large in scope. You could not do such a thing under GA#80.

The problem with thinking that other proposals can 'build upon' A Promotion of Education is two-fold. First, it clearly states that nations must only attempt to educate the handicapped. That is a positive right of nations, according to A Promotion of Basic Education. To pass another resolution stating that they must is of questionable legality. Which would it be? Must nations provide educations to the handicapped, or are they only required to attempt to do so? Remember, an attempt does not require a follow-through.

No, this proposal acknowledges that metally-handicapped people may not be in the cognitive state to even learn in its most primary form -- that clause was to prevent a legal stonewall that nations could not possibly comply to.

If further resolutions worked to offer more options to increase the power and extensiveness of that 'attempt' -- than so be it.

The second problem is with the idea of multi-tiered resolutions in the first place. Imagine a piece of paper. This piece of paper represents the collection of separate education resolutions, as Unibot suggests is a better model. Cut a few holes in that paper. It's still somewhat useful, but not as much as before. Cut out a few more, and then a few more. You have more empty space than you do paper. This is what could happen to the 'collection'. The World Assembly would have a pock-marked, swiss-cheese education policy. It's much easier to repeal a resolution that only provides funding for infrastructure, than it is to repeal the right of an education altogether. It is possible to include everything into a single resolution, which would be unlikely to be easily repealed. What Unibot suggests leaves massive weaknesses in a coherent, comprehensive right to education.

Once again, bull -- one big large resolution makes it easier to repeal the right to an education. That's just simple logic, you're not making any sense, GR.

Rule 101 of GA resolution writing, which was taught to me by a good friend, and a GA veteren is 'to always narrow the focus of resolutions to a very narrow scope and save everything else for the next proposal' -- GA#80 does exactly what I intended to fufill -- and doesn't try to do anything more 'magical' (excuse my pun).

If Sionis Prioratus does not wish to work with me, then that it his choice. I have still extended the offer, as I have extended it to you.

Well, I seriously doubt he'd like you including him in your telegram campaign letter as if a trophy to add to your collection of authors you've worked with, because Sionis doesn't support a repeal, at all.

[New Augustgrad]

After considering the arguments and the text for both documents, New Augustgrad does not support a repeal of GA#80.

[Glen-Rhodes]

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

Absolute Bull, the 'extremely weak' language is large in scope. You could not do such a thing under GA#80.

It is certainly large in scope. So large that you cannot precisely say what nations can and cannot do. There is nothing in the resolution that would prevent a nation from instituting a lackluster education policy, such an incredibly short school day.

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

No, this proposal acknowledges that metally-handicapped people may not be in the cognitive state to even learn in its most primary form -- that clause was to prevent a legal stonewall that nations could not possibly comply to.

I do not doubt that the intentions were good. The execution, however, was poor. You could have written the clause to reflect that nations did not have to waste time attempting to teach people whose brains could not possibly retain learned information. However, the language doesn't say it. It says that nations must only attempt to give an education to "any citizen that is mentally incapable".

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

If further resolutions worked to offer more options to increase the power and extensiveness of that 'attempt' -- than so be it.

Unless, of course, it is contradictory to tell a nation that all that is required is an attempt, in one resolution, then tell them there's a mandatory follow-through in another resolution.

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

Once again, bull -- one big large resolution makes it easier to repeal the right to an education. That's just simple logic, you're not making any sense, GR.

If a nation is opposed to a very small aspect of a resolution, but generally supports the rest, they are less likely to repeal it, because there's no guarantee that the tiny fix would be passed. However, if that small aspect was in a standalone resolution, they would have no problem repealing it, and would likely submit a repeal quickly after it passed. This can be seen by the numerous times nations have urged us authors to "amend" a resolution, rather than repeal & replace, because they like the overall resolution and don't want to put it in jeopardy.

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

Rule 101 of GA resolution writing, which was taught to me by a good friend, and a GA veteren is 'to always narrow the focus of resolutions to a very narrow scope and save everything else for the next proposal' -- GA#80 does exactly what I intended to fufill -- and doesn't try to do anything more 'magical' (excuse my pun).

If you have the space, there is no need to not utilize it. Either way, the changes I'm pushing for by no means 'widen the scope' of the resolution. It's strange that you would want a universal education mandate to be 'very narrow'. It sounds quite toothless. (Though, 'universal' would imply that everybody would have access to an education, which this resolution does not grant)

May 13, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5 Unibot said:

Well, I seriously doubt he'd like you including him in your telegram campaign letter as if a trophy to add to your collection of authors you've worked with, because Sionis doesn't support a repeal, at all.

I did not include his name nor any other names in any 'campaign telegram'. Nor have I ever used the names of any nations as 'trophies'. In fact, I did not campaign for the repeal until the last 5 or 6 hours, since I was quite busy and there didn't seem to be a need for serious campaigning. My 'campaign', if you could call it that, was targeted at getting about 7 or 8 nations to approve, so that it could reach quorum. (I could show you the exact telegram that was sent, if you'd like.)

But that's beside the point. I said that I am open to working with others, specifically including those delegations that have expressed an interest in education policy. If they would rather not work with me, then that is their choice. But if I end up having to write a resolution on my own, they cannot come back and accuse me of repealing "A Promotion of Basic Education" as part of some imagined personal vendetta against them.

[Unibot]

If you have the space, there is no need to not utilize it. Either way, the changes I'm pushing for by no means 'widen the scope' of the resolution. It's strange that you would want a universal education mandate to be 'very narrow'. It sounds quite toothless. (Though, 'universal' would imply that everybody would have access to an education, which this resolution does not grant)

This resolution does not demand that WA nations offer an education to anyone who seeks it. A Primary Education Act did, and it was defeated primarily for that reason. Because some nations don't want to give an education to those that don't pay taxes in their nation. Who would have thunk?

[Ananke II]

The poll is currently 5 for, 5 against, so I'm abstaining until a majority forms.

This is a hint to anyone who hasn't already voted to do so asap btw.

[Greek People Nation (GPN)]

I voted yes

[Dragon Heirs]

May 15, 2010 18:30:27 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

I voted yes

I also voted for the repeal, for what little it is worth.

[Ananke II]

Guys! Stop tying the vote all the time. I only just get to cast my vote before I have to withdraw it again. *sulks*

[Walabamba]

lol ;D

[New Augustgrad]

May 18, 2010 9:10:33 GMT -5 Ananke II said:

Guys! Stop tying the vote all the time. I only just get to cast my vote before I have to withdraw it again. *sulks*

Now where's the fun in that? *grin*

;D