SC Resolution: Repeal "Condemn The Black Hawks"

[Lenlyvit]

Repeal: “Condemn The Black Hawks”

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.

Category: Repeal

Target: SC#52

Proposed By: Tinhampton

Security Council Resolution #52 “Condemn The Black Hawks” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

THE SECURITY COUNCIL:

ADAMANT that every resolution it passes should act as an accessible guide to the historical and present context and actions of its subject, combining a certain level of detail supported by empirical evidence with prompts for further research by world leaders into the subject's nature;

CONCERNED that the target resolution's cult status as a "symbolic Condemnation of invasion" arises from the poor choice of terms it uses to describe The Black Hawks (TBH) - any organised group of raiders, not just TBH, can be described as "aggressive," unpoliced and overly ban-happy - and in spite of its flagrant inferiority to SC#217, a thorough criticism of the Black Hawks' innumerable horrors;

BEMUSED at SC#52's claims that TBH threatened "the functioning and survival of the Security Council" at the time by fuelling "a cooling effect on free speech and... democracy," which the authoring delegation has admitted is a blanket reference to TBH's general raiding activity, as expanded upon by SC#217;

NOTING, however, that this "cooling effect" could also be implied to include the mere targeting of regions whose WA Delegates supported SC#52, when - regardless of whether this "targeting" ever occurred, and by the admission of some notable Black Hawks of the era - TBH did not invade any region simply because of its stance on the target resolution;

OBSERVING that the Black Hawks of 2011 specialised in small-scale tag raiding (at the time, TBH's record tag run was a mere 16 regions), where only cosmetic changes are applied and natives are seldom banned; while certainly upsetting to regional communities, the practice is often non-destructive and has negligible potential to destroy the SC's innately democratic nature;

RECOGNISING that The Black Hawks' failed self-Commendation of March 2011 alluded to in SC#52 was drafted by Soaring Tikal, an active but minor Black Hawk (later a Lieutenant in TBH and, as Tikal Wolf, the Khan of Lone Wolves United) which had not been told to prepare the draft by their superiors; the hypothesis of an actual "conspiracy" amongst Black Hawks to Commend themselves must be rejected in lieu of any evidence beyond what has been stated here; and

HOPING to dissociate itself from a resolution so lacklustre - and even fictitious at times - that it regularly loses sight of The Black Hawks' true nature in favour of unqualified rhetoric:

HEREBY REPEALS SC#52 "Condemn The Black Hawks."

This is the discussion thread. To cast your vote, go HERE

[Jabberwocky]

This goes against my nature

[Lenlyvit]

Oct 26, 2019 21:01:43 GMT -5 Jabberwocky said:

This goes against my nature

Can you explain your thinking Jabber? This resolution is to repeal a badly written proposal that is seen as a badge of honor by TBH.

[Deleted]

I find some of the language and logic in this repeal to be disingenuous. It's also a bit apologist when it comes to tag raiding, and TBH's actions, in general. I think SC#52 reads pretty well for what it is, and I agree with its stated concerns that regions intimidated by the threat of reprisal from TBH may not have expressed themselves as freely as they would have if that threat wasn't there.

There is absolutely no reason to repeal SC#52, and as such, THX will be voting against.

[Jabberwocky]

Oct 26, 2019 21:09:33 GMT -5 Lenlyvit said:

Oct 26, 2019 21:01:43 GMT -5 Jabberwocky said:

This goes against my nature

Can you explain your thinking Jabber? This resolution is to repeal a badly written proposal that is seen as a badge of honor by TBH.

My initial response is that it's fine to condemn a raider, but you've clarified things. Gracias. 

[United Royal Islands]

On this basis:

OBSERVING that the Black Hawks of 2011 specialised in small-scale tag raiding (at the time, TBH's record tag run was a mere 16 regions), where only cosmetic changes are applied and natives are seldom banned; while certainly upsetting to regional communities, the practice is often non-destructive and has negligible potential to destroy the SC's innately democratic nature;

I am against the repeal. I find the inclusion of a defense of tag raiding in an SC resolution to objectionable in and of itself. While there may be logical reasons to repeal SC 52, “tag raiding isn’t bad” is absolutely not one of them.

[Sargon Reman]

The author of the resolution has a history of failed resolutions. They have passed some but they do have issues with seeing the finer points like this. Namely the plethora of geopolitical complexities with a region this well known.
Due to my prejudice against raiding I could care less whether the original resolution has mistakes. I'm against because invariably if the resolution was repealed someone will just write them a new condemnation and the public would get to watch them have a pig fest over their new toy. I would prefer they didn't have one at all but that isn't realistic.
The authors inclusion of tag raiding in the manner stated is sloppy.

[Marxist Germany]

Pretty much what everyone else said
Against.

[HumanSanity]

I voted DELEGATE'S PREROGATIVE - I find Commend/Condemn [Raider Group] and Repeal "Commend/Condemn [Raider Group]" Resolutions incredibly frustrating to vote on. Obviously, I hate raiders. But also, obviously, it's really hard for me to know what would make little raider hearts happy: is it attention of being condemned? Or will that deter new members for TBH that they have a raider badge? And since the ship already sailed on condemning them, does it just give them even more attention to repeal it, and then probably try to reinstate it?

The "direction arrow" of all these things is difficult to determine, for me. So, I'm defaulting to the delegate's judgement about where it goes in this specific context.

While I'm likely to stick with this vote, I am curious and would like to hear more thought out reasoning from a "FOR" voter, since we seem to have a few of them. I definitely agree with the consensus on the tag raiding provision specifically, but that's a reason to vote Against and not For.

[Hawalius]

Against as well. Repealing it just gives them more drama.

[Vichya Dominion]

For. Frequently repeated raiding and raiding in general may be frowned upon, but it should not be condemned in such a poor manner. The Dominion have not been around during the times of the initial condemnation, but, after getting familiar with the initial SC resolution we discovered it is poorly written and it's nature is explicitly controversial.

This relic of the past has to finally go.