Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 22:41 UTC

Re: Discussion of the Declaration of Unity  

@guzlomi

I have integrated your suggestions into the document. Thank you for the thoughtful rewordings. 

I (along with the team) am now in the process of including the others, too. 

Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 22:42 UTC

@skieswanne

Awesome, and thank you for your volunteer work.

Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 23:07 UTC

@LoreZyra, @Susan & @AdamSpears

While I find a lot of the phrasing a little grand and unnecessary I actually think that @AdamSpears has captured 3 very important things:

1) That the declaration of unity is not a constitutional document and does not (as @LoreZyra correctly points out) need to hold enumerated notations on the structure of society

2) That we actually are attached to this earth and that the ideal has come out of a desire to protect and secure the earth and humankind (I'll leave the discussion of protect from what out of this post)

3) The intent of what the good doctor put into the original document without imposing his own desires onto it.

The wording is somewhat grandiose and a lot of it is taken verbatim from the USA declaration of independence and the Spanish constitution, however @AdamSpears has highlighted rather dramatically that this document is an expression of a peoples desire for unity around 3 main goals (as specified by the good doctor who came up with this initiative and not the likes of you and me) and the desire for statehood in order to enact those goals.

@LoreZyra - just a point on the "protection of earth".  (a) that has always been No.2 on the good doctors list of reasons for creating Asgardia (b) If being "...shackled to our origins for eons to come..." is worrisome then this is the very thing you DON'T want in the constitution. Perhaps the declaration of unity is actually the correct place to state it as it makes it less binding.

Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 23:17 UTC

I personally like to think of the Declaration of Unity as a document for you and me to declare (hence the name) our nature, goals and purpose to others. This means that the Declaration shouldn't be a 50-pages bible, it should be a series of simple and concise points you can tell a friend real quick. 

The Declaration is NOT the Constitution, and I think we should all remember that. 

Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 23:27 UTC

@Yovy: 

At your service! :)

@Everyone: 

To anyone who hasn't commented yet: be sure to express your suggestions for the DoU points. We are here to compile, and you still have 10 days. I want to make sure the voice of the people gets included in the document, as faithfully as possible. 

  Last edited by:  John Skieswanne (Asgardian)  on Apr 5, 17 / Tau 11, 01 23:31 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 00:01 UTC

Indeed! As skieswanne has stated, "The Declaration is NOT the Constitution, and I think we should all remember that."

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 00:11 UTC

@bigred,

On the "protection of earth..." Actually, I strongly believe it should be in neither document (DoU / Constitution)!  It can be vaguely referenced as a service we can perform, but should not be written in stone per se. Currently, the USA serves as a de facto international police (of sorts) to the nations of our planet. However, no where in its Constitution and other founding documents was this explicitly written anywhere... The USA has, however, forged treaties with various nations and given a level of agreed protections in the event of international assaults. The function of the United States was not to become the world police. Likewise, I have no desire to see Asgardia become the military outpost of Earth in Space.

  Last edited by:  Richie Bartlett (Asgardian)  on Apr 7, 17 / Tau 13, 01 00:43 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 00:16 UTC

@vari,

"These kind of documents must ensure all points are covered so in case any injustice or abuse happen this documents are clear enough to point out quick solutions."

The declaration is not a place to define judiciary limitations and rights. This is best reserved for the Constitution and/or Civil Codes.

  Last edited by:  Richie Bartlett (Asgardian)  on Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 00:17 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 06:57 UTC

@ LoreZyra and @ Susana Buono

"Citizens of Earth"

You have both rightly articulated the error in using this. But let me explain my intent and hopefully we can find a simple solution. I do not presume to speak for every human living on Earth and I understand, and its a very good point, that Earth is not a nation or state therefor has no citizens of it. I was attempting to use a term that clearly defined use, Asgardians, as separate from our fellow "homeland" citizens. 

If I understand correctly, we need to identify ourselves as separate form those who do not wish to become citizens of Asgardia in order to declare ourselves, our intentions, and our goals. At which point we can proclaim our declaration and in it our name (what we wish to be called) and all other things that a declaration does. I would be open and interested in any suggestion of a name or a designation to which to define ourselves before a proper declaration. It will have to accurately represent all of us form many countries but separate us from our fellow countryman. 

@LoreZyra

"pursuit of Peace"?

I chose to use Peace for two reason. First, because it is slightly more objective than happiness. Yes, I did emphasize slightly. But I think that we need to attempt to at least clearly write our intentions as objectively as possible as to me understood for generations and unmistaken in our meaning. 

Peace:

  1. freedom from disturbance; quiet and tranquility.
  2. freedom from or the cessation of war or violence.

Happiness:

  1. the state of being happy

And second because it was a primary intent of our founder.

"The essence of Asgardia is Peace in Space "

I also think that a pursuit of peace will always be in conflict with war but I do not think that the inevitable conclusion is continuous war. I think it quite possible to pursue peace without being at or going to war. 

As a side note, I don't for a minute think that we will end war any time soon but I think that the trend of violence throughout human history is in the down ward direction. Humans have become less violent as civilized societies prevail. 

"mankind are more disposed to suffer..." Really?

I think you misunderstand this and I'm glade you pointed it out as I think that our Declaration of Unity needs to be unmistakable. It is important to understand this phrase in context. It is stating that humans are predisposed to suffer than to change the structure at which they are use to. This is speaking of the structures of government specifically and human tendency more generally. Put simply, humans fear change.  Taken in context with the rest of the sentence it is saying that the actions we are taking are not to be made for trivial matters. I think our founder and we do not see it as such. We understand that international law and equal access to space is a human imperative that needs to be secured. 

 "evils are sufferable" ?

RIGHT, again LoreZyra. As bigred has stated and I think many find obvious, that I have innocently plagiarized the United States Declaration of Independence, just a bit. I did this in an attempted to use it more as an architect for our Declaration of Unity and less as an attempt to implant ideas and principals from the United States into Asgardia. I hope it is not perceived as such.  

A better word might be "transgressions". I am open to any word that accurately articulates "bad things to happen" in the context of the document. But this might be a bit too dramatic for our Declaration. 

"the protection of Earth"?

I think bigred has stated well and maybe I can to elaborate on this. 

It has been clearly stated by our founder as an initial if not primary intent of Asgardia.

"The second is to protect planet Earth from space threats"

I did not add "all of humanity" because I think that in the very distant future, when humans are multi planetary, it will be a mistake to attempt to protect all human settlements all over our solar system or, if ever, the galaxy. That would be too taxing on resources, will, and political consensus of means or intent. 

If we were to declare this in the constitution and not in the Declaration of Unity if would deny the document of our intent. Protection of Earth being one of our primary intents. 

"all Citizens of Earth regardless of any and all limitations of their earthly citizenship"

Here, I was attempting to offer the Ministry of Immigration a guideline. Although it seems in error, as you have pointed out. We do not intent, "to ensure equal opportunities in space for all Citizens of Earth regardless of any and all limitations of their earthly citizenship." But rather I think we do wish, "to ensure equal access to space for all humans regardless of any limitations of their earthly citizenship."  I also recognize your point. We do not wish to provide a loophole for people who have been convicted of crimes. 

"to ensure equal access to space for all humans regardless of any limitations."

Might be a better way to word it. But reading this got me thinking.  "any limitations.." What kind of limitations? What limitations are we attempting to circumvent?

This might be a discussion too deep for a forum. Maybe left best to future philosophers.

"based on the birthright of Humanity in the universe..." 

I was attempting to articulate the fact that we all have a fundamental right given at birth to make such a declaration. I think that this may bring up many questions but if we don't get our authority to make this declaration as a right of birth then where do we? 

A better way might be to state "based on the birthright of Humanity..."

"recognized by the United Nations..."

Isn't this what our Declaration is attempting to do? We wish to be recognized by the United Nations and the Nations of the world as "a free and independent Nation"? It can be until we appeal and declare our intentions? That we ought to be "a free and independent Nation", recognized by the United Nations, that this declaration is our statement of autonomy as a self governing body?

I think the key part is "ought to be"

I might add, "and of Right ought to be a Free and Independent Nation, recognized by the United Nations and all other Nations of the World:"

"as Free and Independent States..."

Yes, this was a typo. It should be singular. Although this got me thinking. Are we petitioning to be a Nation- a group of people who share the same culture but do not have sovereignty, or a State- a self-governing political entity? I am mostly concerned about the wording but this has implications for the future of Asgardia and for it's legal authority.

"we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our sacred Honor..."

I have no problem with this being removed or reworked. I left this in as an option as to our current and future dedication. I understand that we intend to be a peaceful entity so this may very well just be removed or state, " we mutually pledge to each other our Honor and our dedication..."

  • Adam Spears
  • Citizen
  • Asgardia


  Last edited by:  Adam Spears (Asgardian)  on Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 07:00 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: Misquote

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 06:58 UTC

(Continued)

"Are we all expected to serve time in the "pursuit of Peace" as warriors in the Asgardian Military?" I think, philosophically we do to some extent. As for the document, your right. A military is not our style. Probably in the future some Defense Force will need to be set up but that is not to say it needs to be by us and we should probably no put anything in our Constitution or our Declaration of Unity that binds us to that end. 

Susana Buono, thank you for making that very honest point. I would ask that you don't discard the entire document I have proposed as it is simply my proposition for a better, more accurate and honest document to which we make our Declaration of Unity. I would hope that it is not written by one person but that many people have input to add and subtract to form as perfect a document as we can. I hope within my proposal I articulated some if not all of what you suggested. 

LoreZyra, Very good points sir. Thank you. You made me rethink and think deeper into those statements I had proposed. 

bigred, Thank you? My intention is not to be grandiose but to be as clear and unmistakable as possible. Providing Asgardia with any and all authority it requires to accomplish its objectives. I did take much of it verbatim from the USA Declaration of Independence and I hope nobody faults me for that. I did so because as far as I know it is one of the best documents to properly do all the things I think Asgardia and its founder wishes to do. It works to be a proper scaffolding to build ones own Declaration. And, Thank you for your kind words.

Thank you all for your input. I appreciate the feedback. Very smart and thoughtful. 

  • Adam Spears
  • Citizen
  • Asgardia

  Last edited by:  Adam Spears (Asgardian)  on Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 07:14 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 07:11 UTC

I hope I have not mislead anyone into thinking that I was attempting to supplement the Declaration of Unity, my written proposed version, as the Constitution. I understand the Declaration of Unity as being a document that articulates who we are, our intentions, what authority we declare to exercise, and (more broadly) what authority we seek to establish. 

The Constitution is, and should be, the document we formulate to pronounce the Rights we perceive as being un breakable, the rules by which the government is structured, the limitations of such government, and guidelines that are used to either elect or appoint its leaders.

As it sits the current Declaration of Unity seems to me more like a "Bill of Rights" and less a letter of Declaration. That is my main criticism and I could be wrong. 

  • Adam Spears
  • Citizen
  • Asgardia

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 08:45 UTC

@AdamSpears,

"As it sits the current Declaration of Unity seems to me more like a "Bill of Rights" and less a letter of Declaration. That is my main criticism and I could be wrong. "

This point, I am in complete agreement with you. So many laymen here have not studied so well to understand the distinctions between the documents such as the USA Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and the Constitution with its Amendments. 

It's great that you have used the USA DoI as a guideline for Asgardia's DoU. I don't believe anyone here is faulting you for that. Others with more experience than myself have certainly proposed doing this for the Constitution as well. But it would bold well on us to peer into the minds of future scholars and understand the implications of our words. 

We should remind ourselves "what is the purpose of a declaration?" It's not unlike stating your name when you first meet someone. It's not the proper place to list all your rules for meeting the person(s) you have declared your identity.

I understand Dr. Igor Ashurbeyli has expressed that Asgardia could protect the (outer-space and / or inner-space?) space around Earth. Unless Asgardia is intended to become a Military installation rather than a Nation, I strongly oppose this as both a declaration and a clause in the Constitution. 

  Last edited by:  Richie Bartlett (Asgardian)  on Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 09:39 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times
Reason: Added clarification.

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 10:38 UTC

@LoreZyra: 

"I understand Dr. Igor Ashurbeyli has expressed that Asgardia could protect the (outer-space and / or inner-space?) space around Earth. Unless Asgardia is intended to become a Military installation rather than a Nation, I strongly oppose this as both a declaration and a clause in the Constitution. "

I agree. However it all depends on what form of "protection" the HoN has in mind. The term has such a wide definition. If he intends to try and participate in national wars which are within Earth's atmosphere, then yes, there's a high chance Asgardia spirals down into a military state. However, he might also merely intend to increase preservation of UNESCO sites. 

We just can't know until a more precise definition of "protection" is provided. However, I have a feeling that the HoN doesn't have military participation with Earthly nations in mind. A clue about this is Point 12 of the DoU. 

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 10:53 UTC

@skieswanne,

Regardless of the form and meaning of "protection," it serves our fledgling State little good. All the forms of protection can be defined outside the Declaration and Constitutions in the form of treaties. I vehemently oppose to writing this "protection" directly into our founding documents.


  Last edited by:  Richie Bartlett (Asgardian)  on Apr 7, 17 / Tau 13, 01 00:43 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 11:10 UTC

Outside of the Declaration, yes. 

Outside of the Constitution? I'm not too sure. Yes, treaties will be the main structure. However, the power of, say, a military, must be limited to avoid infringement upon citizens rights; and to limit the power of the military, then the military must be somewhat defined (or prohibited) in the Constitution. 

However, this is an entirely different topic. 

  Last edited by:  John Skieswanne (Asgardian)  on Apr 6, 17 / Tau 12, 01 11:41 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times