The end of a full learning experience
16 de abril de 2021, Virginia Ochaíta
Today was the last day to debate about the protection of ethnic minorities and their cultural and linguistic heritage. There was not much time, but our delegates worked very hard. And, as impossible as it looked, they created for the first time a mutual resolution which was sponsored by: Kingdom of Norway, French Republic, Federal Republic of Germany and United Arabian Emirates.
The principal points of this resolution were:
The creation of an Ethnic Minorities Commission as a subsidiary organ of SOCHUM that would try to send immigrant population with a minority background, among different nations of their choice, when possible, to favor the integration of these minorities in the same society. This new institution will be financed by all member states with ethnic minorities, which will pay a specific tax regarding their GPA per capita. Among others, highlight that this resolution also recognizes the right of every nation to consider their national security and sovereignty as prior to the measures stated on this resolution.
After discussing the different clauses, our delegates proceeded to vote, with 13 delegates of 17 in favor, this resolution passed as a reflection of a good job and cooperation between the countries.
Unfortunately, with this one, the topics to discuss finished… But this experience didn’t reach to the end yet, the chairs wanted to recognize the good job of the delegates giving them some awards before starting with the real fun, the gossips and punishments.
Because, here in URJC MUN, our delegates debate and work really hard but the fun is always present.
The principal points of this resolution were:
The creation of an Ethnic Minorities Commission as a subsidiary organ of SOCHUM that would try to send immigrant population with a minority background, among different nations of their choice, when possible, to favor the integration of these minorities in the same society. This new institution will be financed by all member states with ethnic minorities, which will pay a specific tax regarding their GPA per capita. Among others, highlight that this resolution also recognizes the right of every nation to consider their national security and sovereignty as prior to the measures stated on this resolution.
After discussing the different clauses, our delegates proceeded to vote, with 13 delegates of 17 in favor, this resolution passed as a reflection of a good job and cooperation between the countries.
Unfortunately, with this one, the topics to discuss finished… But this experience didn’t reach to the end yet, the chairs wanted to recognize the good job of the delegates giving them some awards before starting with the real fun, the gossips and punishments.
Because, here in URJC MUN, our delegates debate and work really hard but the fun is always present.
A finished agreement gives the opportunity to discuss the protection of ethnic minorities
15 de abril de 2021, Virginia Ochaíta
The committee of SOCHUM began the day with the delegates voting about the resolutions that took place the day before. Finally, the one proposed by France, United States of America and Norway won by a landslide, concretely twelve against six delegates voted in favor of their ideas: classify this problem as an international one, create a commission with an expert to regulate the information and increase the founding of global education among others.
After concluding Topic A, “The role of Mass Media”, our delegates started to discuss the second topic: “Protection of ethnic minorities and their cultural and linguistic heritage”.
According to Norway’s delegate, the definition of ethnic minorities has to be clear before starting the debate; these are groups of population who have different cultures compared with the main one. Once this concept was clear, the countries started to show their points of view and for the first time, all the countries seemed to share the same goals for their nation: protect, support and integrate these societies. Because as it is stated in human rights: “Every citizen should be treated as equals no matter their race or culture.”
With the opening arguments, we clearly see a big conflict while talking about the cultural heritage. Some countries, especially India, blamed nations like France or Italy for taking their culture away from them, this delegate defended the idea of them being forced to follow a culture that wasn’t theirs. These countries, punished by colonialism, demanded to have their culture back. France didn’t see this as part of the topic so they wanted to keep attention in the minorities and quit talking about the past.
The biggest conflict of interest today was how to treat this conflict, whether nationally or internationally. On one hand, Mexico thinks that European countries which are more developed should help the others who have fewer resources for them to be able to try to fix this problem using the money to invest on education programs and regulate the immigration. But, on the other hand, some European countries like Norway think that they are already helping them, they assure that countries like Mexico are oppressing their own minority citizens instead of using the resources.
Highlight some measures like regulating the vocabulary in mass media or including the languages of these minorities in the school plans, proposed by Italy. However, these measures didn’t have as much support as the one proposed by the United Arab Emirates: Adding a person of each minority to express themselves in the congress. (This ideas was supported by Norway and Germany).
To conclude, say that the delegates haven’t got any resolution yet; hopefully they will get a solution by tomorrow.
After concluding Topic A, “The role of Mass Media”, our delegates started to discuss the second topic: “Protection of ethnic minorities and their cultural and linguistic heritage”.
According to Norway’s delegate, the definition of ethnic minorities has to be clear before starting the debate; these are groups of population who have different cultures compared with the main one. Once this concept was clear, the countries started to show their points of view and for the first time, all the countries seemed to share the same goals for their nation: protect, support and integrate these societies. Because as it is stated in human rights: “Every citizen should be treated as equals no matter their race or culture.”
With the opening arguments, we clearly see a big conflict while talking about the cultural heritage. Some countries, especially India, blamed nations like France or Italy for taking their culture away from them, this delegate defended the idea of them being forced to follow a culture that wasn’t theirs. These countries, punished by colonialism, demanded to have their culture back. France didn’t see this as part of the topic so they wanted to keep attention in the minorities and quit talking about the past.
The biggest conflict of interest today was how to treat this conflict, whether nationally or internationally. On one hand, Mexico thinks that European countries which are more developed should help the others who have fewer resources for them to be able to try to fix this problem using the money to invest on education programs and regulate the immigration. But, on the other hand, some European countries like Norway think that they are already helping them, they assure that countries like Mexico are oppressing their own minority citizens instead of using the resources.
Highlight some measures like regulating the vocabulary in mass media or including the languages of these minorities in the school plans, proposed by Italy. However, these measures didn’t have as much support as the one proposed by the United Arab Emirates: Adding a person of each minority to express themselves in the congress. (This ideas was supported by Norway and Germany).
To conclude, say that the delegates haven’t got any resolution yet; hopefully they will get a solution by tomorrow.
The creation of a third commission to control the information.
14 de abril de 2021, Virginia Ochaíta
In today’s debate, the delegate of Norway proposed to find a concrete measure to correct these problems instead of continuing talking about the same facts over and over, they proposed some ideas like creating an educational program or a commission to regulate the information.
With this proposition, we can see how some countries started to support their ideas, the most supportive for them has been The United States of America, they continued with Norway’s idea of creating a commission, they proposed to call it: “The Third Part Commission”. This commission is basically formed by an expert who has to be elected by the government and the citizens. These common ideas let us see a very interesting friendship between Norway and USA, but this peace doesn’t last long because, The United Arabian Emirates expressed their disagreement.
After this conflict of interest, the different countries kept expressing their opinions and the group between Norway and The United States of America, gets bigger because some countries like Denmark, Mexico or France joined them to support their ideas.
On the other hand, The United Arabian Emirates also grows, countries like Turkey shows their support, entering the game in a very strong way: confronting the USA’s idea to get a new commission, they don’t think that doing it is necessary, because their people already voted for the government so they should already trust them. Russia also shows their disagreement to this commission, which by Norway is a symbol of their fear to people in the country finding out all the secrets that they kept from them.
According to this topic, the idea of protecting journalism came up, France is against punishing them in an extreme way like prison for sharing real information, information that the governments don’t want to share. Turkey responses and according to France for the first time, says that the only journalists who have to be punished are the ones who doesn’t share the information objectively.
Moving on, Denmark put forward the idea of every country being selfish, they accused them of caring only about their own nations, and in their opinion, a problem like fake news is an international problem, it can’t be taken personal. By the way, this idea was one of the principal points that the group formed by USA, France and Norway expressed on their resolution, in addition to other points like create and expert to regulate the internet, some educational, and increase the founding global education.
Contradicting these ideas, the other resolution was created by Turkey, Russia and The United Arabian Emirates with the principal idea of the creation of national legislation to regulate the access to information that the citizens have.
Clearly, we see how for one group this is a national issue but for the other it is obviously internationally. Once again, our delegates didn’t get a conclusion yet but they are working very hard to get it, so hopefully we will have a result by tomorrow.
With this proposition, we can see how some countries started to support their ideas, the most supportive for them has been The United States of America, they continued with Norway’s idea of creating a commission, they proposed to call it: “The Third Part Commission”. This commission is basically formed by an expert who has to be elected by the government and the citizens. These common ideas let us see a very interesting friendship between Norway and USA, but this peace doesn’t last long because, The United Arabian Emirates expressed their disagreement.
After this conflict of interest, the different countries kept expressing their opinions and the group between Norway and The United States of America, gets bigger because some countries like Denmark, Mexico or France joined them to support their ideas.
On the other hand, The United Arabian Emirates also grows, countries like Turkey shows their support, entering the game in a very strong way: confronting the USA’s idea to get a new commission, they don’t think that doing it is necessary, because their people already voted for the government so they should already trust them. Russia also shows their disagreement to this commission, which by Norway is a symbol of their fear to people in the country finding out all the secrets that they kept from them.
According to this topic, the idea of protecting journalism came up, France is against punishing them in an extreme way like prison for sharing real information, information that the governments don’t want to share. Turkey responses and according to France for the first time, says that the only journalists who have to be punished are the ones who doesn’t share the information objectively.
Moving on, Denmark put forward the idea of every country being selfish, they accused them of caring only about their own nations, and in their opinion, a problem like fake news is an international problem, it can’t be taken personal. By the way, this idea was one of the principal points that the group formed by USA, France and Norway expressed on their resolution, in addition to other points like create and expert to regulate the internet, some educational, and increase the founding global education.
Contradicting these ideas, the other resolution was created by Turkey, Russia and The United Arabian Emirates with the principal idea of the creation of national legislation to regulate the access to information that the citizens have.
Clearly, we see how for one group this is a national issue but for the other it is obviously internationally. Once again, our delegates didn’t get a conclusion yet but they are working very hard to get it, so hopefully we will have a result by tomorrow.
THE ROLE OF MASS MEDIA:OBJECTIVITY AND INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION
13 de abril de 2021, Virginia Ochaíta
The importance about the control of fake news in our actual world.
This commite starts with a brief debate about the fact of adding pineapple to the pizza, to warm up the cold winter air, before starting to debate the real topic: The role of mass media: objectivity and influence on public opinión.
As normal in a debate, there were many opinions, but they all agree in one thingh: The importance of the fake news and the how to control them.
Here we find two very differents sides: Some countries think that there has to be a total control about what people public or not public on the internet, like: North Korea, Arab Emirates, Cuba, India…
For example, North Korea let us know how important and dangerous the information is for their country, and how the goverment works to keep the reality instead of fake news, contrasting the information and news before they get to the people.
Arab Emirates is very confident in the fact that the fake news hurts their culture and population and that is why they agree to control the information that goes out.
While on the other hand, there are countries like The United States of America, Italy or France, who agrees with the importance of fake news but not with the control of the population, they believe in the freedom and will only punish the contents that violete human rights.
After debating different motions, they chose to talk about “The role of private interest”, here we start to see a little of conflict between our delegates; America attacks countries like Russia and norway, saying that their politics are the only ones that are not working.
Besides this conflict stand out some little battles between countries like United States of America and United Arab Emirates which finishes with mexico asking them to “chill out”.
After this interesting topic, the delegates voted to continue with the theme of “Should there be limitations to freedom of speech in mass media”.
In this motion, we have seen a war beetween Norway and North Korea, Norway confirms the idea of North korea opressing their people: “There are people which doesn’t even know what is outside of North Korea, of couse you don’t have freedom of speach”, North korea anwsers saying that there are not many difference between them.
I highlight how India believes that the idea of not having limitations, will only increase the fake news. United Arab Emirates emphasizes in the idea that adding these limitations will only protect the words population.
To conclude, say that there has not been any agreement between the two sides that were identified yet, but there has been advances so hopefully at the end of the week we will have a final conclusion.
This commite starts with a brief debate about the fact of adding pineapple to the pizza, to warm up the cold winter air, before starting to debate the real topic: The role of mass media: objectivity and influence on public opinión.
As normal in a debate, there were many opinions, but they all agree in one thingh: The importance of the fake news and the how to control them.
Here we find two very differents sides: Some countries think that there has to be a total control about what people public or not public on the internet, like: North Korea, Arab Emirates, Cuba, India…
For example, North Korea let us know how important and dangerous the information is for their country, and how the goverment works to keep the reality instead of fake news, contrasting the information and news before they get to the people.
Arab Emirates is very confident in the fact that the fake news hurts their culture and population and that is why they agree to control the information that goes out.
While on the other hand, there are countries like The United States of America, Italy or France, who agrees with the importance of fake news but not with the control of the population, they believe in the freedom and will only punish the contents that violete human rights.
After debating different motions, they chose to talk about “The role of private interest”, here we start to see a little of conflict between our delegates; America attacks countries like Russia and norway, saying that their politics are the only ones that are not working.
Besides this conflict stand out some little battles between countries like United States of America and United Arab Emirates which finishes with mexico asking them to “chill out”.
After this interesting topic, the delegates voted to continue with the theme of “Should there be limitations to freedom of speech in mass media”.
In this motion, we have seen a war beetween Norway and North Korea, Norway confirms the idea of North korea opressing their people: “There are people which doesn’t even know what is outside of North Korea, of couse you don’t have freedom of speach”, North korea anwsers saying that there are not many difference between them.
I highlight how India believes that the idea of not having limitations, will only increase the fake news. United Arab Emirates emphasizes in the idea that adding these limitations will only protect the words population.
To conclude, say that there has not been any agreement between the two sides that were identified yet, but there has been advances so hopefully at the end of the week we will have a final conclusion.
