whats your view on world government?

[trey4sports]

for,against,dunno?
share your thoughts.

P.S. whatever happened to the liberals on this board?

[James Madison]

They're still celebrating their lord's victory last Tuesday.

[The_Orlonater]

Partying away.

[James Madison]

http://fliiby.com/file/120693/uzgv43x48w.html

[BuddyRey]

I support voluntary global trade, but I vehemently oppose world government.

[RSLudlum]

P.S. whatever happened to the liberals on this board?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt0yG7aW70E


world government??? Why not declare "Universal Government". I think the liberals would love speaking about such a beautiful utopian concept, god knows they love all things 'universal'.

[Patriot123]

Definitely for. The good outweighs the bad by far. The only problem I have is how it would be put together. If you allow it to just somehow come about you're bound to have liberals involved who will turn it into their own socialist utopia with a constitution equal to that of the USSR's which can only lead to trouble. It would have to involve an awful lot checks and balances, an awful lot of scrutiny and a lot of 'failsafes.' As in something along the lines of give the "citizens of the world" the legal responsibility to overthrow the world government in the event that they knowingly and purposely infringe on the constitution made for it. It needs to guarantee the right to keep, use and fire any and all arms, and clearly define that there shall be no infringement on that right - meaning there are going to be rights that people oppose all together. It needs to be better than our own, and it needs to be created by a very specific set of people. The sad part of this is that creating a proper world constitution is near impossible. You have Democracy mob-rule people who would want "fair elections" on the people to be involved in creating it when they know absolutely nothing but socialism and tyranny.

In short, yeah - a world government would be nice. But it's near impossible that the world populace could come up with a decent constitution without debate which would lead to "compromises," or in short roads to tyranny. Lastly, you would never get the entire world to agree to such a thing - specifically religious counties, due to their faith: Iran, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon...

[Kotin]

government as a necessity is a myth.


until we evolve as a race and become our own masters again, we cannot think about world government. because when this happens, money, debt and government will no longer be needed.

[trey4sports]

Definitely for. The good outweighs the bad by far. The only problem I have is how it would be put together. If you allow it to just somehow come about you're bound to have liberals involved who will turn it into their own socialist utopia with a constitution equal to that of the USSR's which can only lead to trouble. It would have to involve an awful lot checks and balances, an awful lot of scrutiny and a lot of 'failsafes.' As in something along the lines of give the "citizens of the world" the legal responsibility to overthrow the world government in the event that they knowingly and purposely infringe on the constitution made for it. It needs to guarantee the right to keep, use and fire any and all arms, and clearly define that there shall be no infringement on that right - meaning there are going to be rights that people oppose all together. It needs to be better than our own, and it needs to be created by a very specific set of people. The sad part of this is that creating a proper world constitution is near impossible. You have Democracy mob-rule people who would want "fair elections" on the people to be involved in creating it when they know absolutely nothing but socialism and tyranny.

In short, yeah - a world government would be nice. But it's near impossible that the world populace could come up with a decent constitution without debate which would lead to "compromises," or in short roads to tyranny. Lastly, you would never get the entire world to agree to such a thing - specifically religious counties, due to their faith: Iran, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon...


quite interesting, I appreciate you sticking to your guns and going against popular thought on the board.

[Kludge]

I support peace, commerce and honest friendship :p

I'm open to a global government (or union of countries), but fear it would lead to interventionism in every conflict afflicting the world (whether man v. man, nature v. man, or nature v. nature).

[ihsv]

Government should be as local as possible. If we think the Federal government is bad, imagine if we had a global government with the same tastes.

Also, absolute power corrupts absolutely. And control over the whole world is as close to absolute power as one can imagine.

[LibertyEagle]

government should be as local as possible. If we think the federal government is bad, imagine if we had a global government with the same tastes.

Also, absolute power corrupts absolutely. And control over the whole world is as close to absolute power as one can imagine.

+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[Conservative Christian]

I'm absolutely opposed to world government.

[hotbrownsauce]

I'm against one world government because there is no guarantee it will always work for people and freedom. Several governments would be there to scare tyrants. So I think several governments would work best.

[DamianTV]

I am absolutely opposed to the idea. Our current idea of having a one world government is based on the "haves" and the "have nots". We screw over third world countries for their resources to make our lifestyles cheap. Thus, this does not fit the idea of every man woman and child on the planet to have rights.

In a one world government, imagine having an Upper Class, and a Lower Class, no in between. Then multiply that by 1.06 x 10^731, or 1.06 followed by seven hundred and thirty one zeros.

[RonPaulNewbee]

It's a very strange day when I agree with a Conservative Christian but I do. Totally opposed to any kind of world government. And I think it is definitely moving in that direction but not how we think it will be. It is going much slower than the conspiracy people say it is, especially when they blame Obama for it when he hasn't even taken office yet.

It is fine to have laws that are in harmony with each other all around the world and I believe it once was: with the Common Law. However, we don't have that in America anymore! So it is OUR COUNTRY that is leading the world in the wrong direction with statute law. For this, and for the Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act, I am ashamed of my country.

My only hope is that Obama will reverse this abomination of justice. The country's election is just now sinking in. I can't believe I have hope again. Just a month ago, I was a goner.

[Andrew-Austin]

We're already ignored by our representitives as it is, in a world government we would have even less representation if thats even possible.

I can't imagine any logial argument favoring global government over local government.



My only hope is that Obama will reverse this abomination of justice. The country's election is just now sinking in. I can't believe I have hope again. Just a month ago, I was a goner.

lol, I'm sorry your going to be disappointed.

[PatriotOne]

I'm absolutely opposed to world government.

Not trying to start yet another religous discussion here but I find it ironic when Christians wants One World Religion (Christianity), but not One World Government.

[JeNNiF00F00]

It would piss me off beyond belief if our laws had to be "verified" by countries on the other side of the world. We already have this issue going on now with other countries raising a stink about California voting in the medical marijuana laws and the cannabis vending machines. It's NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS!

I don't think that a One World Government would be happy friends time.

Just think of FBI run by the entire fucked up world we live in today. Or a global CIA. Who are they going to "CIA" or "FBI" against if they are joined as one???

NO THANKS!

[RonPaulNewbee]

We're already ignored by our representitives as it is, in a world government we would have even less representation if thats even possible.

I can't imagine any logial argument favoring global government over local government.




lol, I'm sorry your going to be disappointed.


I'm just wondering where you get YOU'RE special knowledge of the future. Can I have some of the magic potion YOUR drinking, please?

[Truth Warrior]

Same answer as for the last 200 RPF threads this question was asked. :p :rolleyes:

[Andrew-Austin]

I'm just wondering where you get YOU'RE special knowledge of the future. Can I have some of the magic potion YOUR drinking, please?

Yeah, if I'm typing at work, I usually don't have time to care about grammar/spelling.

And yes I get my information from a crystal ball... When Obama and the blue Congress fail to abolish the Patriot Act and Military Commissions act, its just going to be a lucky guess on my part. It will just be a freak accident when the false media implanted hope in Mr. Change is denied.

[SnappleLlama]

I'm opposed. I don't have much faith that human beings can all get along very well.

[Truth Warrior]

I'm opposed. I don't have much faith that human beings can all get along very well. I think the plan is to just kill the ones that can't. ;)

[literatim]

Should only exist when there are as many colonized planets as there are countries today.

[RonPaulNewbee]

And yes I get my information from a crystal ball... When Obama and the blue Congress fail to abolish the Patriot Act and Military Commissions act, its just going to be a lucky guess on my part. It will just be a freak accident when the false media implanted hope in Mr. Change is denied.

Ah, so you're playing the color card! hahaha! I thought we could get beyond that. Just kidding.:)

[jeepndesert]

for,against,dunno?
share your thoughts.

P.S. whatever happened to the liberals on this board?

it would be ok if it was brought about with legitimate functioning democratic republics and only with proper decentralized securing of rights and checks and balances in place.

it should not be under the cover of the night and by fascist central bankers, eugenics queen beatrix, and global corporations who already own the world and want to destroy 90% of the world's population. otherwise, it is a nightmare because another nation can't get serious and use their sovereign government to tear down the central banker's new world order before the central bankers nuke us all with neutron bombs.

and as the other poster suggested with an equivalent number of other planets to run to or call for help in case the crap hits the fan.

[lucius]

This is your NWO:

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--forever." George Orwell

Orwell was an insider who was privy to long-range elite planning: whistle-blowing through fiction.

Outrageous? Keep reading/researching...look to Scientific Dictatorships:

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/1419639323.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_V63023801_.jpg

The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century (ISBN: 1419639323)

A review: Social Engineering and Technocratic Elite, October 24, 2006 By Terry Melanson

Many of us are familiar with U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower's farewell speech to the nation on January 17, 1961, in which he warned the American public to "guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence" of the "military-industrial complex." A less known quote from the same speech sets the tone for the Collins brothers' incredibly erudite tome: "... we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

This book discloses exactly who these technological elite (technocrats) are; that they've been working behind the scenes for centuries, and public policy has indeed become its captive. Its aspiration has always been the implementation of a sociopolitical, technocratic utopian world order.

The breadth and scope of Philip and Paul Collins' massive study is nothing short of dazzling. "The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship" is a meticulous examination of a shared ideological construct centuries in the making. This elite circle of technocrats hasn't simply carried forth a unified grand master plan, however; the Collins brothers stress the fact that what we are dealing with is a "conspiracy of ideas," whose adherents have developed into a powerful "epistemological cartel."

Reading "The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship" is to embark on an intellectual journey of the highest order. The Collins brothers effortlessly discuss a wide range of philosophical concepts, all of which are integral to understanding the thinking and development of those behind the formation of a would-be technocracy. There simply isn't any other book that is even in the same league. "The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship" penetrates the core concepts of Gnosticism, Rosicrucian mythos, Baconian utopianism, Freemasonry and the Royal Society of London; from Darwinism to scientism, population control, eugenics and Malthusian propaganda; Jung, Hegel, Wells and Huxley; Fabian socialism, world government, evolutionary pantheism, and the deification of man. The reader is privy to the fact that there is genuine continuity between Illuminism, Jacobinism, Socialism, and Marxism; that the dialectical manipulation of society is symptomatic of "the Hegelian nexus where Darwin, Marx, and Hitler intersect." The Collins brothers are equally at ease with diverse concepts such as Bentham's Panopticon, sociocracy, semiotic manipulation, "sci-fi predictive programming," transhumanism and the techno-eugenic movement - and the implications thereof. Other books that have attempted only a fraction of what is discussed in this book seem haphazard in comparison.

I highly doubt it is even possible to convey the scope of the book in a simple review: with the range of topics discussed, along with judicious quotations from a dizzying array of sources - the breadth of "The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship" is simply mind-numbing. This book is the definitive statement identifying the significance behind the political concept of a New World Order. "Worth its weight in gold" really does apply in this case - and, of course, as is customary with such scholarly endeavors, the bibliography is worth the price alone.

[SnappleLlama]

i think the plan is to just kill the ones that can't. ;)

lol!! :d

[TER]

Not trying to start yet another religous discussion here but I find it ironic when Christians wants One World Religion (Christianity), but not One World Government.

The teachings of Christ never once suggests that Christianity will be the "One World Religion". In fact, the opposite. A Christian is an outcast in the world and is shunned by the world. This is why there have more people killed for their Christian beliefs than for any other religious belief since Christ walked the earth.

As for One World Government, the Holy Scriptures explicitly say that it will happen and most experts in the field of the social sciences agree.

[Tatsit]

Now, I am not apposed to a one world government, however I am apposed to what the neo-cons and elites have planned for a one world government.

I am afraid that their push for their new world order will push us into a new civil war - and / or the third world war. Russia is already pissed about the missile shield and likely to fight with Iran should US invade.

We shall see.

Tatsit
It's Our Freedom (http://www.itsourfreedom.com)

[yongrel]

Meh.

[Conza88]

What's your view on global tyranny? :rolleyes:

[JeNNiF00F00]

Now, I am not apposed to a one world government, however I am apposed to what the neo-cons and elites have planned for a one world government.

I am afraid that their push for their new world order will push us into a new civil war - and / or the third world war. Russia is already pissed about the missile shield and likely to fight with Iran should US invade.

We shall see.

Tatsit
It's Our Freedom (http://www.itsourfreedom.com)

Your so called elites include Obama as well.

[Paulitician]

Well, I don't think it's something to be paranoid about (I.E. Alex Jones). Obviously it would be horrible if it got out of hand, but how is that different from any other government? So, thinking about it, it's a logical progression of the systems and political structures that are currently in place. So, I'm not really concerned about it either way. What I would support is more voluntarism and less coercion.

[JeNNiF00F00]

As for governments getting out of hand, just look at ours. We have a very large government and it is out of control because of its size and power to do what it pleases.

We just elected a president to be who has not/cannot prove that he is a natural born citizen and is currently being sued for a birth certificate, we are starting wars in middle eastern countries, our government went against the peoples pleas and unconstitutionally bailed out financial institutions at the expense of the tax payers, our government has created a massive amount of debt so high that the national debt clock broke...Meanwhile our boarders are wide open(because they are protecting the ones in the middle east), and we have south american gangs coming into the country and beheading Americans over drugs and prostitution. So yeah.....NWO sounds great because the huge overbearing government that we have voted for is obviously not enough, and we need someone from the China or Russia to step in because they are obviously better acquainted with controlling the people and keeping things controlled and in order. :rolleyes:

[Tatsit]

Your so called elites include Obama as well.


Ya, I didnt want to mention any names ;)

[A. Havnes]

I'm opposed to any type of world government. Even if it starts out okay, somewhere down the line it'll become just as corrupt as any other form of government. It's easier to rise up against something when it's local than when it spans across the globe.

[Tenbatsu]

The mechanisms fueling and running the European Union should be more than enough proof to show that the brand of world government being pushed should and must be avoided at all costs.

If global government succeeds you will have handed over your sovereignty, your rights, and your freedom to a handful of ultra powerful elites. The end result will be catastrophic for the people of the world.

[heavenlyboy34]

[quote=Kotin;1821488]government as a necessity is a myth.
QFT!!

[Original_Intent]

I support it as long as I get to be the dictator.

[jeepndesert]

What's your view on global tyranny? :rolleyes:


this is why it is dangerous. nowhere to run and hide. harder to bring down tyranny.

we really should have fixed this problem before nukes.

it is a good argument for the community-based and confederate governments like the confederacy of the iroqois, what we tried to do in the united states thanks to the intellect of ben franklin.

[jeepndesert]

I support it as long as I get to be the dictator.

you better hurry. the rothschild have 2 centuries of wealth and power on you.

[heavenlyboy34]

It would piss me off beyond belief if our laws had to be "verified" by countries on the other side of the world. We already have this issue going on now with other countries raising a stink about California voting in the medical marijuana laws and the cannabis vending machines. It's NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS!

I don't think that a One World Government would be happy friends time.

Just think of FBI run by the entire fucked up world we live in today. Or a global CIA. Who are they going to "CIA" or "FBI" against if they are joined as one???

NO THANKS!

OMFG!!!:eek: :(:mad:

[Freedom 4 all]

for,against,dunno?
share your thoughts.

P.S. whatever happened to the liberals on this board?

I'm one of the most liberal guys on this board and I would never vote for globalism, although if I absolutely had to choose I'd rather Canada joins the US than the EU, as our current "conservative" PM seems to want to.

[mediahasyou]

P.S. whatever happened to the liberals on this board?
http://blogs.chron.com/txpotomac/Mission-accomplished.jpg

[JeNNiF00F00]

I'm one of the most liberal guys on this board and I would never vote for globalism, although if I absolutely had to choose I'd rather Canada joins the US than the EU, as our current "conservative" PM seems to want to.

Thats the goal of these jackasses running everything. To ease people somewhat into the situation of world government they will create the American Union, European Union, African Union and so on. After people get used to all of these unions they will then take all of the unions of the world and combine them as one. By this time, no one will have a say so if they even care, and it will be too late.

[Conservative Christian]

Orwell was an insider who was privy to long-range elite planning: whistle-blowing through fiction.

^That's true.

Orwell was a prominent member of the Fabian Socialist Society, who was intimately familiar with their goals and plans, and knew founders Sidney and Beatrice Webb personally.

For largely unknown reasons, he broke with the Fabians, and wrote 1984 and Animal Farm to expose them. He thinly "disguised" the books as "fiction", because if he would've come out publicly with direct written and verbal attacks on the Fabians, he would've been rather promptly "eliminated".

[Conservative Christian]

Not trying to start yet another religous discussion here but I find it ironic when Christians wants One World Religion (Christianity), but not One World Government.

You're not too bright.

The overwhelming majority of Christians do NOT want a "One World Religion" through GOVERNANCE. Men must come to Christ FREELY and of their own accord.

I ABSOLUTELY support religious freedom for ALL non-Christians.

And please don't bore me with mindless blather about the Spanish Inquisition and other crimes of the New World Order-infiltrated Catholic Church hierarchy. Which has NEVER represented a rock-ribbed Protestant like myself.