Is creating a World Currency an act of war?

[ItsTime]

Yes or no

Poll is private.

[tremendoustie]

Will people be forced to use the currency? Of course, that's the key question.

[FrankRep]

Countries can choose to use a global currency.
Not an act of war unless we are forced to use one.

[LiveToWin]

If some organization tried to take another groups sovereignty away by the means of a mandatory world currency, then yes. It would be an act of war. Those who this organization tries to take power over would need to decide to submit to the organizations will, or resist.


But Obama said theres no plan for that, so we have nothing to worry about ;)




:D

[Kludge]

Of course not.


(Pretend the US lost veto power) The UN says that Frankiis are the new currency.

The US says "nah" and continues to use the dollar.

Now, if the UN responds by committing an actual act of war against the US after this, then an act of war has been committed.

[LiveToWin]

Of course not.


(Pretend the US lost veto power) The UN says that Frankiis are the new currency.

The US says "nah" and continues to use the dollar.

Now, if the UN responds by committing an actual act of war against the US after this, then an act of war has been committed.

There can be a war without fighting. And yes, if it turned to fighting it would be due to the UN or some else trying to enforce the world currency by force.



As an example, let go back to the 1700's. A british fleet lands in prussia. They put down a flag and say this is british soil now, you will use our money and pay us taxes. The prussians are now technicly at war with the british. There doesnt need to be any fighting though, the war could end without a single shot fired. Prussia can take 1 of 2 actions - submit to the british demands, or resist the british demands (by ignoring their demands: continuing to use their own money, and not pay the taxes). Could turn to fighting if the british try to enforce their demands by force, but its just an example to show there can be war without fighting. A "Cold War" rather than a "Hot War".

[ItsTime]

Nice answers so far

[dannno]

Countries can choose to use a global currency.
Not an act of war unless we are forced to use one.

This. (I still voted yes because the poll didn't specify.. but creating the currency in my mind means enforcing it like the dollar is enforced upon us)

[mediahasyou]

As Kludge pointed out, the more important question is whether this is an act of force. Only time will tell.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

The problem is that if most other major industrial countries accept it, the US will really have no choice. Nothing will be pegged to our dollar anymore, it wont be the currency everyone looks up to and the value will drop considerably. Hopefully if that happens we try to rebuild and make our own currency. But the value of the new world currency im thinking would be worth much more than the dollar at the start.

[micahnelson]

Legal tender laws force us to use the dollar. If the dollar we are forced to use is pegged to an international currency, then we are, in essence, being forced to use the international currency.

I say it is an act of war.

[idiom]

A global currency? You mean like Gold?

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Yes or no

Poll is private.

Yes, a war against individualism. That would be the monopoly over currency, ever think about that? Nomore Forex