The benefits of World Government, World Citizenship

[icon57]

A coworker recently told me I was wasting my time supporting Ron Paul and his antiglobalist campaign. He said a World Government was inevitable and Ron is about 40 years too late in trying to stop it. We had a pretty heated argument with him trying to convince me of the benefits of World Citizenship and that I was clinging to old ideas of nationalism. He said once people realize the benefits of an International Union they will accept and even embrace it. He claimed all world citizens be able to relocate wherever they wish without immigration hassles. Each and every world citizen will have all their health care and retirement expenses covered for life. People would have the opportunity to experience exotic cultures and be given equal consideration for job opportunies in their region of choice. Blah blah blah...
The World Government would consist of the weathiest participant nations at first, to include Western Europe, Australia, USA, Canada and Japan. This will eventually spread to include all countries. I told him it was a dumb idea and the ones who benefit are the Int'l bankers and multinational companies. Wages would decrease. The people would be insanely taxed and have little control if any over such a governing body. He said it would operate like the UN but better and more efficient. What a joke.

[ChickenHawk]

Steal his car keys on election day. That is about all you can do with that one.

[FreeTraveler]

Steal his car keys on election day. That is about all you can do with that one.

+1 - Now I have to start a list of the sets of car keys I have to steal the day of the election. :D

[noxagol]

+1 - Now I have to start a list of the sets of car keys I have to steal the day of the election. :D

Or slash tires.

[Goldwater Conservative]

Would this utopian wet dream of his be a democracy? If so, get ready to have your vote be one in 7.5 billion. Government would be run out of a place thousands of miles away and without being in touch with local concerns (all politics, real estate, etc. is local... always will be until we can shed our earthly bodies). Brace yourself for even more special interests, corporatism, and political dynasties that control the "reality" we perceive and the "truths" we believe.

Frankly, the suggestion is just too stupid and out there to be worth delving into any deeper. The burden of proof should really be on the person making these claims that have no basis in rational cultural, economic, or political thought.

[Dave Pedersen]

The globalists are a consortium of death. They would reduce the world population to about 500 million and most of those remaining would be degraded to the status of cattle fit only to slave and serve as organ donors and laboratory animals for the elitists.

See Alex Jone's Endgame if you don't believe me. He documents these assertions from their own statements.

A one world government could conceivably be a utopia but who will ensure good willed people are stationed at the top? If we can learn anything from the history of humankind it is that most of those in positions of power are self-serving. Look at our own congress and tell me if you would want them in total control of humanity.

One world government would be a total nightmare. Even today China harvests organs from prisoners and sells babies on the black market to the highest bidder for the purposes of biologic experimentation. People with unchecked power become absolute monsters 99 times out of 100.

Global government is an evil beast which if loosed can only accomplish unfettered destruction. A beast far less merciful than any wild creature of forest or jungle it like the humans who steer it will degrade into a mindless body forever drunk on the blood and anguish of the powerless. Given today's technology once in place this unholy institution of carnage would be nearly impossible to destroy. Remember the Roman games. People have NOT changed.

[ItsTime]

I found a down side of a world government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler

Is that what he was trying to do?

Now replace the hatred of Jews for Muslims and we have what we are doing today

[Fox McCloud]

The globalists are a consortium of death. They would reduce the world population to about 500 million and most of those remaining would be degraded to the status of cattle fit only to slave and serve as organ donors and laboratory animals for the elitists.

See Alex Jone's Endgame if you don't believe me. He documents these assertions from their own statements.

A one world government could conceivably be a utopia but who will ensure good willed people are stationed at the top? If we can learn anything from the history of humankind it is that most of those in positions of power are self-serving. Look at our own congress and tell me if you would want them in total control of humanity.

One world government would be a total nightmare. Even today China harvests organs from prisoners and sells babies on the black market to the highest bidder for the purposes of biologic experimentation. People with unchecked power become absolute monsters 99 times out of 100.

Global government is an evil beast which if loosed can only accomplish unfettered destruction. A beast far less merciful than any wild creature of forest or jungle it like the humans who steer it will degrade into a mindless body forever drunk on the blood and anguish of the powerless. Given today's technology once in place this unholy institution of carnage would be nearly impossible to destroy. Remember the Roman games. People have NOT changed.

Well said and well stated!

Few people want to talk about it, but Revelation is quite poignant when it comes to prophecy; it mentions one world government and so on....and ultimately, I agree, it will be impossible to destroy (by we as people and humans); it'll take an act of God to destroy the darn thing (and the Bible pretty much states this in Revelation).

[Cjays]

We won't need a united world until we have a common enemy, you know, when the aliens attack. :p

[ChickenHawk]

We won't need a united world until we have a common enemy, you know, when the aliens attack. :p


I think they already have.

[Channing]

I would suggest to him that he inform himself about the EU and how democratic it is (not) and how much the people in Europe like it.

[Kapt Nemo]

The globalists are a consortium of death. They would reduce the world population to about 500 million and most of those remaining would be degraded to the status of cattle fit only to slave and serve as organ donors and laboratory animals for the elitists.

See Alex Jone's Endgame if you don't believe me. He documents these assertions from their own statements.

A one world government could conceivably be a utopia but who will ensure good willed people are stationed at the top? If we can learn anything from the history of humankind it is that most of those in positions of power are self-serving. Look at our own congress and tell me if you would want them in total control of humanity.

One world government would be a total nightmare. Even today China harvests organs from prisoners and sells babies on the black market to the highest bidder for the purposes of biologic experimentation. People with unchecked power become absolute monsters 99 times out of 100.

Global government is an evil beast which if loosed can only accomplish unfettered destruction. A beast far less merciful than any wild creature of forest or jungle it like the humans who steer it will degrade into a mindless body forever drunk on the blood and anguish of the powerless. Given today's technology once in place this unholy institution of carnage would be nearly impossible to destroy. Remember the Roman games. People have NOT changed.

http://www.fossilizedcustoms.com/guidestone.jpg


THE MESSAGE OF THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.

[noxagol]

who erected those stones? I tink they should be the first to be made to work towards tat population limit if you get my drift...

[Lexx78]

the ones who would benefit that the the most are the bankers again (the people at the top of chaos creation the last 300 years) even more pore people who will lend fiat fraud money.

you really think they CARE about you?

[benhaskins]

this is from wikipedia

Anti-globalization (mundialism)
Main articles: Anti-globalization and Mundialization
This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
This section has been tagged since June 2007.

Critiques of the current wave of economic globalization typically look at both the damage to the planet, in terms of the perceived unsustainable harm done to the biosphere, as well as the perceived human costs, such as increased poverty, inequality, injustice and the erosion of traditional culture which, the critics contend, all occur as a result of the economic transformations related to globalization. They challenge directly the metrics, such as GDP, used to measure progress promulgated by institutions such as the World Bank, and look to other measures, such as the Happy Planet Index,[21] created by the New Economics Foundation[22]. They point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequences--social disintegration, a breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"[23] which they claim are the unintended but very real consequences of globalization.

The critics of globalization typically emphasize that globalization is a process that is mediated according to corporate interests, and typically raise the possibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they believe address the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way.[24]

The movement is very broad, including church groups, national liberation factions, peasant unionists, intellectuals, artists, protectionists, anarchists, those in support of relocalization and others. Some are reformist, (arguing for a more humane form of capitalism) while others are more revolutionary (arguing for what they believe is a more humane system than capitalism) and others are reactionary, believing globalization destroys national industry and jobs.

One of the key points made by critics of recent economic globalization is that income inequality, both between and within nations, is increasing as a result of these processes. One article from 2001 found that significantly, in 7 out of 8 metrics, income inequality has increased in the twenty years ending 2001. Also, "incomes in the lower deciles of world income distribution have probably fallen absolutely since the 1980s". Furthermore, the World Bank's figures on absolute poverty were challenged. The article was skeptical of the World Bank's claim that the number of people living on less than $1 a day has held steady at 1.2 billion from 1987 to 1998, because of biased methodology.[25]

A chart that gave the inequality a very visible and comprehensible form, the so-called 'champagne glass' effect[26] , was contained in the 1992 United Nations Development Program Report, which showed the distribution of global income to be very uneven, with the richest 20% of the world's population controlling 82.7% of the world's income.[27]

Distribution of world GDP, 1989 Quintile of Population Income
Richest 20% 82.7%
Second 20% 11.7%
Third 20% 2.3%
Fourth 20% 1.4%
Poorest 20% 1.2%

SOURCE: United Nations Development Program. 1992 Human Development Report[28]

Most importantly, critics of recent economic globalization see that these developments are not at all occurring in a vacuum, but feed into ethnic, religious, and factional tensions that lead to wars and help breed terrorism. Furthermore, these terrorists, now globally interconnected and empowered with knowledge, create a whole new category of warfare based, in part, on the disruption of the interconnections which are both created by and necessary for globalization. [29] Some commentators believe the nation-state is ill-equipped to deal with this emergent threat.[30]

In terms of the controversial global migration issue, disputes revolve around both its causes, whether and to what extent it is voluntary or involuntary, necessary or unnecessary; and its effects, whether beneficial, or socially and environmentally costly. Proponents tend to see migration simply as a process whereby white and blue collar workers may go from one country to another to provide their services, while critics tend to emphasize negative causes such as economic, political, and environmental insecurity, and cite as one notable effect, the link between migration and the enormous growth of urban slums in developing countries. According to "The Challenge of Slums," a 2003 UN-Habitat report, "the cyclical nature of capitalism, increased demand for skilled versus unskilled labour, and the negative effects of globalization — in particular, global economic booms and busts that ratchet up inequality and distribute new wealth unevenly — contribute to the enormous growth of slums."[31]

Various aspects of globalization are seen as harmful by public-interest activists as well as strong state nationalists. This movement has no unified name. "Anti-globalization" is the media's preferred term; it can lead to some confusion, as activists typically oppose certain aspects or forms of globalization, not globalization per se. Activists themselves, for example Noam Chomsky, have said that this name is meaningless as the aim of the movement is to globalize justice.[32] Indeed, the global justice movement is a common name. Many activists also unite under the slogan "another world is possible", which has given rise to names such as altermondialisme in French.

There are a wide variety of types of "anti-globalization". In general, critics claim that the results of globalization have not been what was predicted when the attempt to increase free trade began, and that many institutions involved in the system of globalization have not taken the interests of poorer nations, the working class, and the natural environment into account. One of the proposed solutions to the uncontrolled environmental damage created by global econmic expansion is to set prices for that environmental damage done to the biosphere, so that the economy 'sees' the price signals from the environment, and begins to internalize the value of the environment. [33] The present global economic system, critics of globalization would note, does not price the damage (e.g., pollution) done to limited environmental resources making those resources, in effect, free.[33] Economic theory, however, holds that items of economic utility and in limited supply should be priced in order to be used efficiently by the market.[34] Presently, the two proposals for sending these price signals to the economy are a 'Carbon Tax', proposed by in the U.S. by Al Gore, and a 'Cap and Trade' system, as has been create in the European Union.

Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.[35]

Americanization related to a period of high political American clout and of significant growth of America's shops, markets and object being brought into other countries. So globalisation, a much more diversified phenomenon, relates to a multilateral political world and to the increase of objects, markets and so on into each others contries.

Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as the promotion of corporatist interests.[36] They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of corporate entities shapes the political policy of countries.[37] [38]

Some anti-globalization groups argue that globalization is necessarily imperialistic; it can therefore be said that "globalization" is another term for a form of Americanization, as it is believed by some observers that the United States could be one of the few countries (if not the only one) to truly profit from globalization.[citation needed]

Some argue that globalization imposes credit-based economics, resulting in unsustainable growth of debt and debt crises. [38]

The world increasingly is confronted with problems that cannot be solved by individual nation-states acting alone. Examples include over-fishing of the oceans, water pollution, global warming, global trade, and international terrorist networks . Solutions to these problems necessitate new forms of cooperation and the creation of new global institutions. Since the end of WWII, following the advent of the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions, there has been an explosion in the reach and power of multinational corporations and the rapid growth of global civil society.[39]

The financial crises in Southeast Asia that began in 1997 in the relatively small, debt-ridden economy of Thailand but quickly spread to the economies of South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong, the Philippines and eventually were felt all around the world [40], demonstrated the new risks and volatility in rapidly changing globalized markets[citation needed]. The IMF's subsequent 'bailout' money came with conditions of political change (i.e. government spending limits) attached and came to be viewed by critics as undermining national sovereignty in neo-colonialist fashion[citation needed]. Anti-Globalization activists pointed to the meltdowns as proof of the high human cost of the indiscriminate global economy.[citation needed]

Many global institutions that have a strong international influence are not democratically ruled, nor are their leaders democratically elected. Therefore they are considered by some as supranational undemocratic powers.[41][42][43][44]

The main opposition is to unfettered globalization guided by governments and what are claimed to be quasi-governments (such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank) that are not held responsible through transparent or democratic processes by the populations that they affect and instead respond mostly to the interests of corporations. Many conferences between trade and finance ministers of the core globalizing nations have been met with large, and occasionally violent, protests from opponents of "corporate globalism."

Some anti-globalization activists and supporters object to the fact that the currently globalization encompasses money and corporations, but not people, the environment, and unions. This can be seen in the strict immigration controls in nearly all countries, and the lack of labour rights in many countries in the developing world.

Another more conservative camp opposed to globalization is state-centric nationalists who fear globalization is displacing the role of nations in global politics and point to NGOs as encroaching upon the power of individual nations. Some advocates of this warrant for anti-globalization are Pat Buchanan and Jean-Marie Le Pen and Ned Pencil.

Many have decried the lack of unity and direction in the movement, but some, such as Noam Chomsky, have claimed that this lack of centralization may in fact be a strength.


Sculpture by Robert Indiana at Taipei 101 (Taiwan)Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways such as:

Industrial (alias trans nationalization) - emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies
Financial - emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for corporate, national and subnational borrowers
Economic - realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of goods and capital. Globalization, when considered in a sociological context, has increased economic inequality throughout the world and within the United States.
Poorer countries are at disadvantage: While it is true that Globalization encourages free trade among countries on an international level, there are also negative consequences. The main export of poorer countries is usually an agricultural good. It is difficult for these countries to compete with stronger countries that subsidize their own famers. Because the farmers in the poorer countries cannot compete, they are forced to sell their crops at much lower price than what the market is paying. [45]
Exploitation of foreign impoverished workers: The deterioration of protections for weaker nations by stronger industrialized powers has resulted in the exploitation of the people in those nations to become cheap labor. Due to the lack of protections, companies from powerful industrialized nations are able to force workers to endure extremely long hours, unsafe working conditions, and just enough salary to keep them working. The abundance of cheap labor is giving the countries in power incentive not to rectify the inequality between nations. If these nations developed into industrialized nations, the army of cheap labor would slowly disappear alongside development. With the world in this current state, it is impossible for the exploited workers to escape poverty. It is true that the workers are free to leave their jobs, but in many poorer countries, this would mean starvation for the worker, and possible even his/her family. [46]
Shift from manufacturing to service work: The low cost of off-shore workers have enticed corporations to more production to foreign countries. The laid off unskilled workers are forced move into the service sector where wages and benefits are low, but turnover is high. This has contributed to the widening economic gap between skilled and unskilled workers. The loss of these jobs has also contributed greatly to the slow decline of the middle class which is a major factor in the increasing economic inequality in the United States. Families that were once part of the middle class are forced into lower positions by massive layoffs and outsourcing to another country. This also means that people in the lower class have a much hard time climbing out of poverty because of the absence of the middle class as a stepping stone. [47]
The rise of contingent work: As Globalization causes more and more jobs to be shipped overseas, and the middle class declines, there is less need for corporations to hire full time employees. Companies are less inclined to offer benefits, or reduce benefits, to part time workers. Most companies don’t offer any benefits at all. Such benefits include health insurance, bonuses, vacation time, shares in the company, and pensions. Even though most of the middle class workers still have their jobs, the reality is that their buying power has decreased due to decreased benefits. Job security is also a major issue with contingent work. [48]
Weakening of labor unions: The surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever growing number of companies in transition has caused a weakening of labor unions in the United States. Unions loss their effectiveness when their membership begins to decline. As a result unions hold less power over corporations that are able to easily replace workers, often for lower wages, and have the option to not offer unionized jobs anymore. [49]
Political - political globalization is the creation of a world government which regulates the relationships among nations and guarantees the rights arising from social and economic globalization. [50] Politically, the United States has enjoyed a position of power among the world powers; in part because of its strong and wealthy economy. With the influence of Globalization and with the help of The United States’ own economy, China has experience some tremendous growth within the past decade. If China continues to grow at the rate projected by the trends, then it is very likely that in the next twenty years, there will be a major reallocation of power among the world leaders. China will have the enough wealth, industry, and technology to rival the United States for the position of leading world power. [51]
Informational - increase in information flows between geographically remote locations
Cultural - growth of cross-cultural contacts; advent of new categories of consciousness and identities such as Globalism - which embodies cultural diffusion, the desire to consume and enjoy foreign products and ideas, adopt new technology and practices, and participate in a "world culture"
Ecological- the advent of global environmental challenges that can not be solved without international cooperation, such as climate change, cross-boundary water and air pollution, over-fishing of the ocean, and the spread of invasive species. Many factories are built in developing countries where they can pollute freely.
Social - the achievement of free circulation by people of all nations
Transportation - fewer and fewer European cars on European roads each year (the same can also be said about American cars on American roads) and the death of distance through the incorporation of technology to decrease travel time.[clarify]
Greater international cultural exchange
Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity (e.g. through the export of Hollywood and Bollywood movies). However, the imported culture can easily supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity through hybridization or even assimilation. The most prominent form of this is Westernization, but Sinicization of cultures has taken place over most of Asia for many centuries.
Greater international travel and tourism
Greater immigration, including illegal immigration
Spread of local consumer products (e.g. food) to other countries (often adapted to their culture)
World-wide fads and pop culture such as Pokémon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Origami, Idol series, YouTube, Orkut, Facebook, and MySpace.
World-wide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games.
Formation or development of a set of universal values
Technical/legal
Development of a global telecommunications infrastructure and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the Internet, communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless telephones
Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e.g. copyright laws, patents and world trade agreements.
The push by many advocates for an international criminal court and international justice movements.
Sexual awareness – It is often easy to only focus on the economic aspects of Globalization. This term also has strong social meanings behind it. Globalization can also mean a cultural interaction between different countries. Globalization may also have social effects such changes in sexual inequality, and to this issue brought about a greater awareness of the different (often more brutal) types of gender discrimination throughout the world. Women and girls in African countries have long had to deal with genital mutilation as a form of control enforced by the men in their society. In Muslim cultures in the Middle East, women are discriminated against with beatings, unfair trials, and sometimes even honor killings. The gender oppression is so extreme that over 157,000 Chinese women commit suicide per year. [52]

[jon_perez]

I told him it was a dumb idea and the ones who benefit are the Int'l bankers and multinational companies. Wages would decrease. The people would be insanely taxed and have little control if any over such a governing body. He said it would operate like the UN but better and more efficient. What a joke.Well, that's the problem. If the argument consists of characterizing other people's ideas as dumb, it's not going to get you too far.

You have to answer why wages would necessarily decrease, why "international bankers" and multinational companies would be the only ones to benefit and that the people would be 'insanely' taxed.

The "have little control over such a governing body" part is probably the area where you could conceivably have an easier time convincing other people of and to me forms the crux of the argument. I would suggest hammering on that point and see if people have anything with which to rebut that. I'm sure it is easy to make people see how damaging that is.

[AAjax]

"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. So astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes.

"By this time I felt strange sensations spreading through me. I would have risen but the riveted gaze of the being before me rendered volition impossible. I assayed once more to address her, but my tongue had become useless, as though it had become paralyzed.

"A new influence, mysterious, potent, irresistible, took possession of me. All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor. Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous. Everything about me seemed to rarefy, the mysterious visitor herself becoming more airy and yet more distinct to my sight than before. I now began to feel as one dying, or rather to experience the sensations which I have sometimes imagined accompany dissolution. I did not think, I did not reason, I did not move; all were alike impossible. I was only conscious of gazing fixedly, vacantly at my companion.

"Presently I heard a voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' while at the same time my visitor extended her arm eastwardly, I now beheld a heavy white vapor at some distance rising fold upon fold. This gradually dissipated, and I looked upon a stranger scene. Before me lay spread out in one vast plain all the countries of the world - Europe, Asia, Africa and America. I saw rolling and tossing between Europe and America the billows of the Atlantic, and between Asia and America lay the Pacific.

"`Son of the Republic,' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn.' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.

COMMENT: This part of the vision is probably describing the war of Independence.

"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows in sank from view. A third time I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' I cast my eyes upon America and beheld villages and towns and cities springing up one after another until the whole land from the Atlantic to the Pacific was dotted with them.

"Again, I heard the mysterious voice say, `Son of the Republic, the end of the century cometh, look and learn.' At this the dark shadowy angel turned his face southward, and from Africa I saw an ill omened specter approach our land. It flitted slowly over every town and city of the latter. The inhabitants presently set themselves in battle array against each other. As I continued looking I saw a bright angel, on whose brow rested a crown of light, on which was traced the word `Union,' bearing the American flag which he placed between the divided nation, and said, `Remember ye are brethren.' Instantly, the inhabitants, casting from them their weapons became friends once more, and united around the National Standard.

COMMENT: This part of the vision is most likely describing the Civil War over which involved the slave trade that was brought to America from Africa.

"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: From each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one. Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole county and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of sword, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast.

"Instantly a light as of a thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments the dark cloud which enveloped America. At the same moment the angel upon whose head still shone the word Union, and who bore our national flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from the heavens attended by legions of white spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America, who I perceived were will nigh overcome, but who immediately taking courage again, closed up their broken ranks and renewed the battle.

"Again, amid the fearful noise of the conflict, I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' As the voice ceased, the shadowy angel for the last time dipped water from the ocean and sprinkled it upon America. Instantly the dark cloud rolled back, together with the armies it had brought, leaving the inhabitants of the land victorious!

"Then once more I beheld the villages, towns and cities springing up where I had seen them before, while the bright angel, planting the azure standard he had brought in the midst of them, cried with a loud voice: `While the stars remain, and the heavens send down dew upon the earth, so long shall the Union last.' And taking from his brow the crown on which blazoned the word `Union,' he placed it upon the Standard while the people, kneeling down, said, `Amen.'

"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, `Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: Three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union'. With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress, and destiny of the United States.

This ended General George Washington's vision and prophecy for the United States of America as told in his words."

Interesting the last struggle related, the entire world descending upon the Republic. I truly hope this means we stand until the end. And yeah I know snopes says its bs, but I have the same opinion of snopes on occasion

[Chester Copperpot]

A coworker recently told me I was wasting my time supporting Ron Paul and his antiglobalist campaign. He said a World Government was inevitable and Ron is about 40 years too late in trying to stop it. We had a pretty heated argument with him trying to convince me of the benefits of World Citizenship and that I was clinging to old ideas of nationalism. He said once people realize the benefits of an International Union they will accept and even embrace it. He claimed all world citizens be able to relocate wherever they wish without immigration hassles. Each and every world citizen will have all their health care and retirement expenses covered for life. People would have the opportunity to experience exotic cultures and be given equal consideration for job opportunies in their region of choice. Blah blah blah...
The World Government would consist of the weathiest participant nations at first, to include Western Europe, Australia, USA, Canada and Japan. This will eventually spread to include all countries. I told him it was a dumb idea and the ones who benefit are the Int'l bankers and multinational companies. Wages would decrease. The people would be insanely taxed and have little control if any over such a governing body. He said it would operate like the UN but better and more efficient. What a joke.


In the 1950s they would have called that guy a Communist.

[micahnelson]

Sounds like your friend might like Huckabee, look where huckabee is getting advice from...

Richard Haas, CFR President.

Unlike other sources, this one has links and proof from mainstream news outlets.

[Kade]

"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. So astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes.

"By this time I felt strange sensations spreading through me. I would have risen but the riveted gaze of the being before me rendered volition impossible. I assayed once more to address her, but my tongue had become useless, as though it had become paralyzed.

"A new influence, mysterious, potent, irresistible, took possession of me. All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor. Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous. Everything about me seemed to rarefy, the mysterious visitor herself becoming more airy and yet more distinct to my sight than before. I now began to feel as one dying, or rather to experience the sensations which I have sometimes imagined accompany dissolution. I did not think, I did not reason, I did not move; all were alike impossible. I was only conscious of gazing fixedly, vacantly at my companion.

"Presently I heard a voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' while at the same time my visitor extended her arm eastwardly, I now beheld a heavy white vapor at some distance rising fold upon fold. This gradually dissipated, and I looked upon a stranger scene. Before me lay spread out in one vast plain all the countries of the world - Europe, Asia, Africa and America. I saw rolling and tossing between Europe and America the billows of the Atlantic, and between Asia and America lay the Pacific.

"`Son of the Republic,' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn.' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.

COMMENT: This part of the vision is probably describing the war of Independence.

"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows in sank from view. A third time I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' I cast my eyes upon America and beheld villages and towns and cities springing up one after another until the whole land from the Atlantic to the Pacific was dotted with them.

"Again, I heard the mysterious voice say, `Son of the Republic, the end of the century cometh, look and learn.' At this the dark shadowy angel turned his face southward, and from Africa I saw an ill omened specter approach our land. It flitted slowly over every town and city of the latter. The inhabitants presently set themselves in battle array against each other. As I continued looking I saw a bright angel, on whose brow rested a crown of light, on which was traced the word `Union,' bearing the American flag which he placed between the divided nation, and said, `Remember ye are brethren.' Instantly, the inhabitants, casting from them their weapons became friends once more, and united around the National Standard.

COMMENT: This part of the vision is most likely describing the Civil War over which involved the slave trade that was brought to America from Africa.

"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: From each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one. Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole county and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of sword, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast.

"Instantly a light as of a thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments the dark cloud which enveloped America. At the same moment the angel upon whose head still shone the word Union, and who bore our national flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from the heavens attended by legions of white spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America, who I perceived were will nigh overcome, but who immediately taking courage again, closed up their broken ranks and renewed the battle.

"Again, amid the fearful noise of the conflict, I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' As the voice ceased, the shadowy angel for the last time dipped water from the ocean and sprinkled it upon America. Instantly the dark cloud rolled back, together with the armies it had brought, leaving the inhabitants of the land victorious!

"Then once more I beheld the villages, towns and cities springing up where I had seen them before, while the bright angel, planting the azure standard he had brought in the midst of them, cried with a loud voice: `While the stars remain, and the heavens send down dew upon the earth, so long shall the Union last.' And taking from his brow the crown on which blazoned the word `Union,' he placed it upon the Standard while the people, kneeling down, said, `Amen.'

"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, `Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: Three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union'. With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress, and destiny of the United States.

This ended General George Washington's vision and prophecy for the United States of America as told in his words."

Interesting the last struggle related, the entire world descending upon the Republic. I truly hope this means we stand until the end. And yeah I know snopes says its bs, but I have the same opinion of snopes on occasion

As someone who holds the utmost respect for leaders like Washington, I have to intervene here and call you out... Washington never wrote this garbage... can we please stop with the revision of history so rampant on these boards?

Let's be honest and truthful to our history, we don't need to add spark and glaze, it is pretty fantastic on it's own accord.

[Abyss19562]

40 years to late is inaccurate, it's more like 100 or more too late.

If we really wanted to change something we would have to go back in time and kill John Rockefeller and a Rothchild.

The most we can do now is win the presidency and kill David Rockefeller. I've got his address if anyone lives in New York and wants to give it a shot.Hopefully Mr.David Rockefeller dies soon, I mean I think he's about 97 years old or so.

[CelestialRender]

Steal his car keys on election day. That is about all you can do with that one.

QFT.

[MS0453]

Icon57, if RP is 40 years too late, then why are there more countries in existence today than there were 40 years ago? Why are a good number of secessionist movements more advanced today, than they were 40 years ago? You're friend has it backwards. The world may be getting more connected, but governance is becoming more local. The modern nation-state is toast.

[RonPaulalways]

The reason why government is dangerous is that there is nothing more powerful than the government to check it. With a one world government, then there is absolutely nothing in the world that could check a powerful regime that seized the reigns of political power.

Right now on the international scene, if one government is bad, there are other governments that 1) people can live under, and 2) that check the power of the bad government. With one world government, this is not possible.

To see why local government is better than all-encompassing governments, compare the Roman empire to the feudalism/nation states that followed.

The Roman Empire decayed into a corrupt sprawling exploitation machine run by Rome for the benefit of the elite. The provinces were burdened with taxes and military conscription which the politicians in Rome used to serve their private interests. There was no opportunity for any provinces to build themselves up because they had no security from the wolves that controled Rome. A huge empire meant no security for the people inside the empire.

With feudalism/nation states, competition between various states drove progress, and gave people an option to relocate to better governed locales if their local ruler was corrupt. This competition and security from exploitation eventually led to the renaissance, the industrial revolution and a boom that only subsided in 1913 when Rome reemerged as Washington DC.

[Naraku]

I disagree, the combined machinery of the state can never overcome the people. That's why all successful fascist states have either attempted to brainwash the people into subservience or divide them amongst each other.

Our corporate media, pop culture, and partisan politics do more to divide the people than any government could cream of doing. Unfortunately most people aren't aware enough to realize how completely ridiculous this setup is right now.

“The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” – Steve Biko, Founder of the The Black Consciousness Movement

After all, Mao used the mass line and mobilized student activists against liberal reformists and these Red Guards were responsible for some of the most brutal and destructive actions during the Cultural Revolution.

[Hardrock]

In the 1950s they would have called that guy a Communist.


Today, he would probably be referred to as a Progressive Liberal,
or simply "Progressive."

I haven't yet decided if this is a personality disorder, a birth defect,
or simply an example of one's ability to be educated beyond their intelligence.

At any rate, the idea is "If it's not busted, keep "fixing" it until it is!":D




:D

[Nicketas]

,.,.

[Nicketas]

,.,.

[kushaze]

We won't need a united world until we have a common enemy, you know, when the aliens attack. :p

Yeah its like that corny movie They Live

[nosebruise]

haha that guy in the first post must be living under the world government on the planet Utopia.

[C4talyst]

He claimed all world citizens be able to relocate wherever they wish without immigration hassles.
If this was one of his _top_ reasons for thinking it's a good idea now...

'nuff said.

I believe a one-world government could greatly benefit the planet...a hundred years or so from now. If that's to happen, it should form naturally and not be forced on everyone.

[INforRP]

Except that their goal is not One World Government, I have heard David Rockefeller flatly make that statement. I believe his words were, "no I don't believe I have ever said that". I think it is in the same video interview (maybe with benjamin fulford), where D. Rockefeller is told by the interviewer about this Ron Paul guy who wants to do away with the Federal Reserve.

What they want is One World Governance, these people have gotten much more bold in their assertions. There will be no voting, or expressing of your opinion, these "overlords" do not think the people should have any say whatsoever. The governance will be solely by the whims of the elite bankers. They think they have all the knowledge about what is best for this planet.

[abruzz0]

The title of this thread mentioned benefits

I don't see any

[Deborah K]

Leave him to his delusions. He sounds like a lost cause.

[Deborah K]

Except that their goal is not One World Government, I have heard David Rockefeller flatly make that statement. I believe his words were, "no I don't believe I have ever said that". I think it is in the same video interview (maybe with benjamin fulford), where D. Rockefeller is told by the interviewer about this Ron Paul guy who wants to do away with the Federal Reserve.

What they want is One World Governance, these people have gotten much more bold in their assertions. There will be no voting, or expressing of your opinion, these "overlords" do not think the people should have any say whatsoever. The governance will be solely by the whims of the elite bankers. They think they have all the knowledge about what is best for this planet.

Sounds like a page right out of George Orwell's "1984".

[kgiese]

Quickly move about. Like in America? Home of freedom and liberty. Checkpoints/tollbooths on highways, searches of property and person in airports. "Free to move about", I am suprised stasis, or locked in cage isn't a travel option.

Look you have one vote. Use it as you please. Open your eyes and look around. Do you like what you see? If not cast your vote.

[abruzz0]

Allow me to translate

THE MESSAGE OF THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.

The Message of the Georgia Misguidedstones

1.) Kill off 95% of the population by whatever means necessary to allow an easier way to control them
2.) One child policies, with the government throwing you in jail if you don't eat, drink, and take the vaccinations they force upon you
3.) lol, Tower of Bable
4.) You will believe what we tell you to believe, and you will conform
5.) Do as we say. Our authority is unquestionable.
6.) Supreme Court of the UN, forcing nations to do whatever they tell them to. Perhaps even go to war? (resolutions)
7.) This will be eliminated by surveillance everywhere
8.) Sacrifice liberty for the "greater good"
9.) Attempt to legislate virtue
10.) A tax on breathing

[patriot4paul]

The Bible prophesied a world government which would be headed up by none other than the Antichrist himself - the most ruthless dictator in the history of the world!

[Mini-Me]

If this was one of his _top_ reasons for thinking it's a good idea now...

'nuff said.

I believe a one-world government could greatly benefit the planet...a hundred years or so from now. If that's to happen, it should form naturally and not be forced on everyone.

Your ideas contradict...government by its very nature is force, so the only way for one-world government to occur is by force. Furthermore, one-world government will never, ever be beneficial for anyone except those at the top, because centralization of power is and always will be the most dangerous and tyrannical force on earth.

[John of Des Moines]

Ask your co-worker to read Articles 29 and 30 of the UN Charter. The first 28 articles grant all sorts of rights andf freedoms but 29 and 30 taken them away. Also separate nations act like bulkheads of a ship - one can flood with tyranny but the ship still floats.

[ArrestPoliticians]

Tell him that "the consolidation of power is anti-federalism and therefore inherently evil." Ask him if he supports Wal Mart buying out all competition and holding a total monopoly, as long as the ends justify the means.

[ihsv]

The coming global government will not be one of the people, by the people, and for the people. It will be a government of, by and for business men, profiteers and powermongers, the very ones working so feverishly to establish it. The "utopia" that is being presented to sell the idea of global government is a ruse, as such a state of affairs can never be achieved in this life.

Every nation throughout history has had at one point or another a tyrannical government. At least in the past you could flee to another country to get away from it. In a global scenario, where would you run?

And think about it for a moment: the power to rule the world placed in the hands of a small group of people? Does anyone seriously believe that absolute power would NOT corrupt absolutely, particularly in this case? It has done so in every other instance in history. His faith in human nature is naive at best.

I have my reasons for believing that they will not ultimately be successful in establishing a New World Order, but I do believe they will advance with their plans to a state of semi-completion. But whether you believe they will succeed in their designs or not, the danger is very real and must be opposed at every level.

It must be remembered that every government in history has always sought more and more power, more and more authority. Even were this proposed global government to begin by taking on the nature and restrictions that the original US government had at its inception, it will ultimately end up like ours is now, a corrupt bureaucracy that constantly seeks its own interests above that of the people it is supposed to serve; a corrupt and conscienceless group of individuals who will always feed off the people, turning us into collective slaves of the state rather than the free individuals we are.

And any "global government" that has to be implemented by stealth, lies, deceit, wars, and treachery, as this one is currently being ushered in under, cannot have as its true end a utopia. The means never justify the end. But the means all too frequently expose the intention behind those who employ them.