I am pro-New World Order and pro-globalism & anti-separatism, anti-nationalism and anti-patriotism

originally posted by: tavi45
How would a global government founded by primarily westerners ever going to be anything besides Nazi utopia?

Of course a Nazi utopia would be the exact opposite of what I want. The Nazi utopia THRIVED and depended on the fact that there were other nations and governments where it saw itself as "superior". "All other nations, races etc. are inferior".

Of course, in my utopia (and I freely admit it is one)...there are no "inferior" nations or races..it's ONE government which is supposed to be the government for the entire world. This includes ALL races, cultures...so really the opposite of what Nazis did.

It actually doesn't matter if you don't agree to a One World Government, you are now simply being recorded as one standing on the left, the resister, you people are dealing with highly advanve people of this world who know everything about you an can calculate what you are gonna do next... I'm just waiting...

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Nothing is created equal, not Man and most certainly not nations. So my question has to be how are you going to spread all this equality evenly in your new utopia?

Short of changing the very nature of humanity im afraid its just not a viable prospect.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

As we look at the rise of civilizations over the last 6,000 years we can see at first isolated city states, countries, empires continental empires, slowly over time becoming larger and larger, merging space. Fact.
Different civilizations may come and go, may wax and wane but over all this time the advent of isolated communities and nations have dwindled.

Local sovereignty has been giving way to non-local affiliation all along. Sure, some nations fall, some empires crumble, plagues set back this trend, a decade, a century, even a thousand years, but it has inexorably continued until now.

The United States has shown us this. That a group of people when given a whole continent, rich with resources and promise can, when the indigenous population die off because of imported disease, after a couple of bloody wars, carve out a nation that offers uncountable wealth for some, a sense that they are part of the best country ever for others, and a chance to work their butts of for the rest of their lives to feed crappola food to their babies for the rest.
The cries of no globalization come mostly from the people in that second group many of which would not mind globalization if it were part of the Expansion of the American Exceptional-ism Program. The program, by the way, that has been blossoming now for over a century.

Globalization is here and has been for a while. There is one world economy. Face it. We all know this. Food from way over there is fed to people way over here. Clothes are made half way around the world. It's here, now. The only question is who will be in charge.

The US government is a sham. Add to this list any others you wish. Corporations are in charge, and they too are merging, left and right.

I agree with you Norules.... Globalization is already here, the fruit of thousands of years of development. I personally do not like the prospects of it, but one way or another we are transforming into that new world order. And as you say, all the bad things that can be said about it can also be said about our present situation. There is no going back to the caves, that is unless those who wish to fight one world end up blowing us all to smithereens before it's over.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Nothing is created equal, not Man and most certainly not nations. So my question has to be how are you going to spread all this equality evenly in your new utopia?

Short of changing the very nature of humanity im afraid its just a viable prospect.

Ok..let me ask differently...do you THINK it's governments which make and shape a culture and society?
If so, you might have it wrong.

I could list you a whole bunch of characteristics of individual cultures, the Brits, the Spaniards, the Germans, the Americans, the Ukrainians, the XYZ-ans....and it's not their effing government which define their culture and unique characteristics. (Do you REALLY believe that? Seriously ...)

As for your question how to spread equality across the globe...YES, EXACTLY, that would be the task of this new government. Then maybe, for once in history of this silly planet, a government would do something constructive and good. Ya know.

It can also help to realize that many perceived "differences" are in fact not existent. This is BS that the current Elite wants you to believe. How ELSE would you want to spread/create equality...if not with one large, new government and the elimination of subjective/non-real perception of "differences" which in reality don't even exist. (Hey, believe it or not, even Muslims are in essence "normal" people). Of curse, in my Utopia there will be a way to keep individual beliefs and cultures. It's TODAY that different religions/cultures clash with each other, not because we have one, united world gvt..but BECAUSE we have many different ones.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

"Ok..let me ask differently...do you THINK it's governments which make and shape a culture and society?"

I think that we are supposed to think that our governments shape society.

Sadly its the same old control constructs, admittedly in different packaging, religiously oriented or otherwise, that are the real culprits as to the shape of society and indeed of things to come.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

You are entirely correct that globalism is already here, but at the current stage it's extremely damaging.

Here is one example: A company can outsource workers and production to Pakistan or India and get labor done at a fraction of the costs. We all know that.

In my utopic society, there would be equal law here and elsewhere. It would be IMPOSSIBLE to take advantage of Pakistani or Indians and have them work for the profit of some in another nation for $0.10/hr. This just one example.

In my OP I did not imply that only one religion would be "allowed". Even in a scenario where we only have one gvt (which admittedly at THIS point seems extremely utopical)..why should individuals not be allowed their faith? As said, this is NOT in my "proposal", HOWEVER the elimination of religion *within* politics would. But this is an entirely different topic.

So basically, if you wanted to rule, you would have to be atheist? How is that fair and how would people of faith ever be assured that an atheist could be trusted to make any decisions for them that were correct or in accord with their beliefs to enough of an extent that they would not be required to violate those beliefs in the commission of their daily lives?

After all, when a person has a faith, their faith informs their life to such a degree that it isn't possible to for them to "keep it out of their life" when talking about politics. My faith informs my morality and ethics. It is their basis, and if you wanted me to make moral and ethical decisions, I would have to use my faith as part of the basis of those decisions. When I say that murder is wrong, I say so because "Thou shalt not murder," for example.

Also...if you're opposed to the idea...why would you say that your (or anyone else's) government would be "better" than a hypothetical one-world government? (Or asked differently, what is the worst which would happen that you think we all need separate governments?)

I say that smaller governments have less power and less far reaching power. They are also more in touch with the people they govern.

Think about the US government today. Most people think they are completely out of touch with their constituencies, meaning they don't really understand or appreciate the day-to-day existences and worries of the people they purport to represent. But, you want to make the areas covered by a politician even bigger. How will that put them more in touch with the people they are to represent?

Not only that, but smaller, separate governments allow people with choice. And if you get a bad small government, it's damage is limited. If there is one all-powerful government ... no one can get away from it. The only possible remedy is to wage war on it and rebel to overthrow it. Smaller governments still can allow people to vote with their feet, moving from place to place.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

No, it's the culture that shapes government, and when it goes that way ... how on earth do expect their to be one government that will content ALL the people?

What form of government will content a fundamentalist Islamic Saudi and an atheist liberal gay man in San Franciscio, CA?

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

If one huge government is such a bless, why are people in the EU not so happy about it ?

Start talking with people from Spain, Greece, Franc, Portugal, Italy about how great one big government is.

Or people from the former USSR, take it from someone who has been behind the Iron Curtain and also knows what EU integration has done...it sucks !

Excellent post, NoRulesAllowed! S&F

I just posted at the thread about the Guidestones; I want folks to tell me what they find so abominable about the ACTUAL words on the stones rather than the ignorant balderdash that gets churned out over and over whenever the topic is brought up.

As far as your thoughts here ... I absolutely concur, but as you can see, there's probably at least a few more centuries of cultural evolution needed before we're anywhere near ready for a government for all Humanity.

And probably, lots more bloodshed, horror, and pathetically stupid waste of human lives.

Good on you for being brave enough to speak your mind in this particular lion's den though!

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Where does religion fit into your paradigm?

Im against nationalistic thoughts and against strict borders. I think people should live where they want without a government telling them they cant. A world government is an idealistic fantasy. In reality it would function no different than monopolies of corporations. Once there is no competition there is no desire to please the people. A world could set up any kind of aweful laws and not only can you not move to escape it but no government can stop it. You will wind up with civil wars all the time.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

I agree again. My question is why have the peasants of the world not begun to push for unity. Without scaring people off, where are the workers of the world (un-capitalized) striving for rights for all. Where is our talk about one world other than from those aged despots like old man Bush.

originally posted by: caterpillage
Who gets to be in charge? Who gets to decide who's in charge?

God/Satan/Jesus

a reply to: seeker1963

It doesnt say eliminate it says maintain a low one. As in self maintain not by government. Like not making babies constantly.

originally posted by: Aural
a reply to: seeker1963

It doesnt say eliminate it says maintain a low one. As in self maintain not by government. Like not making babies constantly.

Here is what the Georgia Guidestones say in relevance to global population....

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Now just how do we get to that number unless a whole lot of people die? Eliminate them?

The OP[ just wants attention . Probably set up a bedroom in the basement with some Cheetos loving every response, every star, every flag. Soaking up all the negative emotions in people and getting a response out of them. Its Very Animal and very primitive. The OP obviously knows he is on the wrong forum to spout pro Satan, Pro Darkness messages. If you want Satan to control God's free creature cradle to the grave so be it, but those people would usually not post a OP like this. Just a primate wanting attention.

a reply to: dntwastetime

Well, to certain extent, the same could be said about all of us - just primates wanting attention.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Yeah I had a conversation with a flaming liberal this morning in the park. He was a globalist too. Thought it was a good idea until I pointed out that the only people it serves well are the corporatists. Should have seen the look on his face when I said that LOL