It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 10:37 AM

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Hanslune

The Chinese only had success with that because of the brutality they used enforcing it. Have you looked into it? The abandoned baby girls, the brutal forced abortions, and now the horribly lopsided population demographics they have? They have many young men who will never find a wife because of the cultural value Chinese place on sons. Not only that, but because of the rapid shrinkage of the population, Chinese elders who rely on their children to care for them face abandonment and abuse because the child is not able to care for them in their old age like children used to be able to.

I'd really rather not go down that route.

Yes i'm well aware of that - what method would you like to suggest be used to reduce the population?

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 12:15 PM

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LittleByLittle

What's the point of letting people spread out to find a space where they can live in a group they want to live in if you just then go ahead and force them all into one unifying law system anyhow? Kind of defeats the purpose of letting everyone choose I think.

The removal of the Power pyramid and and putting insane people where they belong do not handle every permutation of a society and the differences you can have between regions. You can choose but if you are a minority go to a place where people have the same preference as you so you can be fully what you feel like.

You can for instance have regions where modesty and sexuality is less in your face and considered part of commitment and other places where people think of sex as a handshake and have it with everyone.

Neither place is un-symbiotic but are better of not living beside each other since their wants are so different and their difference will only annoy each other.
edit on 21-9-2014 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 01:53 PM

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
This is my opinion since I was looking into the "Georgia Guidestones" yesterday and found that many conspiracy people are "against" what the Georgia Guidestones say. With many (conspiracy) people saying the messages are "anti-christian" and promote globalism, ergo they promote the NWO...and ergo the Georgia Guidestones are evil, need to be torn down.

What a sad world we live in!
-- snip --

Even though we may disagree on several of your points, I give you credit for the courage to voice your opinion when it is a virtual given that it will be unpopular.

Your mention of the vandalism done to the guidestones reminded me of a video I saw this weekend from Ferguson. An older Black man came over to some young Black teens that were tagging gas pumps and the parking lot at one of the burned out convenience stores. He asked them (I'm paraphrasing from memory), "What do you think you accomplishing? What does that even mean? Who will even remember it. Look at that... (Pointing toward some apartments that had the brick wall at the end of the complex tagged sayings) That's what they want you to do. They expect that." Then he took a piece of white posterboard and a magic marker and gave it to the one kid and had him write what he was feeling. After the kid was done, he said, "Take that out there (pointing to the crowd still walking in protest and in memory of M.B.) and walk with them. Do something that is real instead of vandalizing someone else's property just because you're upset...

I may not agree with what's on the guidestones, but then again I wouldn't drive a mile out of my way to ever see them. I d*mned sure wouldn't vandalize them. Why waste a can of good spray paint?

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
Elitists normally want power and control, this is done by dividing and conquering, in making countries, forming identities, national goals etc and countries are much easier to rule than continents, hence there will always be nations with individual identities and there will always be countries.

Any 'one world government' is just another way of saying there is an elite above the elite governing countries pulling the strings.

I couldn't help but think of this vid... If individual governments are monstrosities then just imagine a global government. Anyone that has worked in management (I have) knows that someone either above or below you in the pecking order is going to feel slighted in some way by every decision you make.

Maybe we haven't evolved as much as we've thought...

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 02:59 PM

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

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

You will find the solution to your answer if you ponder WHAT actually the difference between a "fundamentalist Islamic Saudi" and an "atheist liberal gay man in SF" is.


As I proposed, religion has NO place in world politics. People can have their religion, being atheist or whatever..but it has to stay out of politics or define a government and laws and rules. OBVIOUSLY this is not the case today. But in my utopia, this has been achieved. In my utopia, a faith/religion is IRRELEVANT for those things. This is something you do in your church, at home...etc.. but NOT something you make laws with. Also "gay", "straight", ...same with sexuality. Has NO relevancy whatsoever for politics and has no relevancy whatsoever in what politics SHOULD concern themselves.

If you take those two subjective things out of the equation (your sexual preferences, GOOD RIDDANCE, and your belief or faith)..then you will see that both of those men are BASICALLY the same and the perceived "differences" are as relevant as saying the one guy likes Italian food and the other is effing vegetarian.

OBVIOUSLY, the major problem would be to establish such a government where those extremely irrelevant things won't matter....and..of await a time far, far in the future where "your god" and your preferences in effing bed DON'T PLAY A ROLE. But once this would be achieved, why should such a government not be able to govern BOTH people...regardless of their personal preferences in sex, religion..or FOOD TASTES. Do you see what I am saying?
I am proposing this NWO "one-world-government" *BECAUSE* current governments ARE ruled and influenced by those entirely irrelevant things. We are, if you will, still in the 12th century because those things play a role still but they *should not*, not for government and laws.
edit on 9/21/2014 by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 03:18 PM

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
worlders, pfft.

when ever i read a op or any post such as this, the first thing that comes to mind is a bunch of folks standing around in a circle, holding hands and singing
Kum Ba Yah.

one world government goes against freedom, in as much if i don't like your government your not free to move where it is not the government in control.

there is good government and bad, there are some that have both, take the U.S. for example. there are things that are great then there are thing that suck.

There are no good governments, there are only degrees of evil and corruption in sea of politics. I prefer an semi-anarchistic/libertarian stance; My rights end where yours begin, that's it that's all.

I don't see the need for government, they are simply parasitic.

Cheers - Dave

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 04:39 PM
I suggest you read and study history why the new world order is more then a idea: I think Myron fagan 1967 tells the history in short why we had worldwars federal reserve and the plan for 1 goverment 1 religion .

posted on Sep, 21 2014 @ 05:26 PM
"World Government" is certainly an interesting and important subject because IMHO, one day, we will have world government one way or another. It certainly has more pros than cons if executed properly, even in todays society. Sure, you might say people are not ready for this kind of government and I would agree with you (more or less), but why do you think that way? Have you asked anyone "would you like to have a world government?"?.

You might still ask "who will be in charge? who will lead the world? who will be the people responsible for this?" but ask yourselves, did YOU pick the representatives of UN, NATO, World Bank? We have a self sustaining political system that will fill any vacant place an the top as soon as it becomes free to take.
All this world that we have today is already global. We have global police (UN), global army (NATO), world bank, united governments (USA, EU, also waiting for Asian, African and South American unions), continental currencies (dollar, euro), even world religions (Christianity, Islam). Yes, it's not entirely global, but it is getting there and when we get there, we should be ready for it. You should understand that it is NOT "if" we are going to get there, but rather "who will be in charge and what are they going to do with it?" Is it corporations, that may drown the world in waste by promoting consumerism; maybe it's hidden world elite with their population reduction agenda; what if nothing will change and the world will deepen the gap between the poor and the rich that will create a population of slaves and masters; maybe all of previously mentioned together?; neither of them?; maybe corporations will do what current governments can't - create a sustainable and happy environment for everyone?; what if the infamous occult leaders are planning the perfect world for everyone, even if it means reducing the population, not all at once, but on a long term, centuries long, by limiting child birth per family, reducing it to its self sustainable limit, but we are so oblivious and scared that we fail all their plans by resisting the change?; maybe our world needs a complete overhaul and only we, the people, are able to change it?

A lot of "but's" and "maybe's" and before touching any delicate issue like corruption, alleged world population reduction or world elite dominance, lets concentrate on more important topic. Why world government? What benefits would it bring to us?

This is my take on the subject. Before suggesting an establishment of world government we should discuss all the problems that may arise and most importantly decide on short-term, long-term and ultimate goals. Today we can only see short-term or micro-term goals, because they last only as long as the current presidents administration is and those are poorly executed (not to mention - useless).

Ultimate goals
a world to live in free of any monetary, geo-political, energetic, religious or social constraints;
a world, where anyone has an equal opportunity to learn anything they like;
a world, where everyone adds something to a society, whether through art, science, health care or entertainment.

Long term goals
resource based economy;
remodel an entire educational system to make it more individualized and fulfilling, a system that encourages learning and reveals everyones true life calling;
self sustaining cities and towns;
minimal or no military presence;

Short term goals
equal social opportunities;
equal globally adjusted salaries;
no or little gap between poor and rich;

You can feel free to add anything you think deserves to be on "goals" list. This is certainly not everything nor accurate, but it is a start and now, instead of saying "this is an utopian world, we can't have that", you can start thinking on how can we achieve these goals because "only those who are crazy enough to think they can change a world will eventually change it".

this is a video about education, what are the problems and what it should look and feel like
The Forbidden Education

this is about resource based economy
The Venus Project
Paradise or oblivion

We will have a World Government. Our aim is to define what kind of world we will be living in, otherwise someone will define it for us and we might not like it. It is not hard to unite different religions under one government. It is harder to stop a multibillion corporation from wrecking the world when it can see its own end. That is where we, the people, take charge, take our world in our hands. That is when we decide, that the world should be led by scholars and professors, not by businessman and lobbyists. You ask who will lead the world? Either we or "them".
edit on 21-9-2014 by 13ssA because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:28 AM
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

honestly, i used to be paranoid about NWO.
but these days, i dun really care so much where this planet is heading, whether its going NWC (new world chaos) or NWO

yeah, i can live with or without NWO. if they want to monitor me when i m in toilet, i also dont mind.


top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in