It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Not only did Gates advocate global government, but he also spoke favorably of the UN and NATO, completely overlooking that they are a major force of oppression in the world. NATO can’t even hold a meeting without thousands of people gathering in the streets to protest their actions. Someone as heavily involved in world affairs as Bill Gates should know all about this.
During the interview last month, Gates said, “Take the UN, it has been created especially for the security in the world. We are ready for war, because we have taken every precaution. We have NATO, we have divisions, jeeps, trained people. But what is with epidemics? How many doctors do we have as much planes, tents, what scientists? If there were such a thing as a world government, we would be better prepared."
Not long ago this subject was considered a total conspiracy theory, but now one of the richest people in the world is openly suggesting that this is a good idea. Governments are generally a pretty bad idea, even when they are small they can still do a tremendous amount of damage. So when a government rules the entire planet, there is no telling what type of atrocities it will be capable of.
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
What is wrong with a world government? What do you people think you are going to lose with a world government? Western superiority?
If we keep shunning our own governments and refusing to speak up or get involved, then our governments will be turned against us.
originally posted by: wasaka
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
What is wrong with a world government? What do you people think you are going to lose with a world government? Western superiority?
If we keep shunning our own governments and refusing to speak up or get involved, then our governments will be turned against us.
I don't care about Western superiority. What is wrong with a world government?
The problem is the top-down structure where individual liberty are not valued.
The solution is bottom-up government.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MALBOSIA
The further away from your level your representatives are from you, the less accountable to you they are.
So let's see ... what's wrong with a world government? I don't know. What's wrong with Washington?
Now understand that a world government is even farther removed form you than Washington is. That's what's wrong with a world government.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MALBOSIA
It's interesting, but I remember watching a disaster and breakdown of society type show once. They had five experts on how to survive the widespread breakdown of society, and they all approached the problem from different philosophical angles.
The one thing they all agreed on was that in the event of widespread breakdown, the best chance humanity has to survive is to have less centralized control. The more self-sufficient communities are in and of themselves in their localities, the better off they would be.
In other words, the trend toward ever increasing centralization and consolidation and specialization was bad because it weakened an area's ability to adapt in the event they get cut off.
originally posted by: TheBlackTiger
But just because a government would be worldwide doesn't mean it would be bad automatically.