It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Years ago, the great Austrian economist Leopold Kohr argued that overwhelming evidence from science, culture and biology all pointed to one unending truth: things improve with an unending process of division.
Of course, that's not the way the media and pundits have framed this important debate. They present the vote on whether Britain should remain or leave the European Union as some sort of proxy war on immigration, free trade and the tolerance of so-called progressive societies.
But these issues are just symptoms of a much greater malaise: the tyrannical nature of big organizations. They can't work or prosper for long because their scale is inhuman, abusive and wrong.
In the end Mother Nature offers a cure for bigness, but it usually involves extinction, collapse or annihilation.
originally posted by: zandra
a reply to: Limbo
Always glad to read something from -who I think- are broad-minded people.
I think I'm one of them. So maybe what follows is wrong, but at this moment I think you are wrong.
Not multinationals are leading the world, but a number of people who have a plan with this world. Although we mostly don't see it. But their plan in some way or another results in: uniting the world. This process goes on for 5000 years or so.
Within a few hundreds of years we will all speak English. Ultimately we will be connected with each other maybe by brain waves. And so on.
If we will live in small countries or in super nations is an issue not too important but I think it will even be in a kind of world nation. Anyway we will all be ruled by a central power. Because to make a long story short: all people in this world make one big consciousness. yes we are all brothers and sisters (don't bother about my soft words), I do my best to make myself clear in a language that still is not mine.
originally posted by: SprocketUK
Nice work op.
I agree to an extent with your premise that smaller organisational structures work better, though I take the view that it is because they allow representation to be closer to the electorate.
If you see how your local parish council works, as a constituent you are much closer to the decision making process than you are with the national parliament.
I firmly believe that most of the problems with the EU are down to the disconnect between the people to whom the laws apply and those (who they can't vote for) who make the laws.
Even in a huge system like the US one, people can at least vote for someone who will enact or repeal legislation which allows the machinery of government to respond to the will of the people. There isn't any such mechanism in the EU.
(For those who don't know, MEP'S, who are elected by the people, have no power to draft legislation, all they can do is vote on that proposed by the commission, who are not elected and who meet behind closed doors....an essentially Soviet model of government ).