How a one world goverment COULD actually work.

a reply to: Unruhestifter

99 percent you say?

Then why bother with the "world" govt.?

It's bad enough now with politicians being out of touch...how much worse would they be with this silliness?

No. Not only no, but Hell no.

As for your "gun rights" being a local decision...piffle. Either it's a right for all, everywhere, or it's not a right, at all. The right is, also, a right not to have. So if I live in one of your fanciful jurisdictions...do I have to move to practice my rights if that jurisdiction decided that guns are the "debil"? If so, how is it a right again, and not a privilege that can be taken away at a whim?

a reply to: seagull

Would you prefer the status quo? I hold no hope the current situation will reach a point in which every person has equal freedoms. Why deny them the same rights you hold dear?

Your putting way to much faith that good will prosper, under your model just like the current model there will be corruption.
People are not innately good. Quite the opposite. We have flights of fancies,whims, imbalanaces,desires and lusts.

I kinda like the current paradigm, to the victor goes the spoils. Works for me.

a reply to: BenignChaos

The rights we hold dear are an abomination in the eyes of some countries.

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: DBCowboy

Why would a unified world be the end of individuality? There is no reason for it. A benign government wouldn't take away individuality.

The fear of a single governing body is unfounded, has your individuality been stripped from you by your current government?

They try every damned day.

a reply to: Athetos

The current way we do things is unsustainable and does little to nothing when it comes to helping those who need it.

For a unified world to work, people would have to pay attention more than ever before. People can do the right thing when it comes down to it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

How so? I am genuinely curious to hear why you think that way.

i am sorry people don’t do the right thing, they will often keep doing the wrong thing right into thier graves.
It’s very sustainable just not for everybody. Why do we take Saudi oil when the US and Canadian have a plethora of it? So they run out first you see, same rearson why we grow most of the worlds grain food. So we can take it all away if we have too.

a reply to: BenignChaos

[7]And then Plissken went to the Duke of New York and commanded “Let the President go.” [8] The Duke said, “I thought you were dead.” [9] Brain and Cabby, who were his companions and yet worked for the Duke, said listen to him for he is a Snake.

a reply to: Athetos

A very bleak and selfish way of looking at things. So you would rather benefit from the desperation of others instead of help everyone become equal?

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: DBCowboy

A disaster that threatens all of humanity would be a good unifying force. Or the gradual implementation of a global constitution over a period of time would lessen the shock of change. We can do it as a species. Look at how interconnected the world already is today.

Why would we want to do anything as a 'species' ?
You have some grand delusions about togetherness.
What reasons do humans have to unify as you put it? Perhaps you could articulate that before drafting a one world govt dictatorship manifesto.

a reply to: UKTruth

Please, how is wanting a unified species a grand delusion?

Together we could accomplish so much as a species. Eradicate diseases, end poverty and starvation, do away with war.

a reply to: BenignChaos

To replace a bad thing, with a bad thing...how does that improve anything. That's gonna be a good trick.

How about this? Smaller govt, not larger more monolithic, less able to adjust on the fly.

Y'all are relying far too much on goodwill of our fellow man...

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: Athetos

The current way we do things is unsustainable and does little to nothing when it comes to helping those who need it.

For a unified world to work, people would have to pay attention more than ever before. People can do the right thing when it comes down to it.

How is it unsustainable? Mankind has been around for 200,000 years or so. It isn't utopia but we now have 7 billion people on the planet so something must be working.

As for people doing the "right thing", that's just never going to happen because one person's "right" is another's "wrong".

a reply to: seagull

I've seen the good that humanity can do.

A smaller government does no good if not kept in check by regulations and watched by the people. Less politicians means less money spent from lobbyists.

Enact anti-lobbying laws, sharp repercussions for any elected official accepting "campaign" donations from corporate entities, and keep everything transparent by law.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

We waste so much that could be given to the people that need it. Water shortages are cropping up across the world. Food is being thrown away. All the while we aim weapons of mass destruction at each other. What will snap first?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: DBCowboy

No. You would be shown where you are incorrect before being released. Why lead with violence when you can lead with compassion and care?

Gods, that is ####ing scary ass stuff right there.

Thanks for proving my point.

A Clockwork Orange.

If individuality and person freedoms are too restrained to accomplish this then failure might be the outcome.

originally posted by: Unruhestifter

originally posted by: MRinder
a reply to: Unruhestifter

What would be the point?

To devolve power to the local level.

Compared to the situation everyone lives in now where out of touch leaders 100 or 1000's of miles away make descions that affect or ruin or everyday life's.

Lol. How does it make sense to you that in order to grant local power we must form a global government? That seems ass backwards to me.

This has already been tried. It’s called the United Nations. It is a visibly failed experiment, where the rest of the world is, as usual, funded by the US while the US gets none of the support for which it (meaning its taxpayers, like me) dearly pays.

The OP is the picture of communisim and/or socialism, and ANYONE living in a currently free country should detest what it represents. I don’t know the author, but will make a WAG they have never worked hard for what they have, whether basic security like food and shelter, or property, like a house, car, and clothing.

The only way I would ever support a one world government is if the Constitution is identical to the current US Constitution, including the Bill of Rights and all SCOTUS decisions to date, without the unconstitutional laws of California and NY (and other democrat led states). Since most of the rest of the world HATES how free US citizens are, they’ll never go for it.

I think the founding folks of the US introduced a scalable system that could, quite readily, work globally.

When coupled with modern technology aiding in decentralization, I think some very realistic systems emerge.

That said, and perhaps most importantly, on the smaller scale of the US.. this has run into issues with incessant undermining. Those wouldnt simply disappear on a larger scale, quite the opposite.

10) If a district fails due to corruption or mismanagement the federal government can remove that districts leaders

What happens if the federal government itself becomes corrupt then?