Citizens of nation states must be world citizens in era of globalization says Koffi Annan

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2003 @ 10:33 PM
link   
SaraMourgueAnne,

Yes, that is in my signature... I could explain it, but there are children present, lol!

JLL,

I agree 10000%, which is why such ideas are such a BAD idea.... but the scary part is that this is ACTUALLY happening here in the US today.... I understand that the US Supreme Court is now examining EUROPEAN laws in some cases in order to make rulings....

Excuse me, this is the USA... why the hell are we deciding AMERICAN cases using EUROPEAN law???




posted on Sep, 17 2003 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Well, what do you think about the fact that people don't really care about sovereignty, autonomy and self government? Do they then deserve neither liberaty or freedom?



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ktprktpr
Well, what do you think about the fact that people don't really care about sovereignty, autonomy and self government? Do they then deserve neither liberaty or freedom?



Pledging allegiance to a national flag is the antithesis of sovereignty, autonomy and self government.

Anyone who cannot see this is living under the boot of their oppressors.

But I will keep my liberty and freedom, thank you, even when others may have sold it at their first day of school.



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 08:48 PM
link   
I am also for the sovereignty of nations the ability to choose thier own laws and how they run thier nation. Unfortunately the majority of nations can not do this without interference from the USA. I know my country can not act of its own will, for instance CIA inlovment in the removal of our Prime minister (Australia) in 1975 regarding pine gap and views which differed to the US point of view or any country whith a socilist stance even though democraticly elected. look at just recently in venezuela there was CIA involvment in trying to over throw President Hugo Chavez (left wing) democraticly elected .

[Edited on 19-9-2003 by inquisitor]



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Well, Masked, Im sure youre all warm and fuzzy with the idea of a horrendous boiling melting pot of sludge to throw all the worlds cultures and identities into, but some of us like fences.

Variety is the spice of life. # the global village. It will smear the rainbow.

Things stay different by seperating them. if you were to take the divders off a box of different grades of sand, all the sand would mix intogether, and thus, you lose all the unique peoperties of the individual types of sand.

If you want this global village and its disgusting multinational melting pot, by all means, enjoy it. But please........leave the rest of us out.

Some of us still love our fences. It keeps undesirables out and is a way to let people know its your land.

Possesion is 9/10 of the law.



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Skadi- What do you think would be the best way to prevent a global viliage from forming?

and

DR - What do you think would be the best way to prevent a global viliage from forming?



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Well, Masked, Im sure youre all warm and fuzzy with the idea of a horrendous boiling melting pot of sludge to throw all the worlds cultures and identities into, but some of us like fences.



As I explained to someone who was in a flap the other day, you can be sure and be wrong at the same time.

Strong cultures will always survive, and they will survive useless national boundaries.

People who find fences important are fools caught in feudal times.

[Edited on 19-9-2003 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:11 PM
link   
That's a very good point MA. Survivial of the fittest occurs in any competition. I have given you my ATS Vote


[Edited on 19-9-2003 by ktprktpr]



posted on Sep, 19 2003 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Masked,

Just because something is old does not mean it has outlived its usefullness.

Boundaries. Humanity needs boundaries and definitions. Fences are good things. The set limits. They show definition. They define. the seperate things that are different.

An open one world means one world govornment. one world govornment is #ty. What may seem like Utopia to you is a nightmare for another.

If one nation wishes to live as Islamic funsdimentalist in govornment, with principals that go against the nature of the one world Utopia, then you violate thier rights. Not all cultures can co exist peacefully, some are diametrically opposed. Opposites balance one another. if a nation wants a communists govornment, that is thier choice. And if they dont want foreigners in, thats thier right.

There are so many cultures int he world. Too much diversity. Uniting it under one banner is the most vile thing that can be done. because it imposes on free will. if a nation wants a fascist dictatorship, and they chose that, then why not? Thier choice. Thier borders. Whatever they wanna do is thier right to do so.

PNAC isnt the only unilateralism out there. Theres other forms of it.

Divsersity is strength. Homogeny is weakness and de humanizing. Borders must exist to keep diversity. Good and bad. I dont want a world where all bad thinsg are removed. i want a world that is balanced between both.


And K, how do we keep the global village from forming?

1. Free Trade must go. period. Nothign free about it. Especially if youre in a third world country getting exploited.

2. International "law" must be re examined

3. The US must end the presence of its military in ALL non US territories. EVERYONE must come home. We cannot go and occupy the world. its not our world to occupy. Too many people out there, too many different cultures and systems. leave them to it.

4. We must have leadership that respects the rights of soverign nations to do whatever they want in thier own borders, no matter how much they dislike it. Its not our country, dont try and run it.

5. Since we have this dispicable entity called the UN, why dont we put thier worthless asses to good use? Instead of sending money and food to developing countries, spend that money and time teaching them how to make the best use of thier resources, how to become self sufficent in thier own needs. How to care for thier populations , ect. But only if THEY desire the advice. It should not be forced.

6. Cooperations must be brought to heel. Thier expansions are getting out of control.



posted on Sep, 20 2003 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Boundaries. Humanity needs boundaries and definitions. Fences are good things.

An open one world means one world govornment. one world govornment is #ty.

There are so many cultures int he world. Too much diversity.



Selectively...

1. You may need boundaries and definitions, but in my opinion these things (as you view them) get in the way of Humanity.

2. No, an open boundaryless world does not mean one world government. It existed before in the times of barbarism, and it might exist again, as anarchy or some other as yet untested form. But there is no doubt that something will replace the current failed model.

3. There is not enough diversity. Diversity as diverse as individual expression needs to be better recognised.


As far as fences go, keep your stinking McDonalds culture homogenization, Hollywood dumbing down crud and global mass marketing trash contained within your own 'borders' and the world of American haters might even find less fuel for their hatred. But that's just an observation, I personally can ignore these less-than-desirable things without having to take vengeance on the citizens of the nation that allowed them to be produced and spread globally.



posted on Sep, 20 2003 @ 10:02 PM
link   
ouch!!!*whip cracks in the background*
This is getting intense,
Simple statement:
We're all global citizens, not international.
We're not worth a thing to the government that rules us.
We're paying them to oppress us...

Enough said, enough said,
- Tassadar



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Globalization Hits Germany's Oktoberfest
Sun Sep 21, 7:56 AM ET

By TONY CZUCZKA, Associated Press Writer

MUNICH, Germany - The polka bands struck up and beer started flowing at this year's Oktoberfest this weekend, even as the sale of a venerable Bavarian brewer to foreign owners injected tough global realities into the party.

story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20030921/ap_on_re_eu/germany_oktoberfest



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 10:35 AM
link   
So long as nothing is changed about the ancient German beer making laws, Oktoberfest and quality German product will still be OK by me.

Brewing is a relatively easy industry to consolidate, it's been going on for years and is probably one of the most internationally incestuous industries of all as far as shareholder equity is concerned.

Beer was invented in Egypt, and purloined for international expansion by copycats as the male drink of choice over thousands of years. It is a staple product, vital to happiness, and worthy of recognition in serious talks about globalization, labor management practices and everything else discussed over a few beers.




posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Masked,

Anarchy is a dream, a wonderful pipedream. I would prefer Anarchy over govornment, but the reality of it is, that Anarchy is a very temporary state of being that humanity cannot sucessfully sustain.

Humans are cattle, period. They need leaders, they cannot govorn themsel;ves. people are sheep pack animals by nature. Individuals are very rare. They need a pack to belong to, they cannot handle defining themselves. They need someone else to define them.

Humans are also oppotunistic and greedy. Thus, within anarchy, groups of humans with similar agendas would unite to form thier own little society to push thier agendas forward.

Your problem is you have too much faith in the human race as an intelligent collective of people. It is not. it is a hive of drones with a few queens here, or intelligent rebels there. The masses, however, will need something defined to belong to, something to tell them who they are and what they should be doing.

Long ago, eaons ago, when there were no borders. That sums up my point right there on the failure of anarchy. People did not keep that border free system, people are diverse in thier lives. Some beliefs or thoughts are totally opposed to others. Terrirotry was precious. Open borders ended, and people congregated to civilizations. Free borders ended. Those who were weaker were destroyed or assilimated. Individuals were deemed crazy or evil. So on and so forth.

Borders are needed to keep people from kiloling themselves. if you had a world with open borders, there would be massive violence. Muslims going to kill cHRISTIANS, Christians killing Muslims. Whites killing Asians, Asians killing whoever, blah blah blah. Koreans killing japanese. So and and so forth ad Nauseum.

In order to have a border free world you would have to have everyone on the same sheet of music. This requires removing any sort of thought, belief, ideology that conflicts with or is opposed to whatever. You would have to have a one world govornment for it to happen. We are no longer small roaming bands of nomads in the deserts or steppes. We are agrarian and technological. One world govornment, since borders would be erased, would be needed to monitor who goes where.

For instance, lets say some Muslim, who still believes everyone should be a Muslim, and still thinsk the West is evil, comes over and blows himself up in a mall. Whose police force would we use to convict him? American polcie wouldnt exist., because if you had American police, youd have to have a country with borders called America. World police require a world govornment.

Borders sserve masny purposes. Mainly, like playpens, to keep the mentally retarded child called humanity from brawling out and harming someone. We need borders, we need definitions, we need lines, because the human race cannot exist in its current state without them.

The only way you could do this is totally re engineer the human species, which would be disasterous. Humanity is not mature enough to master its own evolution. Allowing us to do so is like giving a 5 year old child the rights of an adult. We simply arent mentally evolved or mature enough to handle it yet.

Thus, we need playpens to seperate ourselves before we hurt each other. We may toss rocks and toys from otuside out playpens into other playpens, but remove the playpens, and you have absolute and utter chaos.



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Skadi - you don't think that social systems that run "contary" to supposed "human nature" can change the said human nature? It seems to me that social pressure coupled with a changed concept of the norm could work wonders (



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Brainwashing. In otherwords, to make it work, you would have to engineer humanity.

Human nature is not dshaped by society, otherwise, human nature would be different everywhere, with different societies.

Humans are advanced animals. Human nature is part animal. We have animal insticts, otherwise, wed have no desire for sex, we would not worry about eating, we would not do things to try and get ahead or reshape ourselves so we can get soemwhere.

Humans follow many traits of animals. We are two legged animals. Thus, you must genetically re enigeer humans to remove animal insticts, emotions, and out in whatever the hell you want. Or, you must introduce massive brainwashing, which is alos dehumanizing and deprives people of the right to be what they are.

Social institutions cannot do this. because theres too many societies too many cultures, that whose social standards of what is good and right will we enforce?

Muslims have thier standards. China has thiers. The west has thiers. Africa has thiers.



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Skadi

Excellent!

In two posts your own view of homo sapiens has evolved from cattle requiring cattle prods to a maturing animal to an advanced species. You have compacted 40,000 years or more of evolution into two more or less succinct statements!

But you are trying to diagnose problems that I don't have. You are trying to be inside my brainspace, drawing conclusions that I have never drawn and will not draw.

Here are a few more tidbits of my underlying thinking (rather than your presumed state of my thinking) to carry on the flow of your argument:

1. I have posted here against any form of global police state, and against any form of PNAC (or other regional interest) driven NWO.

2. I am not an anarchist, nor a socialist. Both structures have their points of appeal, as does rampant capitalism to anyone with a brain and a bit of talent and a lucky break and perseverance, but none of these models serve the needs of the complex animal that you yourself have "evolved".

3. I have empathy with people living in a country whose incumbent government allows massive security failures and serious flaws in infrastructure to drive a fear and terror agenda. You have been subjected to it, and it is obvious in your statement about the prototype suicide bombing Muslim in the shopping mall that the Bush terror agenda has worked on you.

But, fences are no means of resolving the issues, and cultural cringe and clinging to the only culture that you know (if we can call it a culture at all) is just wanting to put a fence around your own comfort zone so you do not have to see the complex human animal evolve any further in complexity.

But it will, beyond the stupid industrial-military complex, and feudal societies within nation states, and artificial lines breaking up continental land masses. Because it has to. Deal with that, and you are getting to the table of discussing real issues for the next 2,000 years for humanity.

Whose laws do you use in a universal code for human behavior and societal management? You tell me - better still, make them up from scratch, and write about them, it's all good use of your time.



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Tsk Tsk masked!

First of all, look whose trying to get into whose headspace!


Simply because Bush was behind the 9/11 attacks does not mean that there arent people in the world who really do hate the idea that there are people in the world who dont agree with them should die, and will sacrifice thier lives or wage thier own war against people who dont agree with them.

I have been to the middle east. There are people there that would do it if given the chance. And, even minus the Bush admin and pro israel govornment, minus our oil dependance, they would indeed do it. This is not because Bush told me so. This is because I have seen what humans driven by religous retardation are capable of. They are entitled to believe in whatever spook they wish, masked, but others have the right to ensure they keep thier more esxtreme beliefs to themselves.

I have seen what people will do to each other in the name of mental illness, religious superstition, ideology, ect. They still do cut the clits off thier baby girls over there. Seen a broad do it to her own kid in a dity bathroom sink. A mother mutilating her infant because of superstition? people like this DO exist. They are out there. They are not at the top of my threat list, but they exist. And it is thier right to exist. In thier own space. Not in mine. They wanna do, believe that # they can stay where within the "feudal fence" where that kind of behavior is acceptable.

Humanity is still cattle. Humanity will remain this way until the next evolutionary step, if they get that far. Cattle need drivers. Humans will demand someone rule them.

Humanity has a very long way to go before it even hits adolecence. 2000 years? theres another problem: shortsidedness. 2000 years is nothing in the stream of time and evolution. 2000 years is nothing except maybe our own undoing. But eveolution takes hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of years. Humanity has decided to be cattle for the past 6000 years of civilization. Even before that, humans formed bands, tribes, packs, had a leader, the stringest man/woman/whatever who basically got first pick of everything.

Borders will always be necessary until humanity evolves to that next level, which it will do in its own time. But humans 6000 years ago are not so different from ones today. the majority still placate angry gods and ghosts in the sky, superbeings they still believe control nature. Humans today, like back then, jump into mob mentality and immideitalyey blame the leader. back then they sacrificed the king if things went bad to placate the gods. Maybe oif were lucky, our current king will be sacrificed as well.

But it is dangerous to assume that simply because I believe the possibility of Muslim suicide bombers coming in and #ing up someones day, hardly points to the influence of Bush propoganda of fear. Terrorism isnt a fear of mine, MT Rainier scares me more.

Long before 9/11, I knew the threat of religious extremists in the middle east. And not just the middle east.

Christians are a scary bunch of freaks too. Look at Christian terrorists. Bombing abortion clinics, OK city bombing. Sending death threats to Wiccans, smashing thier windows, slashing tires. Sending death threats to teachers who want to teach evolution.

It is foolish to deny that there are people in the world who would kill and maim hundreds, even thousands of others because they dont agree with them.

It is dangerous to think of the human animal as a rational creature.

The world is a very violent, brutal place full of lawlessness, and much diversity.

I want to keep diversity, both good and bad. To keep diversity, you need borders.

And by the way, I am anarchist in principal. However, Im also realitic enough to realize anarchy is simply a pipedream, because the reality of the human race and human nature make it impossible. I accept the need of govornment only as a necessary evil, one that appalls me, because I know that simply because I can run my own life, make my own choices, and be responsible for myself, and I dont need someone to tell me not to kill or steal, doesnt mean that everyone is like me. Thus, I live with and tolerate the presence of govornment because it is necessary for the majority of people.

I hate the sun, I hate sunshine, yet Id not want the sun to go out, because while it irritates me, it is necessary for the plants I eat, and thus, the animals as well.

The key is to keep things in balance until the natural forces of entropy erode them in thier own sweet time.

Leave nature alone. Nature will take her own course.



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 08:25 PM
link   
1. I don't want to be in your headspace, it is for you to manage.

2. Talking about nature taking its course and preserving fences/borders at the same time is not sustainable. You didn't pick up on that in the way ktprktpr did. Nowhere in the backwaters of the USA is going to be a monoculture for much longer, and in evolutionary terms, the stronger culture/s will survive.

3. I am very pleased you have extended to looking at barbaric practices overseas. Clitorectomies are as needless as circumcisions, and therefore what might be applied to one gender can be applied to the other. Perhaps that is the first of the "one world government in anarchy" Laws that you are now writing - There shall be no genital mutilations.

Sorry, but letting nature take its course is all about the removal of artificial boundaries. If you don't like the idea of wanton barbaric practices infiltrating places where they have not been seen for a while, then you had better come up with even more universal principles, and go and lobby them to people that will make a difference!



posted on Sep, 21 2003 @ 08:37 PM
link   
What Mr. Annan wants is nothing less than a world socialist or tyrannical government with the US as the major finacial engine. What Mr. Annan and most of the world doesn't realize that the US is not blessed with an inordinate amount of magic beans which produce this but that it is only acheived through the possibility of reward and personal gain from efforts by individuals. In other words, to have the US as the rest of the world is truly that.

I hope that in these last days before the NWO (UN and CFR) come to power that MR. Annan for lack of a better term "choke on it"(he he he ) The US out of the UN and the UN out os the US. Pack it chumps and take the CFR with ya!

Get out !! Get out!!, leave us alone you bunch of wanna be Saddams!!




new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join