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.


We Need a Global Declaration of Interdependence

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 10:57 AM
Perhaps some of you may have read it already. Some of you may label it liberal or leftist... But it's still an interesting read...

We Need a Global Declaration of Interdependence
The Western ideal of comfort and wealth holds a hollow promise for the rest of the world and provides fodder for extremists

by Wade Davis

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 12:31 PM
Nothing new, take from the producers and give to the non-producers. Sorry, Interdependence merely means sapping the fruits af labor from the cultivators.

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 02:10 PM
First of all: How many times do you see a "made in Taiwan" tag compared to a made in the USA tag...

Without cheap labor in those countries, western countries would have a lot less products & wealth than they now have...

Also, most of the gold, diamonds, oil, aluminium used in the western world etc... Originally come from third world countries.

Now who are the original producers???

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 02:20 PM
What difference does that make?

Each of those paragraphs of that declaration of interdependence can be anwered to logically and rationally, and be dissected to expose its communistic bones and lay to bear the cancer that would kill the world.
This same rhetoric is what the power-mongers and people behind the OWO concept use to whip the masses their way.

[Edited on 30-10-2002 by Thomas Crowne]

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 02:43 PM
Hee hee heee...

I know it has some communist ideas in it... But not all are all that bad...

Think about it... If everyone was guaranteed a pretty good life, no matter what,... Everyone with an equal quality of life. Don't you think it would create less terrorists and the such???

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 03:24 PM
No I do not think I would like to live a cookie cutter life.

I think there would still terrorism,and dissant.

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 04:21 PM
There would be less terrorism than now where a few have the wealth and the rest nothing...

posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 04:29 PM
Terrorism is not about money all the time.

Our current terrorists don't care about money,it is about religion.If they try to make the world one religion,then you will see a huge increase in terrorism.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 05:02 AM
"If they try to make the world one religion"

Haven't certain Christians been trying to do that for a long time???

check this out...

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:03 AM
The problem with those general ideas is that they don't work. People aren't engineered for communism. It goes against our basic desire to aspire. To take from the producers and redistribute it to the non-producers at an international level would 1) be an impossible logistical feat, and 2) put everyone at an unacceptably low level of living, and everyone would be discontent. You'd find your producers to be a lot less productive, and in the long run the ones you thought you were going to help would be hurt worse.

You can't manufacture and distribute a one world religion. It's not a ordinance that can be enforced or a magic pill that can be swallowed. Peaceful Christian evangelical ministries have reached out for decades and while some people are saved, not everyone accepts the message. People must either acceept Islam peacefully or they will be forced it at the point of the sword, but every day, people die rather than take it. So either way, you can't make the world take a religion. The one true religion will win out in the end as that religion has prophesied, and the other religions will be proven to be false and irrelavent. Or the aliens will come and use us as croutons in the intergalactic soup and salad buffet, but either way, we can't force ideologies on others very well.
If we could, there'd be no more beer sold in aluminum cans, this according to Me!

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 07:16 AM
TC, you have a point there... With what we as the masses currently know and experience, you are totally correct.

The only thing is, (bear with me here, I'm going a little deep) IMO the holographic theory is one of the most (if not the most) accurate scientific model of the universe. It states that we are more than we think we are, and that we are one with the universe/god whatever...

You can compare that with the individual cells of your body. Your body cannot function well if only your brain cells have most of the nutrition and your liver's cells don't. For the whole body to be healthy and function properly, all cells should be well...

Even the Bible says that we are all one...
(Ephesians 4:4-6)

We westerners still think in dualistic ways. The other is not me and not a part of me and doesn't have anything to with me. Based on these terms, it wont work.
But based on monistic terms, it can work.

This is where the saying "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." comes from I think. Because whatever you do to others, you are in reality doing to yourself...

(This is a .doc file of which I selected this quote)

"The holonomic brain theory of Pribram, and the holographic quantum theory of Bohm, added with Laszlos fifth field contribution quoted above, shows us that we are part of something much greater and vast than ours individual mind. Our mind is a subsystem of a universal hologram, accessing and interpreting this holographic universe. We are interactive resonants and harmonics systems with this unbroken self-organizing wholeness. We are this holoinformational field of consciousness, and not observers external to it. The external observers perspective made us lose the sense and the feeling of unity or supreme identity, generating the immense difficulties we have in understanding that we are one with the whole and not part of it."

Like Toltec says,

What are your thoughts?

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 08:20 AM
T.C, do you agree that everyone should have an opportunity in life to make something of themselves? Because this is what this arguement is about. This is about ignorance and trying to make the world more fair, not being a f*ck!ng Robin Hood.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 09:00 AM
Well if there is one thing about life you learn early on is that life is not fair.
But the word interdependence is just that, dependence.That means everyone will be relying on a government for everything.I for one prefer the opposite.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 09:51 AM
Life being not fair is just a belief.

And we don't have to rely on a government for everything, we aren't toddlers...

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 09:58 AM
If you want a society where everyone is making the same amount of money,put in the same kind of housing,a government sponsed healthcare,then you are depending on the government to run your life.Interdependence is nothing more the NWO.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 10:04 AM
That's a grey, boring life.... I don't want that. All I want is equal chances & opportunities for all people...

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 10:18 AM
It is a nice thought. But how would you go about doing it?It would mean the rest of the world would have to conform to a more American viewpoint.Because everone here does have that chance.
I'am going to use myself and two friends to try and make my point so bear with me.

One friend choose not to work,screw around use drugs and stay drunk most of the time.He is in jail now,he blew his opportunaty.

I finished High School got a job and had a family and make a decent living.I could have strived for more,but am happy with my station in life.

My other friend spent years in collage has three degrees and has 6 figure income.He made the most of his oppertunaties.

You see we all had a choice to do what we wanted with our lives.And none of use were born with a silver spoon in our mouths.

Now how would get the rest of the world to conform to western standerds?If you want everyone to have a chance they need to be free.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 10:33 AM
The world doesn't have to conform to western standards. It isn't compatible with all people. Take the Native Americans for example, were they better off before or after the westerners (Europeans) came to America???

Some cultures thrive best when left living in nature. The best thing is to support their own way of living and not to suppress it... That's already a huge part of "equal chances". In their own way, they might then even equal or surpass the western viewpoint of "quality of life"...

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 11:08 AM
Yes the western world has not been kind to Native Americans.Hell I can't rember the last I saw two Indians walking down the street.

I also agree that if a culture wants to live off nature that is fine and should be left to do so.But if you want global interdependence,then those cultures will lose their freedom to live the way they want.I think global intrdependence would be as intrusive as any other form of government.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 11:22 AM
Hmmm... You do have a point there...

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in