Originally posted by billybob
you are for a super-powerful, centralized government, ie. a worldwide police state.
Centralized, unified, but the rest is from your imagination. Is the US powerful because of its people or because of its government? I can't name a
police state in the world today besides NK, so I have no idea where you are going with that.
the US constitution is about protecting the SOVEREIGN rights of all individuals. look sovereign up.
sovereign - 1. a monarch; a king, queen, or other supreme ruler.
Sure, everyone is equal to the king. You know, other nations have constitutions and most pretty much say the same kinds of things about rights.
My point is that all these documents are not only redundant, but contain localized prejudices.
It is inevitable that a Super Constitution will emerge that embodies the rights of all people around the world and not just individual nations.
This document will be superior to the US Constitution in that it protects more people and offers broader rights and less chance for corruption and
abuses.
By the time this happens, war won't make any sense anyway. But it does not require WWIII or one powerful nation to take control. It does however
require a little humility and that is what I see lacking here.
|
sovereigns do not need central KONTROL.
world government and RULE guarantees only the freedoms GIVEN by the RULING CLASS.
yes. i am an anarchist.
the law of the jungle is best.
i will EAT anyone who disagrees with me.
|
Originally posted by billybob
yes. i am an anarchist.
Okay. Have you explored all the different philosophies and there merits and weaknesses before choosing the jungle? Have you ever tried to conceive
your own philosophy, or is the jungle perfect for EVERYONE ELSE too?
|
you know, the jungle is not all that bad. it has natural cycles of the weak and old being culled, and the strong surviving.
our society preserves the weak and old, and sends the strongest off to kill each other.
there is nothing wrong with natural law. it is no crueler than what we are living in.
and, in fact, i think in a TRUE anarchy, people TEND to HELP each other more than PREY on each other. that is how 'societies' start in the first
place.
TRUST is a beautiful thing.
|
Personally, I think that aspects of anarchy are important. So many things in living under a democratic government are not open to choice. There are
reasons, justifications, for some, but not all.
I disagree that one philosophy can be all encompassing. I am also a bit anti-democratic because I think people should only be allowed to vote on
issues they can demonstrate understanding, so many people just vote what they are told, along party lines. From here, I think that people should only
be allowed out of particular government obligations if they demonstrate an understanding of philosophy.
This would prevent people from trying to get out of paying taxes based on what they've been told, but because their personal philosophy (not
religion) forbids it.
If I choose not to donate money to a particular cause, but I am forced to pay taxes, and my tax dollars end up in that cause, then that hurts me.
|
Amero Agenda Admitted On CNBC
GJN
[edit on 4/25/2007 by DYepes]
|
|
Originally posted by Frontkjemper
I'm a Norwegian, I live in Europe/Scandinavia. And there's NO WAY in hell we would want the euro here. Were contempt with our Kroner. (Crowns)
I've also lived in America for 20 years, and I can't say that I like the idea of the proposed change in currency and borders. The Constitution is
more then any European could understand. This is the very road, house, people America is made out of. Changing it or abolishing it is about
un-American as baking apple pie with Ramon-Noodles. It can't be done.
This is just ridiculous beyond comprehension. The flood of Mexicans into America and Canada will increase in crime, as the druglords won't have
borders to worry about. I mean, can't some people see what's happening here and world wide? Our sovereignty is dying and our countries becoming
states of one big country.
I don't get it. Isn't that a trek logo you have there by your profile? I'm guessing that would imply you fancy star trek and wouldn't mind living
a such a future? How does the thought of a "federation" mix with you being contempt with your "krona"?
Personally I was very disappointed when the Swedish people voted no to the euro as I want to see a world where we're dependent on each other, or a
world where we realize this fact.
It's funny how countries with relatively high standards often object to the idea of an euro while countries that have been through years of wars
throw themselves over the idea.
I think you'll fancy the euro when you run out of oil 
Ah..gotta go, anyway I guess my only two cents in this is already well put by Columbus, I completely agree.
Oh and about that document. from the DVD where the guy lost his jobs to..was it singapore..? Yeah I feel for him, but that's the way it goes and will
keep going until we're more even steven on this planet. It is weird however that US media isn't covering the topic of NAU very well. I guess it's
not only here that media figure (apparently correctly) that people are more interested in Britney than in what goes on in this world.
[edit on 25-4-2007 by lasse]
|
