Is a one world government necessary for the future of humankind?

''Like it or not,everything is changing.The result will be the most wonderful experience in the history of man or the most horrible enslavement you can imagine.Be active or abdicate,the future is in your hands.''-Bill Cooper-
Hello,fellow seekers of truth!I all ready expect some people to get hot on this issue,i am sure there have been similar posts,but I want a fresh take on the issue.I was thinking after reading ''Childhoods end''by Aurthor C. Clark the other day,and it occurred to me that there exists a possibility (in an infinite universe people)that there very well may be some kind of''watchers''that may be preparing us for some kind of disclosure.I do believe that it is anybodys best guess as to what the true reason may be,but that the evidence is there to conclude that a''grand conspiracy'' is afoot and has been in place for quite some time.I do not,However,believe we have been given even half of the information that we would need to tie all of these conspiracies together,and some of that information may very well be DISinformation and as such,we cannot possibly make a reasoned conclusion about what is happening behind the scenes and why.But the study of these topics is important and in no way am i suggesting that they stop.
On the same note, I was intrigued by the Michio Kaku interview where he makes reference to ''type 1,2,and 3'' civilizations,and how a one world government would be the government of a ''type 2'' civilization.I encourage everyone to listen to the interview for the full context of the terms.I was wondering if the human race must indeed go through a trial of sorts,so we can truly appreciate human freedom without the hypocrisies and apathy that has existed alongside the strides we as a civilization have made in these endeavors toward protecting individual liberties.I do believe that apathy must be utterly destroyed in order for us to move forward as a race.
So,without further ado, here is the million dollar Question.
Are any of you out there open to the theory that the often ill-advised move toward one world government,if leading to complete slavery,would inspire mankind to throw off the chains of slavery once and for all in such a way that a final revolution will occur ending in a new form of government that makes the case for individual liberty without the hypocrisies that entail our past attempts?

An addendum:I guess this post does hinge on people accepting or not accepting whether or not people believe that our constitutional form of government can evolve.I realize that some people think we can do no better than the U.S. constitution,and as a living document,carries with it the possibility to evolve without having to draft a new one.I personally think that there is too much controversy surrounding the document for worldwide acceptance.(especially when people talk of freedom while owning slaves and not allowing women an active role in government)

There will come a time not too far from now when it will be necessary to increase our efficiency at things like communication and trade or the entire process will slow down and collapse under its own weight.

In order to do that, it will be necessary to have a super-national administrative layer that will basically be involved with monitoring weather and other natural systems (asteroids, for example), coordinating the movement of people and goods around the globe, standardizing communications, currency and measurement, and suppressing political or religious organizations that try to disrupt the ordinary flow of life and business. Either that, or humanity will continue to tear itself apart bit by bit with its petty regional squabbles or religious and racial hatred. We've gotten away with it so far in history, because it's been a pretty big planet, but we just can't afford that crap anymore.

The world is rapidly becoming so relatively small and interconnected that a coup in some small country can have consequences that reverberate so strongly that a lot of people could go hungry or die as a result. I think we all pretty much agree that would be a bad thing.

But to do the job it needs to do, the administrative layer (the NWO) is going to have to use advanced technology to monitor and measure people, things and events to such a degree that some people (particularly those involved in petty illegalities such as taking illegal drugs or cheating on their spouses or taxes) are going to feel very threatened by it. They don't see that monitoring will be another good thing. They want to have their fun.

And they sure don't understand that the larger administrative overlayer isn't going to interested in their petty crimes as long as they don't create problems for other people. People creating problems for other people is another thing we can pretty much all agree is a good thing. We certainly don't want other people creating problems for us. Besides, the job of tracking down and putting a chill on minor reprobates is and will always be done by local police. The monitoring systems will help them do that, but the larger organization won't directly be involved, or care. It has the bigger picture to worry about. People won't be any less "free" than they are now, except perhaps less free to do illegal stuff.

To do some of its job, the NWO will have to be able to back up its desires with a very strong, internationally supplied military force that is under its direct control. Otherwise, it will be no more effective than the United Nations. Some folks think that such a system is bound to veer off into an evil totalitarian nightmare, and they'll wring their hands and cry about Nazis and concentration camps. But it's all just a lot of foolish speculation and paranoia. These are the same people who see an evil plot behind things like the World Health Organization, or the International Association of Medical Regulatory Authorities. They don't think a global administrative layer can be built with internal checks and balances that will allow it to function as a benign organization. That says more about them than the organization.

People are frightened of change. They are also concerned about things like "freedom" and "independence," when they really don't understand that those things all depend on your perspective. We all live in an extremely interconnected world. That automatically means we can never be purely free or independent. And eventually they're going to have to decide whether they value the abstractions of freedom and independence more than the real life need to be a decent person and not let their selfish actions potentially hurt or kill thousands of people somewhere else on the planet.

Or not. I'm certainly not going to be alive long enough to see any major steps taken toward this. Maybe it won't happen, and our selfishness will do us in, either directly through war, or by not being able to get organized enough to stop an asteroid strike or global pandemic. Who's to know?



[edit on 18-9-2008 by Nohup]

Now,to be fair,there are some scary things about the W.H.O.Just google Codex Alimentarious and what some nutrition experts have to say about it.There is cause to worry amongst those of us alive in the next 50 years.I guess I am one who does not trust these new technologies,not because of the technologies in and of themselves,but what I perceive as these advances surpassing our humanity.

reply to post by Nohup



Nohup I was curious as to just why you think a nwo system would be so great.

Say tomorrow, I was made supreme leader of the planet, and anyone I thought would hold us back was to be rounded up and put in "reprogramming camps". I would look at your view since I think that the nwo is a bad thing and you would promptly be interred into the same.

Now, can you not see how this nwo global system under the quise of advancement could turn against the very views you hold true?

Maybe that is what yolu want, but I think millions would fight you to the death. So you see why it would never work. It will be tried, I have no doubt of that, but after a short and meteoric rise, it will be defeated by a higher power.

Although I'm very wary of the formation of one colossal government (considering the way things are going), I can't imagine any advanced civilization spreading out and progressing while still being divided in government, language, goals, wealth, and levels of education.

I'm honestly all for unity, given the nature of the unification is for the right reasons, mainly the promotion of the wellbeing of the individual, and the peaceful advancement of the society. Honesty and openness in government will be required before anything of value can be achieved.

It has to be about respect, not wealth.

It has to be about knowledge, not power.

It can be done. I think it's been done before in some other civilization that could very well be watching us now.

This could go either way. I think we all fear an Orwellian future, but we must focus on digging ourselves out of this rut before it becomes an abyss.

reply to post by Evasius


Yes it looks, to put it in a campy old comedy phrase, mahvelous. But aslthough it will start out with very good intentions, it will quickly go down hill. People who think differently the the "majority" will be rounded up and either made to join the collective, or be imprisoned or worse killed.

Originally posted by Evasius
Although I'm very wary of the formation of one colossal government (considering the way things are going), I can't imagine any advanced civilization spreading out and progressing while still being divided in government, language, goals, wealth, and levels of education.

I could not agree more,Evasius.I am really on the fence about whether political diversity will all ways be as useful as it has been so far.

Basically, I think yes, but it would depend on the government, and I can't see any government that would implement world rule doing so purely for humanities gain. Ultimately it should be down to every person to rule their own life and for every other person to let them do so.

Unless we can stop Tribal Warfare, Bigotry, Fearful Rednecks with Guns & Power, Starvation, Stock Market Collapses, Inequity, Greed, Religion, Disease etc etc etc, I think we will eventually have a need for a One World Government - However all the things above will stop that from happening... In our lifetimes anyway!

Phew!

IRM

[edit on 19/9/08 by InfaRedMan]

It will never happen. I couldn't see the US Government using the money it makes from it's taxes to bring those in Africa up to the same standard of living. That is in effect what would need to happen.... 1 government ... 1 currency... 1 law for all.

Never.

We have seen a NWO many times through history. For example, the Roman Empire. One quarter of the known world lived and died under Roman rule for over 500 years.

Whilst the Romans bought technology to many of the backwaters of the world (like Britain!) and advanced the standard of living on so many levels, it was still built on the blood, sweat and tears of slaves.

It was only the upper echelon of the Roman population that enjoyed the trappings of high civilization. Even the average Roman family had at least 2 slaves per household.

So my point is, we have been there done that. One rule may bring advances in culture and technology, but only a few really get to benefit from it. The rest are left wondering...

Thus, if you can guarantee you will be in the upper echelon of the latest NWO you will have a great time but remember you will have to sell your soul to get there!

reply to post by daeoeste


I actually just finished a essay on the pros and cons of this idea. I believe a one world government, set up correctly would be a tremendous success for mankind. A couple things that my paper discussed:

PROS
1. Imagine having 1 space program. Putting all the worlds leading cosmologists, astronauts, and the like in the same room. The outcome would be an almost instant jump in productivity when were working together and not against each other. This translates into other areas as well:
A. The worlds leading doctors, reaserchers, and scientists all working together on:
I) cancer
II) AIDS
III) Energy
I believe there really isn't an end to this list. If we were to combine forces, and funding I think mankind would make an awsome leap in all forms of technology and research.

2. The end of war. Texas does not goto war with Illinois. This is because all differences would be handled in court of senate. This is not to say there will not be terrorism, and some revolt as one could never make everyone happy. However with the absence of traditional war, a large portion of the world military could easily be converted into riot police or the like.

Now, obviously a world government would have to be carefully established. In my dream government there would be NO individual i.e. president, prime minister and such. There should be a senate, for lack of a better word, comprised of members representing continents, and a house representing states/ former countries. The downside to all of this is that the government will be corrupt to an extent, but that exists now.

Response to thread title: Not at all. I do believe in countries collaborating and prospering together while mantaining its own borders/culture.
The world is screwed up as it is, with money and power belonging to a few. I wouldn't want it to be even more centralized than today.

reply to post by daeoeste


The UN can represent the world to other world. We can still have our independent nation-states. It could be like the Holy Roman Empire, where the Empire itself had no power, but represented a hundred independent states, principalities and small kingdoms to the larger European countries at the time.
No NWO.

Originally posted by seb2882
Response to thread title: Not at all. I do believe in countries collaborating and prospering together while maintaining its own borders/culture.
The world is screwed up as it is, with money and power belonging to a few. I wouldn't want it to be even more centralized than today.

I am beginning to strongly believe that borders and culture are tearing us apart.Especially culture.I believe that because of the great evils that globalization would have to unleash on mankind during the first years of consolidation.People are naturally afraid of its shadow on us all as we speak.Especially patriots here in this country.But it IS coming.And it will prevail unless some paradigm shift in human consciousness occurs and no one is left out.You may as well believe in the idea of rapture as well.I am saying that there is a possibility for both,maybe equally so.But that is our best chance.What i am asking is what happens when their plan is implemented,not implied and some not believing in the possibility,but here and affecting us all and felt everywhere no matter what our religious belief or ''culture''.

reply to post by daeoeste


I agree that current political situations/national laws are doing more harm than good, but the concept of "cultural diversity" and "better distribution of political power" are good notions, don't you think so?
So I think of course, current politics are nasty, I don't know if they're as bad as the NWO because it didn't happened yet, but it sure has a lot to improve.
I haven't used the term "NWO" until now because you didn't used it in the OP, so I theorized about an "hypotetically good world government".
Now, if we speak of the NWO and everything that's said about these elite groups, I strongly believe that it will affect us badly but it would be orchestrated so you woudn't know it.
For instance: are you truly free today? Can you do whatever you want?
Two hundred years from now, people were more independant. You had the blacksmith, the butcher, whatever, most of them having their own ventures.
A hundred years from now, a lot of people started working for big companies, and that tendence has made very difficult to make an independant bussiness venture today that doesn't get destroyed by big monstrous megacompanies.
They are a bunch of very rich, powerful, greedy and powermongering individuals that actually succeded in giving us paper to make us believe it's worth something (which is great if you are the one emmitting the paper of course: I give you paper, you give me lands, factories, mines, oil, workforce).
So you can only guess the outcome of them (or one of their marionettes) actually being acknowledged by everyone as "Earth's representative" or whatever crappy name they use to make it sound nice.
My guesses:
- Increased surveillance (already happening)
- No more paper, just electronic money (maybe just a step ahead)
- Work for the big company or die.
- World-wide monopolies.
- Perpetuation of their own club as leaders (almost always happened)
- They'll give you better toys to play so you are happy (I DO believe that it may lead to a better wealth distribution, they have to do this to make worldwide policies)

As I see the world today, when I think how can you be truly free I have two answers: Be very rich and do whatever you want (buying judges and everything they do that lets them get away with anything), or find a far away spot where noone will find you and do whatever you want.
Did you know that it's calculated that you make your company earn 10 times your salary?

In the NWO you won't be able to be rich anymore, only they can get rich. So you have to live your limited, surveilled, credit controlled life. Sort of going back to the middle ages, this time with nice hydrogen cars.

By the way, I'm no patriot I couldn't care less for national feelings (since they made us believe that stuff), the more power distribution the best for me.
Sorry for the long post.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by seb2882]

It's amazing to me that anyone would think that aggregating enormous power into the hands of a world government would be a good thing. Like big government has always worked in the past. Instead it would be a nightmare of tyranny, especially for certain minorities (e.g. christians and jews). There would be no safe havens from the all encompassing power of such a government.


The Bible predicts that such a one world government is coming. It's president will be the antichrist.

Originally posted by TH3ON3
Say tomorrow, I was made supreme leader of the planet, and anyone I thought would hold us back was to be rounded up and put in "reprogramming camps". I would look at your view since I think that the nwo is a bad thing and you would promptly be interred into the same.

Now, can you not see how this nwo global system under the quise of advancement could turn against the very views you hold true?

Why do you think the NWO would or could become be a totalitarian dictatorship? What evidence to you have that such a thing would be inevitable? Even the people slowly working toward an NWO don't want that, as shown by the actions taken by the seminal NWO to crush that lunatic Hitler.

The NWO needs people to be happy in order to work and buy things and keep things moving. And to do that, its final structure - although still not entirely worked out yet - will likely be a relatively large voting committee with representatives from countries and major industries, divided up into subcommittees, with a pretty good sized bureaucracy to keep it running. Checks and balances in the form of both human organizations and artificial intelligence monitors will probably be put in place, also.

There won't be a single person in charge, ordering people into concentration camps. People in concentration camps don't work and buy things to nearly the degree that happy, fulfilled people do.

This sort of paranoia and misunderstanding about the goal and function of the NWO is going to be the hardest thing for it to overcome. Because people often define themselves by their race or religion or nationality, and have an irrational pride in it. That's why much of the groundwork for the NWO has to be done in secret. Fighting irrationality is best done that way.

reply to post by Nohup


I posted this on another thread, regarding Hitler:

"Hitler received support and financing from the aristocracy and elite of Germany,
including Gustav Krupp (industrialist), Carl Duisberg (founder of I.G. Farben), Ernst
Tengelmann (director of the Ruhr coal mining operation), Dr. Hjalmar Schacht
(prominent banker), and Fritz Thyssen (Chairman of the Board of United Steel Works,
Germany’s largest company). Hitler maintained that the Nazi Party would continue “only
until the German people had been freed from the threat of Marxism and could reach a
decision as to whether the final form of government would be a republic or a monarchy.”
Thyssen told the Kaiser that Hitler was made Chancellor only as “a transitional stage
leading to the reintroduction of the German monarchy.”
America’s Ambassador to Germany, William Dodd, reported to President Roosevelt
in August, 1936:
“At the present moment, more than a hundred American corporations have
subsidiaries here or cooperative understandings. The du Ponts have their allies
in Germany that are aiding in the armament business. Their chief ally is the I. G.
Farben Company (the primary supporter of Hitler) ... Standard Oil Company (of
New York) sent $2,000,000 here in December, 1933, and has made $500,000 a
year helping Germans make Ersatz gas for war purposes; but Standard Oil
cannot take any of its earnings out of the country except in goods ... The
International Harvester Company President told me their business here rose 33%
a year but they could take nothing out. Even our airplane people have secret
arrangements with Krupps. General Motors Company and Ford do enormous
business here through subsidiaries and take no profits out. I mention these facts
because they complicate things and add to war dangers.”
Germany’s two largest tank producers were Opel, a subsidiary of General Motors
(controlled by J. P. Morgan and the du Ponts), and Ford A. G., a subsidiary of the Ford
Motor Company. International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) held a substantial interest
in Focke-Wolfe, an airplane manufacturer who produced German fighter aircraft.
Prior to World War II, the Round Table organization, through various means, made
sure Hitler wasn’t stopped in Austria, the Rhineland, or Sudentenland. His financing was
done through the Warburg-controlled Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam; and the J.
Henry Shroeder Bank (financial agent for the Nazi government), which had branches in
Frankfurt, London, and New York. The Chief Legal Counsel for the Shroeder Bank, was
the firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, whose senior partners included CFR members John
Foster Dulles (who was the top policy-making director for the International Nickel Co.
who helped negotiate an agreement with Farben which helped the Nazis to stockpile
nickel for war purposes) and his brother Allen Dulles (who was a Director on the Board
of the J. Henry Shroeder Bank, and later became the head of the CIA). They were
cousins to the Rockefellers (who later got a controlling interest in Farben).
Hitler indirectly received financing from the Krupps, Kennedys, and the Rothschilds.
The liaison between Hitler and Wall Street was Hjalmar Horace Greely Schact, the
President of Reichsbank, who aided in the rebuilding of Germany. His father worked in
the Berlin office of the Morgan-controlled Equitable Trust Co. of New York. Without a
shadow of a doubt, Hitler was controlled by the Illuminati."

David Rivera- Final Warning, History of the NWO

They seemed to always do this: get in two sides of any conflict and profit from everyone.