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.


Why don't we start our own NWO.

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 07:16 AM
Hi Everyone,

I’m a big fan of "Lets not talk problems , lets talk solutions" . So here on ATS its clear that most of us think that the world wide governments and states don't have the best interests of humanity at heart. There is too much greed, corruption and power mongering in every aspect of society. There is a general feeling that the world is socially, intellectually and morally degrading , which seems to be speeding up.

Everyone sounds tired of the Wars, Killings, Extremisms, value systems, economy, politics.

So lets assume we can wipe the board clean and start our own NWO. I'm sure there are enough good minds here on ATS and people with some good ideas. So lets make a start. I will post my Political Manifest a little later on. But we can use this chance to discuss ideas and ambitions.

I think that everyone has the right idea at the moment. Somehow we need to create a world with strong communities and social ties. Where people can have strong and fair value systems, where people are supported and uplifted. A system that creates the drive and ingenuity of the private sector, but also distributes wealth and support like a socialist. Where education involves education of the person, our spirit and EQ as well as our IQ. Economies based on fairness and without greed.

Where religion has evolved to remove the pathetic dogma and hatred and gets back to the roots of love and fairness. Where we evolve and a species.

We don't need utopia , we just need the chance to be the best we can be.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 07:18 AM
Oh...and of course that very touchy subject of population. How much can the world and nature cope with and how do we maintain humanity at the right level so that we don't completley kill off most of the world species and life. I think its clear we are starving the earth of everything she has got.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 07:19 AM

Originally posted by kilas
Why don't we start our own NWO

Because we still have souls...

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 07:30 AM
reply to post by WorldObserver

Im sure if we have soles then we will want something better. So nows a good chance for us, you included, to tell everyone else how we can make this broken earth and species work a little better....for the good of all.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 07:57 AM
So were gonna start our own NWO
with the basis of it being your manifesto, Get rid of "pathetic" dogma in religion and start a eugenics program....hmm this sounds eerily familiar...

welcome to my ignore list

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 08:09 AM
Listen guys, sounds like all you are here for is just to spread for pain and anguish. I just want to start an open debate. And not "Based on my manifesto". IF YOU CAN READ AND UNDERSTAND SIMPLE ENGLISH!! Then you will clearly see Im just asking for people to put ideas forward. And I will put my ideas forward, then poeple can respond with their own views , and we can discuss ideas, and debate ideas.

Cricky. Please people. Only respond to this if you actually understand what is being said here.

Again to repeat the thread - Lets come up with something better instead of moaning all the time. I don't think ATS is about constant moaning. If we don't like something lets have a go at changing it. Thats all im saying. This is called open and free discussion on how we would make a change.

OK Maybe I might have phrased this right....if you could start a new party of your own....what would your ideas be on Policy, Business, People, Social, Economy, Environment. If you don't like what you see now then surley you both must have some kind of idea on what you would like to change? I have a few of my own which I would like to share later on when I have time to write them out. And I'm not saying that my ideas are right. Because someone else might have a better one. Could be an interesting thread.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 08:16 AM
reply to post by kilas

Because power ALWAYS corrupts, however ethical the manifesto, as soon as the 'alternative' NWO is in place, it'll become the inheritors of all regimes that went before it, and will adopt the same, people crushing, self aggrandising behaviour patterns as seen before.

Because once a 'party' has been elected, they stop smelling the BS.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 09:04 AM
reply to post by teapot

Well I agree, But it does not always have to be that way. Perhaps we have it in us somewhere to make a change. Maybe, there is someway of producing a system that is not open to corruption and power mongering. There has to be a something somewhere. Otherwise there is no point...we may as stop typing away on ATS. After all what the point in highlighting the bad if we can't / won't do anything about it. Do we all come to ATS to to tell each other how much crap there is and is this is competition to see who can uncover the most crap. Or, is there a small window of opportunity here.

So far then we have had three people who dont have any ideas on what they would do to make things better. Has everyone given up out there? Does no one have a better idea?

Ok let start with something simple then. Internation Trade and Monetary. We can't have one world currency, but what could we do to make internation trade fairer, with an emphasis on the environment?

Come to think of it this is a big big subject. So lets break this down even further.

Do you think that utilitise such as water and power which support the basic needs of humanity (Maslows Law) and food should be profited from. Is it fair and ethical for example that large super markets make the profits of a small country. So they are profiting from our basic need for food. Should water , food and power be state owned, and all profits be put back into society to fund social projects, better welare, improved farming, solor power farms? So the things that we rely on to live are given to us fairly. Also, could be encourage the same passion for creativity in those idustries if they were state owned? Assuming here that the state is not some power hungry monster and its sole aim is for the benefit of us all? There could be a large group of interest parties and share holders (Who don't own shares as such ) who are from the public to make sure that standards are being met, and they are creating drive, and that goods products and services are being provided.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 09:30 AM

Originally posted by kilas
reply to post by teapot

Ok let start with something simple then. Internation Trade and Monetary. We can't have one world currency, but what could we do to make internation trade fairer, with an emphasis on the environment?

Assuming that international trade needs to exist at all?

Assuming that humanity will never come up with an alternative to money?

Assuming that the environment needs us to take it into consideration when we construct this alternative NWO?

I don't really understand what you mean when you say 'we can't have one world currency'. Any NWO would decide for itself if a global currency would aid it's members to further increase in wealth, take a larger share of the available resources.

This alternative NWO, would it exist within a democratic framework? And if so, which of the existing democratic models do you anticipate would win the vote? Would this issue be for all to vote on or would it be for the 'elect' only?

There is no reason to give up hope. No matter how corrupt any government or regime of the past, there have always been people, who for moral and ethical reasons, make it their business to undermine the worst excesses or protect the most vulnerable. And I think that may the only way to resist, from within, whilst playing the game.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 09:51 AM
"Global Camaraderie need not be dictated by those who fear it the most", my best quote this year.

I've had a gutful of greed. I've had a gutful of war.

Consider this - 20 short years ago we had people, good salt of the earth people, more than happy with their mediocre income and lives. Communities were strong without being fearful. They'd refuse to tread on toes to get ahead.

We're now all being raised to now see that as failure.

I'm as capitilist as the next guy but have we gone too far?

my long way of saying godspeed brother. I'm behind you in theory and possibly action.

[edit on 24-9-2009 by Caveat Lector]

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 10:16 AM
reply to post by Caveat Lector

Me to, I think capitalism is a good if not slightly broken engine. It has done a lot to bolster creativity and drive and try and develop new things. But you are right, the "Get Ahead" attitude has not done us any good.

To reply to a few posts here already.

1) Yes - The new way of working would have to be a wide spread democratic framework. Which model I don't know. But I'm thinking that a de-centralised government seems to have worked best in the UK (When we had it). Councils could manage the region in which they are charged with as they see fit, or as guided by the people. Overal legislation and law is handled by the state as it is now, and those legislations are put forward by interest groups or parties or people, and voted on. Of course we would probably have ti go through most law books and rewrite them.

But all demotracic parties must have equal representation i.e. Religous members, working class, business leaders, proffessionals . In the UK for example the head of transport , or the head of the Health System have no previous experience or knowledge of those how can they effectivley manage their departments? Surley we need the best of the best running these areas?

All people must have access to and be educated in what governments are doind and what their plans are, as well as have the right to vote.

2) One world currency still may not work . But I might be wrong. As I see the economy, you need to have manufacturing, service or consumer based economies. In order from us all to buy TV's for instance, they need to be produced in countries where the price index item for item is of a lower valeu than the people consuming them. If, for example, TV's were produced un England, they would be too expensive for english people to buy. Because the price index in the UK is higher than that of China. World trade is a tricky on....any university economy gads or professors on ATS?

This may end up being a huge subject. But hey...we have until 2012 :-)

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 11:17 AM
Ok , I guess we may have made a start somewhere here.

So, what would make up a good world and regional governmental structure?

My thoughts would be around this...starting from the voter upwards.

Voter / Joe Public
Local Representative - This would be a person (elected, nominated, or part of a community service i.e. national service) who stays in post for a period of time to act as a voice and ideas person for their community. Which could be a Post Code/Zip Code, Small village and so on. Although not a paid position, they are there to gather data and dedicate a small amount of time to advising local government on peoples opinions and needs. This need not be one person , it could be a team of people.
Tier 2 Government / Local Council
Local govs would be part of a two tier structure for regions i.e. counties or cities. These would have some control over providing locals services and influencing decisions makers in tier 1. In the UK there are sometimes unity councils which control entire counties, and no control is given to individual communities.

Tier 2 would also have some responsibility in high population areas i.e. acting under one cities tier 1 government.
Tier 1 Government
This would be the larger scale county or city councils . Control for education, health, roads and transport , security and police and so on. Policy at this level is suggested in tier 1 and 2 , as well as views of local repetitive take into account.

At this level, civil servants have to have experience in some form or another to represent their department i.e. head of transport must come from a background with skills and knowledge relevant to the job (This is not the case in the UK. Often heads are administrators more than innovators)

NB * In order to make sure that the community is being best represented tier 1 and 2 must have members of the public (Elected, Volunteers, or national service) who can give a little time to take part in decision making)


Regional Government i.e. Region like east midlands, London and the south, or States if in the US.

These will have overall budgetary control and head up Health, Education, Spiritual , transport and so on. These level will have the overall management function.


National government –
Overall control of each country.
Full taxing and financial control (Could there be an internationally agreed level of tax?)
Full control over Law and Legislation, Laws and Leg have to be put through the World Council and agreed upon by all members. Things like legal age of consent , marriage laws across all faiths, legal matters, business law and so on….all the big stuff.

Parties can not be funded by external interests. That leaves the government open to all sorts of corruption. i.e. in USA your government is funded by special interest groups like oil companies. I’m sorry I just don’t believe you get a donation of several millions into your account from an oil company and not be expected to do something in return….like look the other way when they knowingly destroy and African community and pollute the land.

Instead, the TV and Media could have slots which are allotted to the parties for their own advertising. A limited amount of funding should also come from Tax, which it does anyway, to enable parties to communicate their message.

Governments and people are elected but this comes with a more altered mission. You would elect people you think would be best at managing the world systems as well as driving policy if needed on an international scale.


posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 11:19 AM

World Government –

National governments would report in to the World Government. The world has no power to influence policy, they are just their to run the world forum and to ensure that national governments can influence change and make sure that communications take place between all governments. National government comes up with laws, policy and legislation, and the world government obtains all the views of all governments.

The world Government would have to ensure the basic principles of humanity, such as (Only examples here people…open to change and ideas):

Open education for all (Regardless of sex and colour), To provide a world health care system so that all people are given a good level of care and support throughout their life, to ensure that people play an active role in making the world better, To provide fair and open trade between all countries, To provide education and welfare or work to those who need it, To ensure that humanity can practice religion and to uphold the overall spirit of humanity, To see that wealth is distributed fairly, to encourage a good set of values and ethics for humanity which are decided on as a race.

I’m sure the structure will have to be far more complicated than this but it could be a start, or catalyst for a start somewhere.

I am stuck on a few things though. Such as population… how can you ethically manage population. We are a very successful species after all and if we are not careful there will be over 50 billion people by the end of the century. We are struggling with around 7 billion. I think the only way would be for all people to agree to a charter of 2 children per couple or something like that….its a tricky area. But we can’t keep breeding like rabbits. The reason the Bad NWO exists because some public school boy toffs at the top don’t think we are bright enough as a race to figure out a way ourselves.

I know some of you say...well lets just leave that too god. Well I just don't think they are that "Hands On" Unfortunatley. We have to find the path ourselves.

Somehow we need to have the same drive that we get from consumerism/capitalism. But remove the thing that’s makes the need to vast amounts of wealth our only goal as well. Both tricky.

posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 10:22 PM
I like your opening post but the rest is pretty similar to what's already in place. The best way to stop the NWO is de-centralization, which is the opposite of everything they want (denies them power). Fragments are far harder to control - and much easier for smaller groups to take over.

posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:25 AM
reply to post by kilas

Sounds like exactly what is already in place, so I don’t understand what you are trying to achieve?? BTW, I have not given up, but as Teapot so eloquently pointed out, power ultimately corrupts.

So even in your little fantasy world you have left out the main ingredient that invariably leads to its downfall – human nature.

Human nature will always fall victim to greed and power. As long as men are born with testosterone then there will always be competition and the need to control others. It is innate in this animal body – a by-product of evolution.

So no matter how high and mighty and moral your dreams are, you cannot control how other people will act. Until you can convince people to accept responsibility for their own actions then you will never achieve this utopian society you dream of.

I am not trying to rain on your parade, I am just trying to highlight the obvious that I think you have missed.

BTW, the road to unification is to abolish Government, Religion, and Money. Unfortunately, at this time and place, humans will fight to the death to maintain these infrastructures so maybe come back in 1000 years and try again

posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:36 AM
I think that fixing one thing at the time is much much better then coming hard with utopia - or semi-utopia plan. And first thing to do is to improve education, not dumb people down or allow this "dumbing down", ensure that people would respect getting education and educate people to some agreed-upon basic moral values. Make greed in excess something to be ashamed of. Right now it is the opposite, very greedy are considered among "winners" and less greedy are sometimes considered "losers".
This is most important. Not only system shapes the people, people shape the system too.
By the way, if you could get your NWO plan going, what would you do to annoying opposition that halts the progress to common good? Just asking, you know.

new topics

top topics


log in