It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why we MUST avoid a One World Government

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   
One world government is the ultimate deception. The people who want to put it in place are more evil than Stalin, Hilter, Mao, etc because they will use their followers as instruments in the most perverse ways.

What do I mean by this? In Nazi Germany, and Soviet Russia, atrocities were committed in part because of the hatred and prejudices of the common people in those countries.

The New World Order/One World Government is totally different. The people who carry out the evil deeds of the NWO will be acting out of goodwill.

All the promises the NWO will make, world peace, green energy, respect for minorities and indigenous peoples, will be hollow and the exact opposite will actually be done.

For example, one of the phrases the NWO bandies as pro-OWG propaganda, "Unity in Diversity", is oxymoronic. One World Government would be the greatest enemy of diversity. Think about it. A world nation means a world language. At first, people would speak both their native language and the world language (which would probably be English), but after 50-100 years, they would forget their native languages. You might end racism, but new forms of prejudice and division would replace it, and you would lose a rich tapestry of cultural diversity in the process.

One World Government may or may not end war. It probably wouldn't, you would still have civil war, class wars and culture wars. Even if you did end war, it's almost inevitable that the one world government would eventually commit atrocities against its own people.

If you got a really bad regime in power, they would devastate the entire planet. Having all your eggs in one basket is never a good idea for this reason.

The real aim of OWG, imo, is population reduction. And do you know who the first people they will eliminate are? Indigenous people! Why? Because those are the people that know how to live off the land and avoid the New World Order's oppression. Likely, they will secretly exterminate First Nations all around the world under the guise of "free healthcare", then they will kill off the majority of all the other people.

That's why the One World Government people are more evil than ANY other regime in history. They are manipulating people through their goodwill, not through their personal prejudice. We all want world peace, clean air, and social justice, and the NWO are such clever bastards, that they can even turn THAT against us.

It is our destiny to become a Type 1 Civilization, but that global unification will happen on a spiritual, and not a political level.




posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
The arguments against a World Government could be applied to the United States. Before the states got united, there were at least three languages - English, French, and Spanish. Probably others I don't know about, plus ones spoken by First Nations people. Whatever. Now we speak English mostly. It's not the end of the world.

This "rich tapestry" you speak of doesn't seem to be worth the violence and heartache it causes. "Diversity" has caused more harm than good, IMNSHO. If we had a World Government, eventually we would become somewhat more homogeneous, as we set aside differences and intermarried.

It is true that if the World Government becomes corrupted, it would do immeasurable harm. Just as all the corrupt governments do already. Welcome to the real world. Arguing against it simply because it would be bad if it went bad, is circular reasoning. Don't vote for X, because he might turn out to be a crook. Well, yeah. So you try to make sure X isn't a crook, try to make sure he can't become a crook.

As for the population being reduced, that's a given. The question isn't whether the population will be reduced; it's *HOW* it will be reduced. If we mindlessly keep breeding irresponsibly, then our resources will eventually fail, and our population will collapse. That is the fate of every uncontrolled life form, from yeast on up. Population rises until food fails, then it drops precipitously. The other way is for us to gradually reduce our numbers to sustainable levels. For that to happen, we probably need a world government.

Indigenous people living off the land? What land? It's almost gone.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   
im pretty sure america is not evil enough to do that and other countries would ally up to fight against it.

i know other countries would want to do such thing though.
...which probably wouldnt happen either :p (not, it could)



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by chiron613
 




The arguments against a World Government could be applied to the United States. Before the states got united, there were at least three languages - English, French, and Spanish. Probably others I don't know about, plus ones spoken by First Nations people. Whatever. Now we speak English mostly. It's not the end of the world.


The arguments were made in fact the founding fathers were more about states rights and a very limited Federal government. The NWO movement is very old and it began way back then even but it had had to be done in baby steps.

Jefferson didn't even like the idea of the Louisiana Purchase because he thought it would erode states' rights by increasing federal power.
But he eventually did it despite his predecessors probably being against it also.

The efforts towards a one world government go back hundreds of years and have been attempted in many ways.

The one good thing is it hasn't worked so far



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


On the topic of a unified world.. I will say that..

It must be avoided until everyone wants to unite.

We are not yet mature enough to reach this goal.

A one world govt. at this point would be best described as

"Chaos out of order"

If the change is not wanted then endless chaos will follow.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:37 AM
link   
I'm hardly a nationalist, but what is wrong with having different cultures? I actually think government should become more localized but based on some kind of global human rights, common-sense protocol.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   
Arguing against a one-world government is kind of like arguing against allowing the Kzinti to win. I mean sure, it would really suck if tiger-like warrior aliens managed to conquer earth, no doubt! ...But they don't really exist.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Arguing against a one-world government is kind of like arguing against allowing the Kzinti to win. I mean sure, it would really suck if tiger-like warrior aliens managed to conquer earth, no doubt! ...But they don't really exist.


You really think there isn't a push for a one-world government? It's so obvious there is.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


On the topic of a unified world.. I will say that..

It must be avoided until everyone wants to unite.

We are not yet mature enough to reach this goal.

A one world govt. at this point would be best described as

"Chaos out of order"

If the change is not wanted then endless chaos will follow.


Agreed. Its sad that everyone boo hoos this concept.



Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I'm hardly a nationalist, but what is wrong with having different cultures? I actually think government should become more localized but based on some kind of global human rights, common-sense protocol.


A One World Gov, doesnt mean anyone would have to give up thier culture, or their way of life.
It would be supportive of all cultures.
The real issue is that not all cultures (even human beings at that), tolerate or are even respectful of each other.
Our concept of right and just , what should and shouldnt be done, our materialistic values and judgement of others, is so skew wif that it can be hard to see the field for the sheep.
When we get past the idea of need and I want, greed, and self injustice and so on is when we can look toward a One World Gov. At this stage, it would be suicide to do it.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


IMO only....How can you not. Its there in your face on TV (European Union (cough..cough))



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:06 AM
link   
I am for it.
People putting their "cultural Heritage" before advancement it ignorant. Atrocities will always be committed there wasn't a time in history that they where not a OWG has more pros then cons.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


A push? Sure. There are people trying to do all sorts of damn wacky, unlikely things.

Now, is it possible? No. It's not. About the closest we've seen came in the 50's and 60's, with NATO, the Warsaw Pact, and their assorted allies and proxies. It was shaky for all involved, many nations and regions were unincorporated, allies kept slapping each other around, and the whole shebang started crumbling in the mid-60's with "third way" revolutions and anticolonial movements.

Simply put, a primitive ass-scratching superstitious tribal ape prone to senseless conflict and paranoia (i.e., humans) isn't a very good subject for a totalitarian rule. The more people you have, the truer it is.

The shadowy geniuses supposedly behind this can't even manage a few million Arabs in a single country. You think they're going to pull it off with nearly seven billion of us brachiating cretins?



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Feasible or not, this is the stated goal. To debate either way that the global elite desire a one world government, at this point, is a waste of keystrokes and braincells.

www.ft.com...

"I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.

A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.

So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might...."

So its time to stop asking 'is this the plan?' and time to start asking 'do we want this plan?'



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Hopefully humans wont be around long enough for this to happen. There would be nowhere to run when your government starts making people disappear, and nobody to complain to.

Today you can leave the country if things get really bad under a oppressive regime. But you cant leave the planet.



[edit on 4-10-2009 by Copernicus]



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
flu mist. great vaccine for spreading the h1n1 live virus. a weakened version but with flu mist, viral shedding will occur for 20 days after its inhaled. the weakened virus gets coughed back and forth between poeple, mutating alittle each time, getting stronger and stronger. then......bam....a strain of flu that kills 90% of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

this is the sick facts, people. best thing you can do is strengthen your immune system the best you can. hope you can beat it.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by blackpheonix
I am for it.
People putting their "cultural Heritage" before advancement it ignorant. Atrocities will always be committed there wasn't a time in history that they where not a OWG has more pros then cons.


So you think all nations should give up their culture, forget their history and become Hollywood-American, if we want peace?

People will find new things to fight over, trust me. We need to learn to coexist, not destroy our differences altogether.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Seeker


A One World Gov, doesnt mean anyone would have to give up thier culture, or their way of life.
It would be supportive of all cultures.


You really think so? You don't think it would show a bias to certain cultures?

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Donnie Darko]



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Neo_Serf
 


Please dont take the EU as a good example.

The EU is completelly based on corporatism, no place for you and me there.
You´d start screaming if you read certain passages of the Lisbon Treaty.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
If it turned out like Star Trek then I don't think it would be bad, but nothing good will come from anything being forced, every country on earth needs to reach the 21st century(so many are still living in the past) and then unanimously decide on how to proceed. I for one don't think we will ever make any sort of significant progress in space until we unite as a world. Sadly I don't think I'll see such a thing in my lifetime, greed and pride will always get in the way.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


at this moment in our history.. no certainly not



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join