One World, One Government.

One Currency, One Language.

One World, No Borders.

ATS is about denying ignorance.

What is wrong with these things if they are applied correctly and fairly?

Originally posted by Phlynx
One World, One Government.

One Currency, One Language.

One World, No Borders.

ATS is about denying ignorance.

What is wrong with these things if they are applied correctly and fairly?

What you propose sounds kinda.....dull.

With no diversity of cultures the world would be a boring place indeed.

Also, I strongly believe in the principle of Subsidarity. People are best able to rule over themselves at the LOCAL level.

Some Mega-govt half way around the world will never understand what goes on at the local level. Look how disconnected the guys in Washington are from the rest of the nation.

Another thing is the old maxim; absolute power corrupts absolutely. If the world gov becomes corrupt and oppressive, where will the people have to go to escape?

I'll take the world as it is today, with all it's imperfections.

Originally posted by FortAnthem

Originally posted by Phlynx
One World, One Government.

One Currency, One Language.

One World, No Borders.

ATS is about denying ignorance.

What is wrong with these things if they are applied correctly and fairly?

What you propose sounds kinda.....dull.

With no diversity of cultures the world would be a boring place indeed.

Also, I strongly believe in the principle of Subsidarity. People are best able to rule over themselves at the LOCAL level.

Some Mega-govt half way around the world will never understand what goes on at the local level. Look how disconnected the guys in Washington are from the rest of the nation.

Another thing is the old maxim; absolute power corrupts absolutely. If the world gov becomes corrupt and oppressive, where will the people have to go to escape?

I'll take the world as it is today, with all it's imperfections.

So your suggesting some sort of Anarchist local government that goes from the ground up instead of the top down?

Originally posted by FortAnthem
With no diversity of cultures the world would be a boring place indeed.

Yet this world would not be our only world, and remarkable encounters amongst the stars, spheres and the black there between ought not be "boring indeed."

It's do or probably die.

I'm suggesting we go back to the Constitution as it was meant to work.

The Federal govt having limited powers dealing with defence and handling disputes between the states. All other powers are given to the states or to the people without constant Federal interferance.

Different countries allow for a diversity of cultures to fluorish. They allow for experimentation in govt policies so we can see if some ideology, say communism would actually work without commiting the whole world to that course.

If someone is dissatisfied with their current govt, they could vote with their feet and go to some country more amenable to their tastes, so long as they are willing to assimilate peacibly.

Anarchy is bad. One world govt would be to. Freedom of diversity, IMO is the best policy.

This is a wonderful dream the problem is reality. My local representatives, the mayor etc. etc. cant even get our city in order let alone the country and definately not at all if it comes to the entire world. People in power will abuse it and will be corrupt. Our species simply couldnt cope with this.

Career politicians is a huge problem and I don't want to see them move their revolving door sytem to a global model. Id rather have anarchy before I ever settled for a one world government. Until we as a species can grow up and shirk the greedy and selfish impulses it will never work for the people.

But like utopia, its fun to day dream about.

Originally posted by Phlynx
One World, One Government.

Who gets to decide who governs? I would not expect the people who live in the wonderful places to easily let the majority of the world who live in awful places rule over them. Nor should the people who live in the world's shangi la's dictate how people in hard places live. There is no way a world government could help all people everywhere. Many people would suffer from lack of knowlegdeable leadership.

One Currency, One Language.

Language is derived from culture. A beduin does not need as many words for snow as an eskimo. One language would either be to narrow to meet the needs of all people or so all conclusive it would be impossible to learn.

Whoever controls the world currency would be so powerful they would be dangerous. Fortunately the Arabs will never fall for a world currency unless they control it.

What is wrong with these things if they are applied correctly and fairly?

Fair always depends on perspective. Is it wrong for a starving family to steal a loaf of bread? It is not wrong from the childs perspective. From the shop owners perspective it is wrong. Fair is unacheivable in this realm. A world court would be spread too thin. Anarchy and lawlessnes will be the result of such a consolidation of power.


[edit on 24-12-2009 by eradown]

I prefer individual, sovereign nations, with their/our existing languages, cultures, currencies (if money is still needed in the next paradigm) etc., in the spirit of diversity, variety, lack of boredom etc., BUT, only if it can be done without rule BY secrecy, i.e. anything even remotely resembling the National "Security" STATE and Black Budget, AND without any religious, not to be confused with spiritual, influence... Second line...

The problem is CONSOLIDATION OF POWER.

All power will eventually be put in the hands of a group of oligarchs or in the hands of one man. And god help us when that man is a Hitler or a Stalin or a Pol Pot, Kim Jong-Ill, pervez Musharraf or a Fidel Castro.

All these things you mention cannot be "applied correctly" because a one world government will always turn into a dictatorship.

To get the Muslims and Jews to 'all get along' would be quite an accomplishment! Same thing for the many religious and ethnic groups in the Balkans. It is the same around the world: racism, ethnism, religious intolerance, it is pervasive and one language might help, but wouldn't solve the problem. No borders would even make it worse.

Very rarely will the special banner be used in-thread, but the situation here is ripe and most certainly calls for unusual action.

Behold!



"There's no time any more..."

I like the idea of a One World Government, with American controlling the world and Republicans controlling America.

This world needs a keeper.

After WWII, America and the Soviet Union tussled for control of large chunks of the world. At some point, the Soviets became corrupted by the depressing nature of egalitarian communism and power-hungry forces from within, causing their system to collapse and vaulting Americans to the top spot in the human power chain. Being of a fundamentally liberal nature on social policy, but a conservative nature in economics, Americans began to create an environment friendly for American corporations to go multinational.

Because this new arrangement would be a new form of colonialism, and because colonialism had created such a disaster none wanted to revisit it, the process of exporting raw materials from the third world to the first had to be dressed up in a "positive" form that all the television-fed sheep would find rewarded their sense of self image. As a result the current age takes the yearning of the last age, for a world without a constant threat of nuclear conflict from its partisanship, into unipartisan government.

The problems with this are manifold. First, it will contribute to the utter destruction of the environment, as this centralized government will like America before it make token concessions every year without addressing the real problem. Second, it will strengthen corporations across continents and in every voting market possible, causing them to be more powerful than ever before. Third, it will standardize cultures, languages, medias and heritage across the globe, normalizing humanity into a conformity to an average.

While the mythos of globalism and a peaceful world under one government seems appealing, it is this emotional appeal that is a hallmark of social manipulation for the further profits of those who recognize the rules are fake and act accordingly. A more sensible world order would allow local governments to decide whether or not they want to participate in Colonialism II without the presence of a superpower breathing down their necks. Whether this will be acceptable to the masses looking for an ego-boost remains to be seen.

As long as the government doesn't have any people count me in! I really believe in one currency because it eliminates all the money trading. I think the simpler the economy, the stronger it will be.

The NWO is only the name we have given to the powers of corruption. It the New World Order can still be ours.

Originally posted by Phlynx
One World, One Government.

One Currency, One Language.

One World, No Borders.

ATS is about denying ignorance.

What is wrong with these things if they are applied correctly and fairly?

What is wrong you ask? That you have no right to take away my culture, language, way of life!

These things define who we are from the inside out.

Let me guess, you want:

1 currency - probably US dollar
1 language - probably English
1 world - probably the United Countries of America.
No borders I can agree with.

Do you see the problem with that?