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.

 

What is it you are truly fighting for or against?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
The New World Order and the One World Government are complex subjects today. As I see it, there are three stances on these subjects in todays world. For, against, and indifferent. All of which, people feel strongly about. Those that are for, are for them 100%. Those that are against, are against them 100%. Those that are indifferent really do not care, nor do they want to be bothered with making a decision 100%. What is it about this subject that has the for and against so dedicated to their views?

 


On the for side, the conclusion would be a society of people living and working together within a strict set of laws governing the way we act toward each other and each others property. A global society with the freedom to travel to any continent, only limited by the individuals actions in their place within the society. A centralized banking and monetary system allowing one to handle their credits as they choose. A drop of illegal activity such as drugs due to a non cash transference. Less fear among the people due to the regulation of guns in the public based on the previous actions of the applicant. A global workforce for the betterment of Human kind. In short, a global set of laws governing public responsibility toward each other and each others property, structured for global peace.

On the against side, the conclusion would be a society of people of the separated individual and separated governments protecting their own. A return to the freedom to do as they wish under their own responsibility of respecting each other and each others property and rights. The freedom to move within their individual country and globally with the permission of the foreign governments. The freedom of everyone owning guns regardless of their background or intention. A transparent Government system of both the State and Federal level with the State overseeing the Federal government instead of the other way around. The right to act and do as you wish while being respectful(by the individual interpretation of the understanding). The freedom of commerce within a backed monetary system of tangible goods. In short, personal responsibility of actions while expecting your neighbor to do the same, lack of structure for freedom of domination.

On the indifferent, Compliance based on the average societal view. The ability to stay within the norm without the responsibility of personal decision beyond the home. The freedom to follow and flow with the changes of society based on global events, but structured around the family unit and conformity to the norm. In short, simplicity, acceptance and conformity to the actions of voted officials.

 


The problem I see, is that we are working for Civilization, rather than, Society and the betterment of Human kind. Value is placed on money, property, and position, rather than life and the betterment of the Human Race and its existence. We as a Race of Human Beings have, are, and always will be a slave to the system, unless we become nomadic and live only for ourselves. A true life of anarchy, with liberty and rights being offered only by the individual, with no code of reference. If I am to be a member of Society, it is my opinion, to have an acceptable code of ethics, taught and followed by all, and free from religious doctrines, would be a benefit to Society.

We look at the economy of the World as if the credits we use are finite, from a perspective of today with reference of yesterday. In a one world government the stability of the credit balances out, as there are no conflicts of value from continent to continent, but in order to make the shift the entire current structure must falter and collapse making way for the new. In nature, the caterpillar enters into its cocoon, and gives up its freedom, in order to gain more freedom than it had originally. It does not fight. It simply follows the process and is rewarded for it. Unfortunately, this puts that cocoon at the mercy of nature and some do not survive.

 


After reviewing the above descriptions, I honestly feel the One World Government would be most beneficial and safe for society as a whole. Everyone in equality to each other regardless of continent of birth, with the opportunities being left to the best possible applicant, promoting education and dedication to our fellow man.
Our freedoms today are based on compliance with the Law. I see no difference. What I do see is 6 billion people doing their own thing with no common ground in which to become united. Definitions and understandings of the meaning of "responsible" are beyond count and the definition of "respect" infinitely changing with the individual situation. I want a world of peace and acceptance of the individual, but I do not see that happening without a "TRUE" set of guidelines in which to follow. Currently, these guidelines are taught by the Parent or Guardian based on their opinions and life experiences, Schools, dependent on funding and lack of responsible control in the classroom, and the Media, pulling the thoughts and understandings in an infinite amount of directions.

I do have a fear and paranoia of the transition however, as I am sure that some of you do as well. Because of the state of the Human Race, as it is today, the only possible outcome is global war, population thinning, incarceration, and extreme control in order to make the transition to a single structure of Society. This is what I am fearful of, as my life is important to me(maybe others as well), but in the grand scheme of it all, I am just another body, mouth, and potential earner to the Government, as is everyone else below the top 1%. I do not know anyone who would voluntarily sign up to be thinned out, making those that make the decisions the bad guy during the transition stage. It only takes two generations to make a permanent change to Society, but it is those two generations that will suffer for the common good to be built. I will probably be one that will be "shut down" as I am opinionated and will fight for my life and the lives of those around me and I refuse to go quietly into the night.

 


My questions to you are these,

What is it you are truly fighting for or against and where do you fit into both the world we live in today and the world of tomorrow?

 

Feel free to comment on any and all of the above, as I know many of you will, but please answer the questions, if not for me, but for yourself.

edit on 1-7-2011 by IPILYA because: I moved the lines.




posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by IPILYA
 


Im against a One World Government. Not 100% forever, perhaps, but Im definitely against one now.

Why? One, evolution, and free market economics both have in common the idea that things work better and more efficiently when there are lots of competitors. Nations are competitors. And they do well differentially because their cultures are different. Some do better than others, some make their people happier, some crash and burn repeatedly, and thats how cultures evolve.

I think competition between nations is desirable, so our human cultures continue to evolve.

War is an undesirable side effect of competition between nations, but, a one world government is not a guarantee there will be no war. And there are ways to diminish the problem of war without a one world government.

My second main reason, besides the fact that a one world government is inconsistent with nature, is that leaders cannot manage large nations in such a way that the people are happy, the economy stable, and the government reflects the real needs of the nation. So why would we assume that if we make it bigger, and more complex, they will manage better? Related to the issue of war, and why I said a one world government will not solve the problem of violent conflict, it is likely that a one world government in trying to please the majority, when the majority is so culturally diverse, will end up pleasing no one. And that will lead to repeated attempts to return to self governance. When and if nations the size of the EU, Russia, and the US run well and the people are happy and the economy stable, then it may be time to try a larger unit.

Lastly, economies cycle. Its something you learn in freshman economics. The nice thing about many small economies is they arent all expanding at once, or all contracting at once. Its like a safety net. If one crashes, there are others in a more favorable state who might be able and willing to help out. But when the worlds economy is linked together into one, a crash is absolute. Everyone is suffering at once. And that, again can lead to war.

We arent really that great at managing complexity yet. We just arent ready to make that leap, and honestly, I dont know if it will ever be our ideal solution because it ISNT the formula we see nature using. And nature has had billions of years to refine its technique. If "an entire species not competing" was a viable strategy, I would expect to see that reflected somewhere in nature, and.................I dont.

Nature always has a couple pots cooking in case one proves no good. A one world government is putting all of humanities eggs in one basket, and handing it to people who we know to be inept and hoping for a great outcome.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I'm all for a one world government. Aldous Huxley explains why it is necessary in "The Human Situation" You can rent it from your local library. That Rockefeller quote about how there will be a one government is taken directly from this book. Basically, a one world government is the only way to prevent a future world/nuclear war.

I'm against how it's currently being implemented by an elite group.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Just let me go where I please, do what I please as long as I don't hurt anyone doing it. Just let me succeed and be happy, and don't tax the sh't out of me. When people get in my way that's when they may get hurt. Step on my toes, and I'll break your foot. The biggest fear that the NWO has or any oppressive organization has should be the man with nothing to lose. Take it all away and we have problems.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
I'm all for a one world government. Aldous Huxley explains why it is necessary in "The Human Situation" You can rent it from your local library. That Rockefeller quote about how there will be a one government is taken directly from this book. Basically, a one world government is the only way to prevent a future world/nuclear war.

I'm against how it's currently being implemented by an elite group.


So I guess that you are not a "end justifies the means" kind of guy/gal.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
There are too many different ideology's in the world for this to work. You would have groups that would want to live by standards they think are important to them, like the colonies during the revolution.

You would have all types of religious factions and political factions wanting a say in what and how things are done. The overall government of a one world system would have to be so bland and generic so as to please everyone it would be highly ineffective.

You would have revolutions all over the place with people wanting independence to live and pratice their beliefs and it would be very hard for one government to control the entire population. At the current time if people do not like the system they live under they more than likely have some other country to go to where their beliefs are either in practice or more fully accepted.

Under a one world government people would not have this choice. I believe it will happen but probably not until we start colonizing space. I can see that system as being one unit as it makes more sense than a bunch of different factions all doing the same thing. And they still have their roots on earth to return too if they feel to pressured up there.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by AnimositisominA
 

Well, the means they're using makes me think that the end we're heading to isn't so good.
And there's very few cases where the ends justify the means. You can usually find some other means to reach the same end.
guy


edit on 1-7-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I see any government beyond the village/city level as evil and intrusive. I want my own space, and the freedom to do as I wish, to worship the God I choose, to marry the woman I choose, and I want nosy government and corporations out of my life/business. Power corrupts. More power or larger concentrations of power lead to exponential increases in corruption. Community government can be held accountable more easily and can also be limited in scope more easily. The bigger the government, the more power it has, the more corruption.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

reply to post by kro32
 

 


Thank you for you in-depth perspective and I agree we are not ready, but I don't think we ever will be, so we might as well get it over with for the betterment of Human Kind. I think with a single law structure with a set of guidelines that do not change, the way one treats another will become uniform. In my opinion the Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be a starting point. Obviously local law enforcement and governments exist, but they all adhere to the one set of laws. If one culture does something and it does not violate those stable laws they are not in the wrong and would be accepted by all. Its, imo, the over definition of a simple understanding that causes the conflict.

P.S. Cockroaches. Are we not better than them? We should be.

 






edit on 1-7-2011 by IPILYA because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by IPILYA
 


A lot of that universal declaration is communistic and/or socialistic claptrap. You have a "right" to paid holidays? a "right" to social security. Claptrap. Any government big enough to "guarantee" such "rights" is big enough to enslave you.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by IPILYA
 


What do you mean by cockroaches and how is that relevant?

And, I think your idea that "we never will be ready, thus we should just do it" is odd. Irrational even. Why would it make sense to do it if you think we arent ready for it, and we might never be?

And for those who will think its the only way to eliminate war, I disagree. Wars are over resources, primarily, and while religion, nationalism, etc., are used to pump people up and make them want to fight the other guy, they are not really CAUSES of war. Conflict over land, resources, food, water, those are causes of war.

If we dont address the problem of our overpopulation and unjust distribution of resources, a one world government will do nothing to prevent war. And if we do address the problem of our population growth and correct the unjust distribution of resources, a one world government wont be necessary.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
I am fighting for my integrity as this is an attribute that is lacking within the world these days. The aim is to maintain our self determination.

As for the New World Order, it is changing and evolving every day. From the many different dreams, ideals and possibilities you have presented two of the main branches. As long as the system is not pushed too hard to collapse I would like to see something that goes beyond any one possible imagination as all the different ideas merge and evolve with the best ones rise to the top.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


I realize this which is why I said to Start with not accept as is. The problem is, is that it IS the responsibility of big government to protect the rights and they have abused their authority and power.

 


reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Cockroaches. You said

If "an entire species not competing" was a viable strategy, I would expect to see that reflected somewhere in nature, and.................I dont.


 


I feel as though I over simplified my statement I apologize. We can see that the Government is pulling us to, at the very least a Police state and by definition we are loosely already in one(In the U.S.). We can see a very Plausible future in a one world government if things continue along the path it is today. What I meant was "Lets get this party started" in other words, the battle of the future is inevitable as it matters not who we elect. It was not meant as an "Ok lets jump into a one world government". In order to do anything within politics you must follow their rules which we, as a people, have no control over. The only way to fix it is to remove everyone, decide new protocol, establish new policy, remove the ability of lobbyists, and enforce the "For the People" clause. The problem with the Constitution, as I see it, is that it was written by and for people of like mind. As this nation has grown and become the melting pot it is and through the changes in the publics mentality, it is no longer the vision of the original authors. It is continuously being amended or new statutes put in place to attempt to keep up with these changes when a new modern statement of law may be better for us in the long run.
Basically, If we are going to fight, lets get on with it, If we are going to succumb, lets get on with it, either way lets get moving.

Resources should be shared not horded and valued above Human kind, and resources should be replentishable in every case if it is not than we need to find a way to achieve it as such IMO.

Honestly I do not think we are over populated. Settled in centralized locations, yes. We just need to spread out in balance with nature. We have the technology to live in any environment on this planet. We have the technology to mass produce food in giant buildings with controlled environments and multiple floors. We have the technology to build grazing land under the ground opening space for Humans and nature. Yes, there are many peaceful ways to live in harmony within the confines of accepted law, not rule. The problem remains the old government must be changed.

edit on 1-7-2011 by IPILYA because: I changed wording.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by IPILYA
 





The problem is, is that it IS the responsibility of big government to protect the rights
NO! It is not. It is scary to me that you think so. Those rights belong to us, endowed upon us by our creator. To count on an evil institution like a government comprised of men(meaning humans, not males exclusively) to maintain and protect those rights is what has put the USA in the predicament where we currently find ourselves. It is the job of the individual and the people collectively to safeguard our God given rights. This is a huge problem with atheism and darwinism in my opinion. When you do not believe in a God or Creator, then where do those rights come from? The only possible answer is from "man", ourselves, which means they can be taken from us by those in power over us. When we trust in the Lord as the source of our freedoms, there is no power higher than he. Thus no one can take them, except that they use force.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


It is their responsibility to Protect them not give them they are to be expected and understood. That does not mean they did not fail or abuse this issue by altering those rights. God given rights are universal. They are not given by Humans, but by God, and should carry over to Humans regardless of belief in a higher power or creator.

 


Anyone who has an idea that would help the people of the world to realize equality, under the same rights, and to treat each other with the respect that comes with it, I am always ready to consider it.
edit on 1-7-2011 by IPILYA because: I changed wording.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by IPILYA
 
The answer is simple. JESUS.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
It doesn't work. It never will, even on a small scale. Now in the US, we have local goverment, state government, and federal government. There are still neighborhoods at war with other neighborhoods. It is only peace, if you have enough money to live in a rural area, or an uppity gated community area. Anywhere else, the police are at war with the people, trying to suck more money out of them. There are people at war with poverty, selling drugs, mugging people, robbing businesses.

The only way it will work is from the bottom up. Raising the standard of living for the people on the bottom. Aleviate individual suffering. Then there can be peace.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by IPILYA

Cockroaches. You said

If "an entire species not competing" was a viable strategy, I would expect to see that reflected somewhere in nature, and.................I dont.


But all cockroaches of one type all around the world do not have one leader. They arent one "group." In fact they really arent considered social insects at all. (Like ants and bees for instance) So they arent examples of organisms not in competition, they are competing as far as we can tell on the individual level, and not even cooperating on a group level.

www.bio.umass.edu...


Q55: Justin Winstead asks:
I had a debate with my brother and his wife over whether or not cockroaches live in organized groups. I said that they do live in organized groups and they acted like I was crazy. Can you set us straight please?

A: Justin, Social structure in the cockroach pest species is next to invisible. However there are a few indications of group organization. Most such behavior would not be considered social:



Originally posted by IPILYA
I feel as though I over simplified my statement I apologize. We can see that the Government is pulling us to, at the very least a Police state and by definition we are loosely already in one(In the U.S.). We can see a very Plausible future in a one world government if things continue along the path it is today. What I meant was "Lets get this party started" in other words, the battle of the future is inevitable as it matters not who we elect. It was not meant as an "Ok lets jump into a one world government".




Ah. Yes. I see what you mean now. I think it would be wise to stop this before it gets much further too, mostly because the more we get enmeshed in it, the more damage we will take when it collapses. But human beings tend to wait until things are already really bad before they act to change things, and so even though it would be wise to stop it now, we wont until really bad things are happening to a large percentage of us. Its a shame, but thats how we work.



Originally posted by IPILYA
Resources should be shared not horded and valued above Human kind, and resources should be replentishable in every case if it is not than we need to find a way to achieve it as such IMO.


I agree that resources should be shared not horded, although there are tricky little catches to the way humans work that we have to deal with to make that feasible. The tragedy of the commons, for one. Resources should be distributed more fairly, but, there also have to be serious consequences for those who squander theirs. Or we dont maintain the "differential selection" aspect of nature that has driven us upwards for millions of years. You cant, in other words select for stupidity by protecting and enabling it. We have to let some people succeed and some fail, the best we can do is to put their success or failure in their own hands rather than make it about one group brutally crushing any weaker group in number or force.




Originally posted by IPILYA
Honestly I do not think we are over populated. Settled in centralized locations, yes.


We dont have to agree on everything. I think we are waaaaaay over the carrying capacity right now. Like 6 billion over. I dont think spreading out will save us. I think we need to reproduce less and cut our population by attrition or nature is going to cut it for us in a very short while the hard way.

I believe if you look at nature, which has been operating for billions of years, you can get a very good idea of what you need to do to survive. And you can mold yourself to natures model, rather than blindly be molded by it. And, nature has this neat little trick it tends to do in all sorts of areas of biology. It overproduces and then prunes back to what it needs and works.

You hands are an example of this. In utero, you have webbing for a while between your fingers. Nature does not just produce fingers, it produces a paddle, and then sculpts fingers using programmed cell death. Another example is the human brain. It way over produces gray matter, and then prunes it back in adolescence/early adult hood.

It happens to species too, and, Im pretty sure we are about to get pruned.


edit on 1-7-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a free press
honest elections
due process
integrity in leadership
antipropaganda
a sovereign debt free currency

tolerance



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


A faith and/or belief in Jesus does not and never will bring peace to this world, unless of course your idea is to commit genocide of all non believers and all that is left is Christians. Which is what all of the 3 major religion types have done and in some cases still do.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join