OP, you make some decent points but some outright fallacies. I respect where you're trying to go, but you need to be set straight on a few points.
1) We are not a democratic nation. We are, technically, a constitutional republic. There is a world of difference and it's that misunderstanding
which forms the foundation of your arguement that you've made multiple times about the 50 states breaking up. America was never formed as a true
democracy, nor should it be understood or thought to be one. Being a Literati/Intelligencia, you should know better.
2) There are a great many documents which provide very conclusive proof of conspiracy over at least a hundred years to subsume power from the people
and concentrate it into a corporate plutocratic class. Here's a good place to catch up: www.abovetopsecret.com...
3) Absolute power corrupts absolutely; the goal of one world government is idyllic at best. The reality is that while people maintain their current
moral and ethical structures that the nearer we approach such a beast, the more likely we will break out into faction warfare or coups. The lure of
ultimate power over humanity would as such simply be too much. Unless of course we can isolate psychopathy out of our genetic pool or develop a
benevolent synthetic intelligence to serve as permenant president ;P
So while I can see what you're getting at, to answer your question - the reason to fight a one world order is that it's not the one world order that
we believe is the ideal solution. Frankly if it was a freedom-based constitutional republic as the founding fathers had intended in liber I'd be very
much on board. But the reality is that it is not.
Everyone knows this quote..
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a
world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries." ." - D. Rockefeller
But not everyone knows this one:
"Everything is in place - after 500 years - to build a true 'new world'
in the Western Hemisphere... And what happens if we don't pass NAFTA?
I truly don't think that 'criminal' would be too strong a word for
rejecting NAFTA." - D. Rockefeller
As I stated before; I'm not opposed to a world order - just one run by the likes of D. Rockefeller and criminals like him. These people actively
support and encourage dictatorships and tyrannical government. Our meddling in the middle east (ongoing current events)and south america (school of
the americas) should serve sufficient proof of that. Or Kissinger's perennial love of the chinese government (along with mao's genocide
- not a GB fan, but it's a good vid).
I hope you can understand why as such most people are leery of ANY world government, especially given your plainly sympathetic viewpoint towards the
current 'movers and shakers'. I hope you take the time to understand that not everyone is a crackpot here; that many are just scared - scared of
seeing what many of us have researched for in some cases decades come to fruition in such rapid fashion. A great many of us are just checking off
the checklist of 'world tyranny' as it goes at this point, watching the current bid for power and feeling powerless to stop it. We watch as more
people wake up and hope that they are aware enough to understand the grave threat we face - not the movement.. but the people in charge of it. The
in-bred, strangely occult, HUGELY powerful figures who run the helm of this great ship of humanity.
What we need are people like you to stop being obstacles and start being advocates.
edit on 9-7-2011 by rlnochance because: spelling