Originally posted by METACOMET
Your conclusion may be well meaning but it is without understanding.

You are simply an authoritarian; A vast majority of people are. There is an element of human nature that relishes in having control over another or others. Our current political and social construct is based upon the authoritarian values of physical coercion, compulsion and control. When these values are entrenched into a culture it becomes a positive feedback loop, and it takes hardly any energy to get into it. Power over others is a hell of a drug.

Your error- and the danger- is first in the conceit inherent in the desire to plan the lives of others; second, the force necessary to impose that plan on unwilling subjects. This is not a formula for freedom but for tyranny.

Obedience and subjection to authority is intrinsically at odds with the way human beings come to live satisfying lives. Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can live in freedom.

edit on 11-7-2011 by METACOMET because: sp

I would never want a government that infringes on human rights. If anything that is the opposite of what the guidestones are saying.I think from the thread I have pointed out that human rights are important... I think on rule 8's opinion. Of course it may probably be tough to start up the NWO, but when it comes into fruition, it will be good for the long run. If anything, it is our only hope to start progressing as a species through science. Imagine all the time spent on wars for power was diverted to technology. It would be what we wanted.

I don't usually post so many times in a single thread, so please forgive me, but this is something I feel very adamant about! Good reply. However, I still believe your intentions are well meaning but without understanding. I admit, I may also be the one without understanding. But hear me out, please.

The entire basis of a NWO or a "global government" or a "one world government" is very simply concentrated political power. That is the goal. That is the very definition of a global seat of governance. The problem lies in the FACT that concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth.

George Washington once said "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." Which I believe to be a very true statement. After all, six times as many people died at the hand of their own governments during the 20th century than in all that century's wars combined. Think about that for just a minute, please! Governments in the 20th century killed more than the total world population at the time of Christ.

So what is history, then?
History is simply the story of how governments have squandered the blood and treasure of the human race.

Government is force, and politics is the process of deciding who gets to use it on whom, that's all it is. The bigger it is, the more control it assumes and the more force it exudes. History is full of men who promise to govern well, but they mean to govern. They have promised to be good masters, but in the end, they mean to be masters.

So, in a way, the NWO would be very much like the old world order. The difference being that in the past, when men have garnered control and concentrated their political power in an effort to foist their ideologies on innocent others, they have been relegated to spreading their misery only in their corner of the world. If and when a global government succeeds, they will control all political power and there will be nowhere to run and nobody to fight back. It would not be armed with superior morals or honesty, but with superior physical strength. This, in a nutshell, is what the NWO is all about.

Belief in the "good intentions" of concentrated political power is foolish. Don't be blind to their actual intended results. Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom while trying to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own.

I'm confident that if we simply followed the american constitution, and men respected the individual sovereign rights of others, we wouldn't have many of the problems we have today. Now THAT is a novel concept. It is sad that freedom and individuality are still the most radical ideas of all. I think the reason that these ideas are not more popular is the very fact that mankind dreads the consequences to themselves and their families if they were to show any real disobedience to the political powers that be. It's like a disease that masquerades as its own cure. How ironic that some people are of the opinion that concentrating that political power even more- into even fewer hands- will be the medicine that cures us. Go figure.

Wouldn't a much nobler cause than a NWO be a movement to emancipate all of mankind from the arbitrary rule of other men? Instead of pursuing and relishing (or wallowing) in the control we hold over others, maybe the world would be a better place if we all endeavored not lend ourselves to the wrongs which we condemn.

Both sides have their good points, can both sides reach an agreement to satisfy everyone? YES! we can, we have the mentality for it, its a trait even dolphins have, which is "Sympathy". To understand one another we must sympathize with the person, be in the persons shoes and at the same time balancing with yourself.


I am not against the idea of a one world government, as long as there is freedom, just laws, and fairity for everyone. However, I am against coporations who only care about greed and money, and view the population as tiny ants to be stepped on in order to achieve their goals. These corporations /banking systems end up corrupting the governments and seek out death as means in order to preserve THEIR not ours way of life. Their way of a solution as a depopulation method is through death and spreading sicknesses and brainwashing us into believing that we are not powerfull, when in fact we are all sons and daughters of the source or GOD.


Are there better ways to decrease the population? Yes certainly, all it takes is agreement to having one child per couple. But this shouldn't be a forced thing either, the couple must understand that it IS a necessity in order to survive and bring a better future to the next generation.


I have spoken to freemasons aswell, one of my closest friends is in the freemasonry, and i actually was asked if I was interested in joining. and they all seem pretty decent people with different points of views. Many do not agree with corruption and they value benjamin franklins words who was also a freemason. "He who sacrifices liberty for security, deserves neither".

Originally posted by Shoomoo
I reread the Georgia Guidestones.
Let's look at the commandments shall we? .

How dare you call what is written on the georgia guidestones commandments!

I've been thinking about the ideas behind the Guidestones that I've seen here and in other places, and the way people generally behave, and it leaves me in a quandry.

I certainly don't want a future as planned by the banking cabals that seem to have their hands on everything, and yet, I can see how the current trajectory of the planet is unreliable.

I keep thinking of this apocryphal letter attributed to Albert Pike that I've heard about where he has the prediction of a third world war where the dual threats of Zionism and radical Islam are removed from the world. While I could never bring myself to condone what that would require, I imagine a world without fundamentalist religion (including the Christian variety), and cannot help but think how much better the world would be.

In that context, the poverty of much of the world begins to look like a lock upon the maniacal ambitions of people who have more interest in what happens after life than during their lives. And from that perspective, and from the historical background, I can see why people believe that people can't govern themselves. They simply don't.

It makes me sad. I spent a great many years fighting for liberty in political and other causes just to see people ignore the idea, but maybe I've learned a hard lesson there. I wanted the moral comfort of knowing I suppored the idea of how things should be, but in allowing that luxury for others, would I be creating a situation where the freedoms I would have for myself would lead to terrible destruction in their hands?

And you can say I don't have that right. But if I have the power to influence others, I can choose to exercise or not exercise that responsibility through my arguments and actions, and it is something I think about often.

I wonder if the people of the NWO are any different. Behind the pantomine masks we paint, maybe they are the ones who have seen humanity needs to become one species and not a litany of tribes, and maybe there is no other way but a baptism by fire. I would love to be wrong about this, but I sincerely doubt anyone will convince me short of divine intervention that it can go another way. For an individual here or there, sure, but not for a society.

Originally posted by Partygirl
Illuminati, NWO, reptoids, Freemasons, Nibiru, depopulation agenda, etc. = FAKE CONSPIRACY

Dollar collapse, geopolitics of oil, rise of China, economic decline = THE REAL DEAL.

Learn to tell the difference...it isn't that hard...ultimately all you need is a kind of "smell test."

The fake conspiracies can be a lot of fun...but at the end of the day, they are fake.

Things are getting too serious now to run away from the real and hide in the fake.

I couldn't agree with this more, well, I could actually, but for the most part, I agree. However, we must take into consideration, OP, that truth is stranger than fiction, and what may, at first glance, appear to be nothing more than a harmless, and good-natured attempt to unify humanity in a goal to further our spiritual existence, may in fact turn out to be an agenda focused around the centralization of power, expanse of tyranny on a global, and perhaps even galactic, scale, and the extinction of the human species.