Listing Things That Should Be Good--But Really Aren't?

There is a question on another post tonight asking why would we automatically hate a NWO? Truth is, how could it possibly be worse than the system we have now? I will to leave that specific debate to that forum.

Still, this brought a few other things to mind and I wanted to see if anyone else wants to add their input. In addition to the question about a NWO, I have often pondered the predispositioned negative response to the word "socialism". On the surface, I have wondered if it were carried out right (as if it were possible), wouldn't far more people benefit than suffer? I'm not saying we should throw out our democracy, as if we really had one, but there are some good characteristics to be found in other things we have been conditioned to oppose. I hope others will put some thoughts together and contribute, but I doubt we will solve the world's problems, it is only an exercise I'm throwing out there. Doesn't have to be limited to political, either. Feel free to include any subject that may cause you to think or rethink something from different perspectives. There are many, many exceptional thinkers on ATS, and I would love to see some of the profound thought processes you guys are capable of.

So, the first two things I can offer in the category of it should be good but probably isn't are 1) socialism, and 2) NWO.

Hope to see some good ideas.

The more we "humans" organize, the more the worst of us rise to positions of power. I honestly don't know why...I do know it's true though.

Best case scenario is small independent groups with different religions, governments and trade systems.
Never ever let humans organize...I think the "elite" know this, they just think it's ok for "them" to organize. Truth is it's not.

Margarine. It is suppose to be better for you than butter.

But it's not. In fact the science shows butter is far better for you than margarine.

Go figure.

Originally posted by FrenchOsage
The more we "humans" organize, the more the worst of us rise to positions of power. I honestly don't know why...I do know it's true though.

Best case scenario is small independent groups with different religions, governments and trade systems.
Never ever let humans organize...I think the "elite" know this, they just think it's ok for "them" to organize. Truth is it's not.

That's why you don't see me organizing anything.

Well, I do organize one thing, or at least try to.

My thoughts.

And then I share them.

In reply to Socialism and a NWO, I say no and no.
We need freedom, not control.
Who would you choose to control you? I was raised to believe the US was the most free country on this planet and of course it's a lie...many believe this lie though...why?

Most religions
you see all these scandals that come out of them, not to mention the ones that advocate any violence towards others.

reply to post by FrenchOsage

You are correct, and what a shame. My wife and I built a hospice company 12 years ago and I can tell you there is no freedom even in death. The incredibly overbearing regulatory issues and laws make it an even worse idea to die than it might otherwise be.

In line with this thread, do you think that a true democracy is realistic and if so, would that have the potential to be a negative instead of a positive? If not, is there an existing form of government that would actually be better for the greater majority?

Thanks for the thoughts.

reply to post by muzzleflash

Good for you. I tried to organize my thoughts, but then I couldn't remember where I left them. Thanks for participating.

reply to post by nikobellic

This is what I was expecting to see first. Religion has a way to turn people off, and when it is invoked as an excuse for violence, then I think you have every right to be offended. Having said that, I would probably be considered extremely religious by my peers, but I have learned that I prefer to be a "person of faith". No one has to believe everything I do, although there is a great deal of thought, soul searching, and more that has gone into why I believe what I believe and I would encourage others to do so. But back to your thought, if I have to force it on anyone and if I let it become violent, then it really isn't "faith", is it? It could potentially still be labeled as religion, or is it then something entirely different?