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.

 

Pros and Cons of a one world Government

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I just don't think there is going to be a One World Government right now, it's just not feasible for us. We have fighting in our own country, our own communities, we aren't about to come together with other countries and other political ideas....right now...
In order for a one world government to take place, there has to be a common enemy. That's the only way anything ever comes together on the grand scale. There has to be a reason, a desire, strong emotions of either love or hate to bring so many different people together.
There's a lot of talk about 2012 and how it will be destruction or universal love and some big "thing" will happen, but maybe, just maybe, the big "thing" is of our making, right here, right now. People starting to look at other possiblities whether they exist or not and looking for a way to come together. Who knows...I guess we'll all know come December, either hit or miss, right or wrong on the prophecies.
Everything from the Aliens to the "zombie attacks", people are looking for this mysterious enemy to bring everyone together. They don't realize that's what they're doing, but subconsciously, that's what it is. We have to seek out that common enemy so we can band together, blacks and whites, democrats and republicans, christians and athiests, everybody banded together as "Humanity" to fight what is "out to get us".
If we want things to change, we're going to have to change them. Plain and simple. We can bicker and spew, we can hope and dream, we can wish and pray, but in order to make a diffrence, we have to stand up, roll up our sleeves and get to work at changing it. I don't have the answers though, I have tons of questions and there is somebody out there that can answer a few and somebody else that can answer a few more and somebody else for a few more until they really are all answered. Coming together is the answer. We can communicate around the world at light speed. We can speak to people in a millisecond that we would have to travel for days to come in physical contact with. We have the world at our fingertips, do we chose to use it to build up or use it to tear down?
It's our choice, all of us, from the largest to the smallest from the richest to the poorest and everyone in between.
What are we going to do? How are we going to do it? What do we want? What do we need? Until we can find some small, even tiny amount of common ground and start building on it, we're not going to get anywhere.




posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by reitze
 


I've had experiences since birth.

Even in an OBE when I was 5 years old - - - I was in the "gray place" - - - and a very tall man in a long white robe appeared. He told me I was trying to return to the spirit world - - but I needed to stay in the physical world.

I am still Atheist. No one can be raised Atheist - - any more then someone can be raised a god believer.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
I just don't think there is going to be a One World Government right now, it's just not feasible for us.


And I did not say now.

I said it was the natural progression.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Pro-- it would be similar to the USA I would think with individual states...except more autonomy to each individual state than what we have here. Con. I can see it going south if there becomes corrupt leadership in the central government. How would you balance that and what would you do if a 'state' decided to go rogue and quit the collective?



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
When someone asks me an honest straight forward question (without the usual sarcastic digs) - - I try to give an honest straight forward answer.


Then a bit of advice. Don't introduce yourself into a thread by having a one-liner saying, "Give me a f-ing break." and then have the audacity to claim you're being civil.


Originally posted by Annee
And I did not say now.

I said it was the natural progression.

It is by no means "natural". It would require a rather "unnatural" approach to politics and much enforcing. There is a difference between "division" and what is known as "sovereignty". You mentioned a Federation of sorts, and that makes more sense, but there will always be sovereign nations, and different people.
edit on 4-6-2012 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   
I don't think a One World Government is even possible any time soon. They can't even control the boarders, let alone all the drug cartels and terrorist. They could possibly control The US, Europe, Russia and parts of Asia with micro chips and surveillance. I think there would be too many hot headed leaders out there that wouldn't let this happen. Talk about an extreme world war 3. I think half the world would explode before that happened.



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX

Originally posted by Annee
When someone asks me an honest straight forward question (without the usual sarcastic digs) - - I try to give an honest straight forward answer.


Then a bit of advice. Don't introduce yourself into a thread by having a one-liner saying, "Give me a f-ing break." and then have the audacity to claim you're being civil.


Must have been some absurd statement that prompted that response.


Originally posted by Annee
And I did not say now.

I said it was the natural progression.



It is by no means "natural". It would require a rather "unnatural" approach to politics and much enforcing. There is a difference between "division" and what is known as "sovereignty". You mentioned a Federation of sorts, and that makes more sense, but there will always be sovereign nations, and different people.


Unnatural? Organization is not unnatural.

I use the term One World Federation to state a legitimate government - - - not the conspiracy NWO.

I can say that country sovereignty is an egotistical and childish power trip. I'm not promoting individuals and communities not have their pride and accomplishments.

The importance - of course - is in how a One World Federation is set up. We should be more concerned with HOW and WHO - - - instead of spending useless emotional energy in fighting the inevitable.




edit on 4-6-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by reitze
 


I've had experiences since birth.

Even in an OBE when I was 5 years old - - - I was in the "gray place" - - - and a very tall man in a long white robe appeared. He told me I was trying to return to the spirit world - - but I needed to stay in the physical world.

I am still Atheist. No one can be raised Atheist - - any more then someone can be raised a god believer.


By "raised athiest" (really agnostic) I meant that my parents were and I remaind that way till over 30 in 1994. My first "experiences" broke my athiest world-view. If that could happen then what about ____. I read over 500 books and found satisfaction in the bible as a fictional explination for WTF. Since reading that I feel like I finally get it. There is a God - and a lot of BS done 'in his name'.

Agnosticism is better than athiesim since its not hostile to those with faith in things I had no knowledge of. And by loving the truth you get to be educated - otherwise there's no hope for you - you'll end up in a hell of your own creation. I do hope that helps.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aliensun
And if you were to dwell on it with much thought, you may conclude that perhaps the UFOs are alien craft and they have been influencing some of the major earth governments to change.


I actually do believe that.

I do believe the unity of a One World Federation is a requirement before we will be allowed planetary travel.


News flash. We might not like what we find.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by angrysniper

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aliensun
And if you were to dwell on it with much thought, you may conclude that perhaps the UFOs are alien craft and they have been influencing some of the major earth governments to change.


I actually do believe that.

I do believe the unity of a One World Federation is a requirement before we will be allowed planetary travel.


News flash. We might not like what we find.


Not a News Flash for me.

I lean toward the Terra Papers being closer to our true history. I think the "War in Heaven" was a real war over control of earth - - and an agreement was decided upon by a ruling body - such as a Federation of Planets. The question is: what is that agreement - - what are the terms - - does it have an expiration date?

And I think the universe is as diverse and political as earth - - if not more so.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by reitze

By "raised atheist" (really agnostic) I meant that my parents were and I remained that way till over 30 in 1994. My first "experiences" broke my atheist world-view. If that could happen then what about ____.


I've had all kinds of experiences - - I do not attribute them to a God.

As far as read to find truth - - I did. It was my search for truth that resulted in atheist.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am pro One World Federation (not NWO conspiracy).

Because it is the logical progression. Preparing for it makes more sense to me - - then fighting against it.

Like heading for a waterfall in a rowboat with only one paddle. You're gonna go over those falls eventually. Wouldn't it be better to consider how to survive it - - rather then fight a losing battle?



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by reitze

By "raised atheist" (really agnostic) I meant that my parents were and I remained that way till over 30 in 1994. My first "experiences" broke my atheist world-view. If that could happen then what about ____.


I've had all kinds of experiences - - I do not attribute them to a God.

As far as read to find truth - - I did. It was my search for truth that resulted in atheist.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am pro One World Federation (not NWO conspiracy).

Because it is the logical progression. Preparing for it makes more sense to me - - then fighting against it.

Like heading for a waterfall in a rowboat with only one paddle. You're gonna go over those falls eventually. Wouldn't it be better to consider how to survive it - - rather then fight a losing battle?


Not if there's a chance you might win that battle somehow. And sure... like if its niagrara falls - hit the rocks you die, go in deep you may survive. Or best yet... get the boat near the southern shore (risk rocks) and look for a side-stream-spill with a low hanging tree branch... jump for it... you might make it without the 1 world govt... maybe it will be a total anarchy or something.

But having read so many books myself, the satanic enslavement of mankind with 666 beast marks appears to be the WORST possible outcome. You really read that book cover to cover? If so, I can understand your POV a bit - but then what do you live for other than scoring some $ and pussy (or dick) before rotting in a box?



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by reitze

But having read so many books myself, the satanic enslavement of mankind with 666 beast marks appears to be the WORST possible outcome.


You completely lose me with this.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
"There would be no war because all the nations would be united as one."

I Disagree with this statement, take a-look at the United States and the tension between states and ethnic groups within. At one point other states wanted to shoot down CIVIL aircraft's leaving Texas, your own people, Americans!

In Australia we have WA bringing in all the cash into Australia getting fedup they have to share with less productive states and talks to spilt away, although far fetched and unlikely to ever happen it does raise of the equality of such a system.

Another issue would be conflict, as much as I hate saying this the US economic system and way of life even is based around war. From the foundations of the US to its current investment in military hardware it provides profit and access to resources such as oil.
How the transition from international currency's to one currency is beyond me, no sane international person would base such a system and allocation of money on US dollars or even the Euro as they are not backed by anything.

In a way Australia is slowly becoming a world one government with surrounding Asian countries due to our economic, political and geographic ties however their is still a huge cultural difference between us.
I doubt their is room for a whole world government though.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by reitze

But having read so many books myself, the satanic enslavement of mankind with 666 beast marks appears to be the WORST possible outcome.


You completely lose me with this.


Well if you actually did read the bible cover to cover it might make better sense. From the opening in Genesis to the Closing in revelation its a sort of contest between God and Satan to either enslave the world or raise its consciousness to a lights on reality. From lies like "who told you you were naked" (Gen 3:11) through the horsemen of conquest via things like prohibition of the #1 plant that seeds (food)... there's a war going on... that seems ready for soul harvesting time... As for the planet... is it back to the garden or the chain gang. Obviously the apocoliptic timeline is happening since there are so many vested interests in making exactly that happen. And yea, Fukushima, oil leaks, stuff like that done on purpose will make even water a marketable commodity.

Ever read Starhawks "Fith Sacred Thing"? Water is sacred - and making it unavailable so that people have to pay for it is part of the plan. Are you ready for harvest? I think I am... I Got My Way - thanks to the books (growing up) after the experiences (baptism of spirit). Its not "better red than dead"... its whether or not the seed of hope in Good over Evil that was cultivated by God/Jesus/Yahweh takes root in your heart.



Hope that helps - if you really appreciate the TRUTH of history, perspective, fictional-stories designed to illuminate such truths then I think it might because that's what got me here.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   
I dunno, when I see people list "no more wars" as a pro, it feels like a more accurate pro would be "they will stop victimizing mankind with all the war and horrors they created specifically to strongarm human civilization into a NWO".

It's like saying giving in to terrorist demands means terrorists will finally stop killing innocent people because that was only necessary to have their demands met, except this is applied on an epic, global scale.

Well, you just better make sure you never leave any demands unmet if you want the war and terrorism to remain extinct. Good luck maintaining that "pro".



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by reitze

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by reitze

But having read so many books myself, the satanic enslavement of mankind with 666 beast marks appears to be the WORST possible outcome.


You completely lose me with this.


Well if you actually did read the bible cover to cover it might make better sense.



I've read the bible cover to cover twice.

I'm sure reading it "clean" without infusing it with a supernatural belief - - - results in a different comprehension.

If I read another person's research - - - it will be someone who bases their research on historical facts in relation to the culture at the time.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by The X

I very much like this post, I wish there was more like us, government is unnecessary, people are more than capable of looking after themselves, governments only leave those with a power problem in charge of those of us that don't really want or need them there.


Idealism is a nice word.

It should be left in the dictionary.


:LOL: WTH….

Originally posted by Annee
How anyone can watch Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot" - - - and still think we should be fighting amongst ourselves is beyond my acceptance.

A One World Federation (not NWO conspiracy) is the only logical progression.

Our focus should be on: Who and How is the best way to go about making it a reality.

www.youtube.com...



Hi, I think introductions are in order – which one of you is pot and which one is kettle?


Definition of IDEALISM
1 a (1): a theory that ultimate reality lies in a realm transcending phenomena
(2): a theory that the essential nature of reality lies in consciousness or reason
b (1): a theory that only the perceptible is real
(2): a theory that only mental states or entities are knowable

2 a: the practice of forming ideals or living under their influence
b: something that is idealized

3 : literary or artistic theory or practice that affirms the preeminent value of imagination as compared with faithful copying of nature — compare REALISM

www.merriam-webster.com...


I assume you are refereeing to idealism as in its use under definition 3 which is the opposite of realism.

The realism of government and humans is that it is necessary for without some form of rules humans are incapable of coexisting safely and fairly in their dealings with one another. That is how “The X” is wrong the belief that the absence of government is the ideal.

The other realism of government is that people have a hard time identifying with others who have values or a culture very dissimilar to their own. They resent being governed by an entity that they see made up of people who are somehow different from themselves. That is how you are wrong... People of the planet will never accept a World government.

It is why the government in the US is breaking down – the more the federal government tries to homogenize the population and cultural norms of the US to fit their ideal vision of America as the “representatives of the people” it the more those who don’t feel that our system of representation relative to population (i.e. representative republic) is fair.

Whole portions of the values and culture of large demographic sections of the population (i.e. whites, rural and conservative) are being systematically ignored by representatives of the larger segments of the population (i.e. urban, minority and liberal) in the name of the “people”.

People are not all the same and trying to homogenize the whole human race into one culture is a failed proposition. There will always be war because humans naturally seek to live and be governed by those who are like themselves.

We are experiencing the breakdown of modern society in direct proportion to the reaction of the people to this homogenization process.

The bigger the governments get the more they want the people to “be the same” (equal) the more they try legislating equality of outcome through PC control of values and legislating morality and redistribution of wealth schemes the more people will resist. We will reach the tipping point soon and there will be secession – once the people of the middle (red flyover States) realize their voice at the federal table is all but mute.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by The X

I very much like this post, I wish there was more like us, government is unnecessary, people are more than capable of looking after themselves, governments only leave those with a power problem in charge of those of us that don't really want or need them there.


Idealism is a nice word.

It should be left in the dictionary.



I assume you are refereeing to idealism as in its use under definition 3 which is the opposite of realism.


Not really interested in any in-depth discussion on it.

At 65 years I've had many idealistic thoughts on how I wanted life to be. Then Real Life happened.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66
The realism of government and humans is that it is necessary for without some form of rules humans are incapable of coexisting safely and fairly in their dealings with one another. That is how “The X” is wrong the belief that the absence of government is the ideal.


I don't have "quality" time right now. So I can't give you full attention and in-depth responses.

Yes I agree government is necessary.


The other realism of government is that people have a hard time identifying with others who have values or a culture very dissimilar to their own. They resent being governed by an entity that they see made up of people who are somehow different from themselves. That is how you are wrong... People of the planet will never accept a World government.


Depends on how World Government is set up. We're pretty close to it right now. What do you think the UN is?

It is far from perfect - - but it is the stepping stone. The correct stepping stone IMO.

What is the first thing I would do? Equalize the worlds economy. Bring up 3rd world countries to a living standard - - - lower over-bloated economies and bring people down to a level that's still comfortable - but not wasteful.

Make all resources - science - peacekeepers - human rights - etc - - - global. Keep local governments that understand the personal needs of their areas.


It is why the government in the US is breaking down – the more the federal government tries to homogenize the population and cultural norms of the US to fit their ideal vision


I don't agree. America is a country that had uninterrupted economic growth - - and became spoiled. What would Great Britain be like if it had not been so accessible to invasion? America had one building destroyed and went into near economic collapse.


Whole portions of the values and culture of large demographic sections of the population (i.e. whites, rural and conservative) are being systematically ignored by representatives of the larger segments of the population (i.e. urban, minority and liberal) in the name of the “people”.


I'm from the 50s before the Fair Housing Act. I lived it. Did you?


People are not all the same and trying to homogenize the whole human race into one culture is a failed proposition. There will always be war because humans naturally seek to live and be governed by those who are like themselves.


I'm getting really tired of your "homogenized" rant. Let me guess - - you are White Male Christian

.
edit on 9-6-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join