It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kwakakev
You have done a really good job at trying to capture the sense of what it means to be human, a common trait that all peoples of this planet share and one that runs a lot deeper than national boarders and shared cultures. For a moment it did take me out my little self centred world and realise that there is a bigger picture in play, thank you.
As for practicably, movement towards a common currency has been the works for a long time as global trade has grown and expanded. The foreign exchange markets are representative of this at this time, they still have some problems but a common currency value is fairly well established. Until all the rules and regulations of how a stable, productive and legitimate economy have been clearly defined, it is in the global interest that we hold off making the step to a single global currency that could crash and drag everything down.
The idea of a single language goes against respecting the diversity of cultures and is not going to work. Just take a look at how diverse and mixed the English language has become. Over time improvements in automated language translation will aid in communication between the main language groups, but due to the diversity and dynamic nature of language it is always constantly evolving with many sub branches. Over time a more unified language may develop if other processes of unification are working, but to push this point before it is naturally ready is a call for war.
As for a common government, there is need for organisation and responsibility on a local, state, national, regional and global levels. Clear distinctions do need to be made between these different levels of governments so cultural diversity and self determination can be respected while global organisation can take place. Considering the challenges the UN has had to face it is doing a fairly good job. It does cope a lot of flack and deserving so, but considering the size, complexity and diversity it has to contend with I expect this world would be in much worst state without it.
The other main contention I have with your ideas is with promoting unification through peace. The most powerful organisation in the world is the UN Security council, because they have the muscle. It can be a somewhat dysfunctional body at times as Syria is demonstrating, but when they can agree it does bring together an Earth shattering force. I do hold that peaceful values and aims can help guide this and similar organisations through the disharmony and conflict that it must face. With a deep and embedded culture of war within the history of mankind it is important to remain objective and realistic in attempts to tame this beast.
You can trash this. A body that can vote itself in without public oversight is unacceptable.
Article 24 the Aalliance establishes the Executive Council.The Executive Council is elected by the Council.The Executive directors are not more than 1/2 of the number of directors.When the Council is not in session, the Executive Council exercises the mandate of Article 21 (a), (c), (e), (f), (g), (h), (I), (J) terms ,responsible to the Council.
The American Indians solved this problem a long time ago. Each tribe, cant remember if it was Apache or another group, had a system of governance where each and every member had a voice. It is true mind numbing drugs such as fluoride and mercury did not exist then but the people of the world must be involved. Certain categories should be excluded from management and supervisory roles but can still participate on another level.
To get the most effective decision making process, I am leaning towards some kind of decentralised issue based platform. Having people vote and decide on complex issues they know little about or are not concerned about is a recipe for disaster.
I might suggest an experiment, just to test the theory of global peaceful unification.
I second that motion, now on to businesses at hand... blink blink
Originally posted by Rubinstein
All depends who's at the top of the system, those currently in control of the UN (Bankers) are the last people you'd ever want in control of a planet, they fund World Wars, vaccinate us with disease, steal our wealth, fund GMO food etc.
As long as these people are in control, we have to resist global governance, these psychopaths needs to be stopped!