reply to post by Hecate666
I noticed that those pro one world government believe very much that it will be based upon western democracy. Why?
I can only speak for myself. My view is that democracy with all its faults guarantees that minorities are given the same level of representation, it
was something that the West took a while to enable for instance in regards to economic distinction, gender or race but once it became universal I see
no special fault with the premise. The issue is that societies in general (not only democracies are flawed in their structure due mostly to the
historic evolution based on the alliance of powers politico-economical powers, most all evolving from the Roman social setup and law).
There are millions of people who really so not want that structure. What is going to happen to them?
I have never seen anyone object to democracy. Most people object to the system where democracy is applied or the fairness and transparency of its
Will they be forced to conform and if so how?
This process is already running, todays globalization is the implementation of a one world order by economic means. When it drastically fails we have
wars, if have been attentive to ATS you have read about central banks and the issues of fiat currency.
The beauty for me is that there are people, countries and governments with different structures. If one gets out of control [as seen in the middle
east], other countries can intervene to a certain degree.
Yes diversity is a great thing but certain aspects of governance require normalization and global consensus, the more normalized it becomes less
diversity will be possible. Diversity foster chaos and complexity something that reduces greatly the efficiency of any system (not only political).
I'm not particularly interested in diversity of government structures they are artificial creations, administrative constructs. Conforming only to
one system seems the right choice. What should be preserved is diversity of opinion, culture and views and their expression.
What if there are no opposition to a central government? Where can you go to if you are suffering?
I defend the concept of a single party also (but that is a more complex issue, and does not invalidate democratic selection). In any case a central
democratically selected government will always have opposition if the underlying system is fair and open. The courts and law should always be
independent of the government (very bad things occur when it is not)
At the moment you can flee your country and seek refuge somewhere else. You won't be able to in a single government.
It depends on how it would end, a single government does not obligatorily terminate national boarders, consider the United States or the UK, both are
structures that exist above smaller and to some degree independent substructures.
What if commercialism is going to be regulated and the same all over the world. Could a young entrepreneur still come up with a new idea, would he/she
I do not see why not, I even see more possibilities since competition will be more equal (better use or termination of taxes, subsidies, etc)
Are all shops everywhere going to stock the same things? Would you miss any individual shops that sell local produce [clothes, furniture etc] or will
you be alright if we all had only access to official merchandise?
Central planing permits a more efficient, even gains in management of resources/services/education/work, production and transportation. As for the
offering that would be Dependant on many factors. Consider for example the end of some subsidies (fuel and production of goods), local produces would
be able to compete more freely, and it would even benefit the environment.
Who will regulate business behaviour? For example I love the way the Japanese conduct their business whilst I do not like the way it is done in the
west. Who will decide which one is best and what happens to those that disagree? I could go on like this forever.
I would expect some central rules would be put in place but hope some freedom would be given for local/regional structures. I do not fully fallow what
you meant but for instance in the EU there was an adoption of a guarantee on items sold of 2 years.
Just to end it here, would you be alright if there were a muslim rule of the world with all its trimmings or a purely christian one?
None, religion has no place in governance. Having said that both religions have good moral guidances. I do like the restrictions of Islam on usury. I
dislike the Wahhabi movement/alterations and in general any organized religion. I do respect believers and see value in faith and diversity in belief