The Cons and Pros of a NWO / OWG

Considering how obvious it now is that many of our world leaders are conspiring to bring us towards a New World Order, or if you prefer, a One World Government, I think it's important for us to seriously consider some of the pros and cons associated with a NWO / OWG. Despite how much it may pain us to even entertain such an idea, it seems fairly obvious to me that we will eventually morph into a world controlled by one central Government. Whether it's in 10 years or 100 years or even 1000 years, the prospect is much more than some conspiratorial fantasy, it's something we need to take very seriously.

Now, your idea of a One World Government may be some what different from mine, in fact it's unlikely that any of us have the exact same vision of what a OWG would be like. But for the purpose of this thread I'm going to go with something like that which is described in the Zeitgeist movie, but without most of the "good stuff". In the Zeitgeist movie they describe a central Government which controls and manages all the worlds resources in an intelligent manner, and centralized manufacturing plants which use the combined scientific knowledge of the world to use those resources to produce the most efficiently designed products.

However they also describe a world where these products are simply handed out for free to anyone who needs them, and there is no form of currency or money, everything is shared amongst people. This is arguably one of the "good" things, one that is clearly a massive contradiction to human nature, and one that will most likely never ever happen as long as humans express any degree of greed. So I'm obviously talking about a world where resource harvesting and manufacturing will be highly centralized, but of course currency and banking will still exist, not only because of human greed, but because it a great tool for control.

Zeitgeist also describes a system where everything becomes highly standardized, like city layouts; such as the architecture and placement of hospitals and schools, and even right down to the curriculum taught in those schools. This is to ensure that everything is designed as efficiently as possible and that everyone is receiving relevant up-to-date educations based on the latest scientific understandings. Not only does Zeitgeist describe a world with many more regulations concerning how resources are harvested and used, but many new regulations will be put in place regarding how those resources are transported.

Business practices such as unnecessary importing and exporting, only designed to cut costs and/or make profit, will be banned so that resources are transported only though the most efficient paths to reach their destination, and this will result in less pollution incurred via transportation. We can also expect many regulations like this to extend into many different areas of business. We will see many strict regulations placed on the way companies will be able to conduct business, even at the cost of reducing economic stimulation. Of course a OWG isn't just bad for the little guy, the repercussions extend to mega-businesses.

That is what I find most interesting about this whole concept, how it effects us and how it effects the filthy rich overlords. It's not just a one way street, there are of course cons and pros. The type of OWG I have described here is the most probable design and structure for a One World Government, because the pros allow us to be sucked in by what it has to offer, meanwhile we will never get told about all the cons that come along with it. Below I have listed 10 pros and 10 cons of such a OWG for your consideration. Of course not all of you will agree that the pros are pros or that the cons are cons, but I think most of you will agree with my placements.


PROS:
• the worlds resources can be properly managed in a sustainable way by central scientific planners
• we will have a more sustainable population with a lower growth rate and less pollution output
• we will have a healthier planetary ecosystem and provide the necessary room for nature to live
• we will have less people but those people will be healthier due to an effective global healthcare system
• war will be much less likely when we all think of ourselves as living under the same Government
• we can easily integrate with the ET community by having a world government to represent humanity
• poor nations will get a much larger share of the pie as they merge with the global community
• opportunities for education and work will become more evenly distributed throughout the world
• we will likely get a global currency which must be accepted as legal tender anywhere on the planet
• an increase in regulations will make it harder for CEO's and shareholders to screw over the little guy

CONS:
• regulations concerning resource usage and pollution will put a choke hold on many large manufacturers
• product diversity and business competition will be dramatically reduced as manufacturing is centralized
• the mainstream media will become a hardcore center of propaganda as it is merged and centralized
• many more restricting regulations will be placed on the internet and other forms of communication
• it's likely that many new laws and regulations will be implemented to help minimize the population
• travelling will become more difficult as the central government seeks to manage the world population
• it's extremely likely that at some point everyone will be legally required to be micro-chipped at birth
• vaccinations will become mandatory, and a certain educational curriculum will become a global standard
• all undesirable technology (eg free energy) will be carefully guarded by the central Government
• although we will probably have the technology, leaving the Earth for any reason will be strictly forbidden

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


comment withdrawn as it addresses a sub issue - not the actual topic

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

are NWO /OWG actually synonymous? admittedly all OWGs will be NWOs but are all NWOs ,OWGs ?

No they aren't necessarily synonymous, but I don't really think it's necessary to get into the specific definitions. They are often used as interchangeable terms on ATS so I'm just basically using them as if they were the same thing... but in fact they mean quite different things when you really get down to it. But I don't really think we need to get into all of that, because it's off topic. I would prefer to discuss the subject matter of this thread.

Centralism doesn't work.

No need to speculate about the possible outcome of it, just look at the living example that is the €uro Zone.
Look how fiscal centralism furthered a contagious situation within our centralized systems in the current global financial crisis.

The opposite course is the way to go.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


As I usually do, if I suddenly wake up and decide that I want to go camping for a few days or a week and leave the phones and computer at home, anything that hinders that freedom to get away from it all will not get my consent.

These two "cons" are my case-in-point.......

travelling will become more difficult as the central government seeks to manage the world population

it's extremely likely that at some point everyone will be legally required to be micro-chipped at birth

As long as I am not harming people, property or environment, NO ONE, can dictate how I am to live.

I do agree with you OP - this does indeed need to be discussed. I reckon one or two more "trigger events" and it will be upon us - 10 years tops.

S&F

Nice post, Chaotic.

But after reading all your list...and agreeing with most...
I've narrowed my list down to one con.

When all the globe is controlled by a select few men, there is NO pro.

We have absolutely no need for a one world gov't, nor will we ever.
It is purely a scheme concocted by those evil men who strive for more money/power.
There is no benefit to the people, no matter what propaganda is fed to them, or believed.

At some point in the modern world, we, as living creatures on this planet, have to realize:
Money/wealth isn't necessary to live, or function.
Humans have lived for millennia without it.
Global economies focus money into fewer hands.
The Earth actually provides everything we need to flourish.

reply to post by Sublimecraft

anything that hinders that freedom to get away from it all will not get my consent.

That's a very elegant way of putting it, and I completely agree. It will be a cold day in hell before I ever allow them to put a microchip in me.

reply to post by havok

There is no benefit to the people, no matter what propaganda is fed to them, or believed.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with some of your points. There are clearly some benefits associated with a OWG. But the question is, are those pros really worth the cons? And that's a very tricky question when you really look at it from all angles.

At some point in the modern world, we, as living creatures on this planet, have to realize:
Money/wealth isn't necessary to live, or function.
Humans have lived for millennia without it.

I also have to disagree with this point. If we want to have any sort of functioning economy capable of handling trade and complex business processes, money is an absolute necessity. I can respect the fact that other people have the right to own personal property. If I want to trade my personal property for the property of a another person, it is much easier to use an intermediate currency instead of bartering the objects themselves.

And in this point you're wrong, people have in fact been using money for millennia to conduct trade. The problem is, you think of money as fancy pieces of paper, when in fact that's not at all what money is, that's just one form of money. People used to use rare shells as currency... all that matters is that it's a commonly accepted medium of exchange between people; that's what makes money, it doesn't have to be paper.

A moneyless society, is in my opinion, a pure fantasy reserved for the most primitive and tribal societies who have not yet advanced far enough to require a form of currency to conduct complex trade. For any modern society, currency is an absolute necessity. I do not expect that everyone should start sharing everything they have, and there's no reason they should. It's their wealth and they worked for it.

That is why I said a moneyless society "is arguably one of the "good" things" presented in the Zeitgeist movie... because I don't really think it's a good thing. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's not a good thing either. It just seems like a good thing on the surface, because everyone can see how corrupt our money system is; and that right there is the problem - the flaws and corruption in our money system, not money in general.

A good example of a secure and fair money system outside the realm of centralized manipulation, is the decentralized cryptographic currency known as Bitcoin. It proves that a money system can be designed in a fair, trustworthy, secure and reliable way which frees it from the grasp of bankers and government. And that is why I love it and promote it.

Does all of this even matter? the human race is so #ed up and greedy it should cease to exist>

Originally posted by TokerTV
Does all of this even matter? the human race is so #ed up and greedy it should cease to exist>

Incorrect. A small fraction of the Human race is f'd up and extremely greedy. The rest of us just want to live in peace and harmony. It's unfortunate that the actions of our leaders create the illusion that entire populations believe the same things as our leaders, but in truth we have nearly nothing in common with the evil scum bags slinking around the Government offices.