Qjakal mentioned in an earlier post that we need to get these events over with so we can move toward a one world economy and one world government. What are some thoughts on that? The end of the world? The beginning of one that makes more sense? A global platform for a world dictator? Or peace on Earth?
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year. -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
One World Government - ahhhh!
- Thread starter mabus
- Start date
- Status
Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
Good God, I hope not!
This country is special. I wouldn't care to have it submerged and homogenized with the other 94% of the world's population, many of whom are little better than savages. For that matter, I wouldn't care to have NATO turn into a political union. We share much of our culture with Europe, but the differences... No thanks.
Strelnikov
This country is special. I wouldn't care to have it submerged and homogenized with the other 94% of the world's population, many of whom are little better than savages. For that matter, I wouldn't care to have NATO turn into a political union. We share much of our culture with Europe, but the differences... No thanks.
Strelnikov
ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,702
- Points
- 36
Umm....................Strelnikov.....................define YOUR idea of what a "savage" is
Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
Ice, here are some examples: Cambodia and Uganda in the 1970's. Angola and Central America in the 1980's. Rwanda in the 1990's. The Middle East, any time.
Strelnikov
Strelnikov
strtbottomjim
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 156
- Points
- 0
All you need to know about making the UN the sole real power:
Take a look at all the nations that make up the UN. Now add up how many of them have committed organized mass murder of non-combatant civilians in the last, say, three decades.
The total is horrifying. Go back 60 years so that you cover the nasties during the WW2 era, and it's worse.
But what's really nasty is that the single largest population nation on the planet makes the list either way: China. Ditto Indonesia, which is either #2 or #3 on the population ranking, and Russia which is also pretty high up on the population rank (above us, I think?). India has the best government of all the really high-pop nations, and they still have some problems related to race relations and religious toleration - one of their main political parties is basically "Hindu-supremacists" (at the expense of all other faiths).
Now look at how many nations simply don't have any concept of human rights. Look how many have governments that were founded purely because they were the most violent members of their society - like the House of Saud fr'instance...they are MORE COMMON than Democracies and Constitutional Republics put together.
You want that crowd equipped with the right to vote on how WE live our lives, or to tax us?
Oh HELL no. Absofreakinlutely NOT.
There's enough of us that understand this, in the US alone, to put up one *hell* of a fight if it's tried. And we're about 100x smarter and better educated than the Palestinians, plus richer and better armed.
(Sidenote: the US is *not* a Democracy. It's a Constitutional Republic. And it needs to stay that way!)
Take a look at all the nations that make up the UN. Now add up how many of them have committed organized mass murder of non-combatant civilians in the last, say, three decades.
The total is horrifying. Go back 60 years so that you cover the nasties during the WW2 era, and it's worse.
But what's really nasty is that the single largest population nation on the planet makes the list either way: China. Ditto Indonesia, which is either #2 or #3 on the population ranking, and Russia which is also pretty high up on the population rank (above us, I think?). India has the best government of all the really high-pop nations, and they still have some problems related to race relations and religious toleration - one of their main political parties is basically "Hindu-supremacists" (at the expense of all other faiths).
Now look at how many nations simply don't have any concept of human rights. Look how many have governments that were founded purely because they were the most violent members of their society - like the House of Saud fr'instance...they are MORE COMMON than Democracies and Constitutional Republics put together.
You want that crowd equipped with the right to vote on how WE live our lives, or to tax us?
Oh HELL no. Absofreakinlutely NOT.
There's enough of us that understand this, in the US alone, to put up one *hell* of a fight if it's tried. And we're about 100x smarter and better educated than the Palestinians, plus richer and better armed.
(Sidenote: the US is *not* a Democracy. It's a Constitutional Republic. And it needs to stay that way!)
UN...lol?
Who ever mentioned that group of do nothings? Nope...we need to go in an entirely different direction. As for Strels usual cynical point about the "savages", I believe we ALL have a bit of savagery lurking in our backgrounds, and that at some point it WILL be time to move forward together...those who won't change will get left behind to such an extent that they will be dooming themselves to virtual nonexistence. My ideal world government will most likely come from our own country, although thats not a given, just an educated guess based on the trends of the last few decades...it could still conceivably be the result of the rise of a charismatic leader elsewhere. We're nowhere near the point where this would work, and I'm fairly sure it shan't be in my own lifetime, but then again I never thought i'd see that damn wall fall in Berlin or Russia collapse like a house of cards either.... Q
Who ever mentioned that group of do nothings? Nope...we need to go in an entirely different direction. As for Strels usual cynical point about the "savages", I believe we ALL have a bit of savagery lurking in our backgrounds, and that at some point it WILL be time to move forward together...those who won't change will get left behind to such an extent that they will be dooming themselves to virtual nonexistence. My ideal world government will most likely come from our own country, although thats not a given, just an educated guess based on the trends of the last few decades...it could still conceivably be the result of the rise of a charismatic leader elsewhere. We're nowhere near the point where this would work, and I'm fairly sure it shan't be in my own lifetime, but then again I never thought i'd see that damn wall fall in Berlin or Russia collapse like a house of cards either.... Q
red indian
2nd Level Yellow Feather
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2001
- Messages
- 3,441
- Points
- 0
How about a little futher back still?
How about Veitnam in the 1960,s or how about a place called The United States of America in the late 1800,s? some real "nasties" there i think. The tyrany of the British empire is of course well documented and its demise celebrated every year on the fourth of july so its not something that I am unaware of but I am sometimes mystified by the suggestion that the USA is some kind of virgin republic and was the result of an immaculate conception by Debby Reynolds or Judy Garland.
So this idea that the USA can look down on the rest of the world and pity our petty squabling just will not wash.
How about Veitnam in the 1960,s or how about a place called The United States of America in the late 1800,s? some real "nasties" there i think. The tyrany of the British empire is of course well documented and its demise celebrated every year on the fourth of july so its not something that I am unaware of but I am sometimes mystified by the suggestion that the USA is some kind of virgin republic and was the result of an immaculate conception by Debby Reynolds or Judy Garland.
So this idea that the USA can look down on the rest of the world and pity our petty squabling just will not wash.
strtbottomjim
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 156
- Points
- 0
Red Indian, you're absolutely correct about the US in regards both slavery and the "Indian wars" (mostly massacres) of the 19th century.
Vietnam is a hair less clear-cut...still not real good mind you, and definately debatable.
To more directly answer Qjakal on why her version of world gov't is still a bad idea:
Different parts of the world are at different states of cultural development. That's something the "politically correct" crowd doesn't like talking about, but it's true. It's one reason a 3rd world nation such as Mexico with strict gun control can have a murder rate triple the US rate, while a very culturally advanced nation such as Switzerland can literally have a machine gun in every home yet have a murder rate only a small fraction of the US rate. Murder rates aren't connected to gun access, it's connected to cultural violence.
For a horrifying example of current cultural violence problems, go do a websearch in www.google.com for the term "honor killings" (with quotemarks so it looks for those two words in sequence. Fact: the #1 cause of death for Palestinian women is being killed by family for supposed "sexual dishonor" - and Jordanian law (which Palestinian law is based on) condones the practice. "Honor killings" occur all over the middle eastern world, all the way out to India.
This is just one example of cultural-level problems. (And before you ask: no, this is NOT an issue with Islam, "honor killings" as practiced across the Arab world are in conflict with the Quran, it's a *cultural* thing.)
A bigger problem is that the basic idea of government being legitimate based only on the active will of the governed is an alien concept for the MAJORITY of the human race. Most people today are governed by whoever was able to scrape together the most brute force.
Those people are NOT ready to be able to boss me around.
I won't allow it.
Vietnam is a hair less clear-cut...still not real good mind you, and definately debatable.
To more directly answer Qjakal on why her version of world gov't is still a bad idea:
Different parts of the world are at different states of cultural development. That's something the "politically correct" crowd doesn't like talking about, but it's true. It's one reason a 3rd world nation such as Mexico with strict gun control can have a murder rate triple the US rate, while a very culturally advanced nation such as Switzerland can literally have a machine gun in every home yet have a murder rate only a small fraction of the US rate. Murder rates aren't connected to gun access, it's connected to cultural violence.
For a horrifying example of current cultural violence problems, go do a websearch in www.google.com for the term "honor killings" (with quotemarks so it looks for those two words in sequence. Fact: the #1 cause of death for Palestinian women is being killed by family for supposed "sexual dishonor" - and Jordanian law (which Palestinian law is based on) condones the practice. "Honor killings" occur all over the middle eastern world, all the way out to India.
This is just one example of cultural-level problems. (And before you ask: no, this is NOT an issue with Islam, "honor killings" as practiced across the Arab world are in conflict with the Quran, it's a *cultural* thing.)
A bigger problem is that the basic idea of government being legitimate based only on the active will of the governed is an alien concept for the MAJORITY of the human race. Most people today are governed by whoever was able to scrape together the most brute force.
Those people are NOT ready to be able to boss me around.
I won't allow it.
Say they manage, by some miracle, to develope one governing body. Ok, so we have one world government...then what?
First, the Bushes, Arrafats, Sharon, (etc) realize that when there is no competition, there is no blaming the other guy. Goverment fails.
Second, the pressure cooker we call government eventually has to release through change or the people at the bottom blow...and take the rest down with them. Can anyone say the word of the day??
"Revolution"
Won't work....barely works when you have one person organizing a family reunion...and all those people are supposed to LOVE each other..lol
Jo
First, the Bushes, Arrafats, Sharon, (etc) realize that when there is no competition, there is no blaming the other guy. Goverment fails.
Second, the pressure cooker we call government eventually has to release through change or the people at the bottom blow...and take the rest down with them. Can anyone say the word of the day??
"Revolution"
Won't work....barely works when you have one person organizing a family reunion...and all those people are supposed to LOVE each other..lol
Jo
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
one world government
god forbid!
i just cannot imaging taking orders on how to live from a bunch like the french(no female body shaving, and no deodorant use at all). and the cradle of man, africa. where it's eat your enemy, or be eaten by him!
and to red indian: oh please! you bloody english are the ones who brought slavery to america. the indians? if we hadn't taken this country away from them, they'd still be living in teepees, and stealing from their neighbors. on top of that, if america hadn't spread from shore to shore, and grown strong, you would be speaking german! viet nam? should never have been fought, but once again we try and help the french, and where does it get us?! then when it's our baby, the freaking politicans screw everything up, and loose the damn war for us! we should have back uncle ho back in '46 when he came here asking for our help!
how about englands heavy hand in india? all over africa? you name it, where ever you people go, they eventually throw you out! so yes i feel entirely justifed in looking down my nose at the rest of the world!
steve
god forbid!
i just cannot imaging taking orders on how to live from a bunch like the french(no female body shaving, and no deodorant use at all). and the cradle of man, africa. where it's eat your enemy, or be eaten by him!
and to red indian: oh please! you bloody english are the ones who brought slavery to america. the indians? if we hadn't taken this country away from them, they'd still be living in teepees, and stealing from their neighbors. on top of that, if america hadn't spread from shore to shore, and grown strong, you would be speaking german! viet nam? should never have been fought, but once again we try and help the french, and where does it get us?! then when it's our baby, the freaking politicans screw everything up, and loose the damn war for us! we should have back uncle ho back in '46 when he came here asking for our help!
how about englands heavy hand in india? all over africa? you name it, where ever you people go, they eventually throw you out! so yes i feel entirely justifed in looking down my nose at the rest of the world!
steve
To those that claim that the US is not a democracy:
I assume you are speaking of "pure" democracy, which doesn't exist anywhere at the national level. Anyone talking about democracy today is most likely referring to "representative democracy," a term that I feel may be used interchangeably with "constitutional republic." I realize that many are very proud of the US system of government, but to claim that it is not a democracy is to claim that any country that uses a representative government is not a democracy. That said, are there any countries that would still fit the definition of a "democracy?"
I assume you are speaking of "pure" democracy, which doesn't exist anywhere at the national level. Anyone talking about democracy today is most likely referring to "representative democracy," a term that I feel may be used interchangeably with "constitutional republic." I realize that many are very proud of the US system of government, but to claim that it is not a democracy is to claim that any country that uses a representative government is not a democracy. That said, are there any countries that would still fit the definition of a "democracy?"
P.H. Tickler
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 245
- Points
- 0
hmmmm
One government would never work, where would they ship all of our jobs?
One government would never work, where would they ship all of our jobs?
Haltickling
2nd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2001
- Messages
- 4,353
- Points
- 0
In an aggressive mood today, aren't we, areenactor? Maybe you're bored. Must be the loneliness on your very own Mt. Olympus. 😛
FYI, most probably your ancestors came from Europe, too, so you're shitting in your own nest. There would be no USA without Europe.
FYI, most probably your ancestors came from Europe, too, so you're shitting in your own nest. There would be no USA without Europe.
P.H. Tickler
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 245
- Points
- 0
lol
at this stage, I'd settle for the nap😉
at this stage, I'd settle for the nap😉
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
to hal
you are right on several accounts hal.
yes i am bored today.
i'm upset also about having to write a couple checks today, for state, and federal income tax!
i'm also upset about what is happening in the middle east.
i'm upset at the arrogence of red indian, and his continued anti american diatribe.
my ancestors are from europe. the smart ones that got out in the last 1800's that is... see all the rest of my ancestors family, etc., were all killed by the germans in W.W.2. see, my ancestors were jewish, and as we know, that was a capital offence in europe during the '30's, and '40's. so yeah, i don't have too good of an opinion about europe, and it's peoples.
for the record, i'm; dutch, romanian, french, and german on my mothers side. there is even a castle in germany that needs someone to come claime it. the german family name was Von Os, royal cousins to the hapsburges.
on my fathers side, i'm scotch, and irish. the family ran after the last revolt led by prince charlie, with prices on their heads. they hid out in northern irland for a couple hundred years, then came to america in 1921. my fathers father was a highly decorated vet. of the british army from W.W.1, so he got fast tracked to american citizenship. both my parents were born in america.
maybe some of this will give any here an insight into what makes me ****.
steve
you are right on several accounts hal.
yes i am bored today.
i'm upset also about having to write a couple checks today, for state, and federal income tax!
i'm also upset about what is happening in the middle east.
i'm upset at the arrogence of red indian, and his continued anti american diatribe.
my ancestors are from europe. the smart ones that got out in the last 1800's that is... see all the rest of my ancestors family, etc., were all killed by the germans in W.W.2. see, my ancestors were jewish, and as we know, that was a capital offence in europe during the '30's, and '40's. so yeah, i don't have too good of an opinion about europe, and it's peoples.
for the record, i'm; dutch, romanian, french, and german on my mothers side. there is even a castle in germany that needs someone to come claime it. the german family name was Von Os, royal cousins to the hapsburges.
on my fathers side, i'm scotch, and irish. the family ran after the last revolt led by prince charlie, with prices on their heads. they hid out in northern irland for a couple hundred years, then came to america in 1921. my fathers father was a highly decorated vet. of the british army from W.W.1, so he got fast tracked to american citizenship. both my parents were born in america.
maybe some of this will give any here an insight into what makes me ****.
steve
strtbottomjim
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 156
- Points
- 0
Quoting Sushi:
--------------
Anyone talking about democracy today is most likely referring to "representative democracy," a term that I feel may be used interchangeably with "constitutional republic."
--------------
Close, but not quite.
In a Constitutional Republic, there are some things the People, or their representatives, are NOT allowed to vote into existence. Things that are literally outside the allowable bounds of what even a Democratic government should do.
--------------
Anyone talking about democracy today is most likely referring to "representative democracy," a term that I feel may be used interchangeably with "constitutional republic."
--------------
Close, but not quite.
In a Constitutional Republic, there are some things the People, or their representatives, are NOT allowed to vote into existence. Things that are literally outside the allowable bounds of what even a Democratic government should do.
Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
You're right, Jim, but unfortunately the distinction has pretty much been lost. Most Democrats and many Republicans don't even recognize it.
red indian, I've talked with elderly Indians (South Asian variety) and ancient Irishmen about life as British subjects. I've come to the conclusion that you Brits weren't racists. You just treated everyone who wasn't British as a "native". You behaved better in India than in Ireland. Go figure.
Hal, finally something we agree on. Maybe one of us needs to change his mind.
Q, if we're gonna have a New World Order, maybe we ought to let an Italian run it. The Romans did better than most. So did Rudy Giuliani, for that matter. Would you be willing to volunteer for the job? (BTW I'm fine, thank you for asking.)
Strelnikov
red indian, I've talked with elderly Indians (South Asian variety) and ancient Irishmen about life as British subjects. I've come to the conclusion that you Brits weren't racists. You just treated everyone who wasn't British as a "native". You behaved better in India than in Ireland. Go figure.
Hal, finally something we agree on. Maybe one of us needs to change his mind.
Q, if we're gonna have a New World Order, maybe we ought to let an Italian run it. The Romans did better than most. So did Rudy Giuliani, for that matter. Would you be willing to volunteer for the job? (BTW I'm fine, thank you for asking.)
Strelnikov
Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
Civics 101
The Founders took the position that the US Government had certain enumerated powers - those specifically listed in the Constitution - and no others. For example, there was debate over the legality of the Louisiana Purchase, resolved when it was handled as part of a treaty with France since making treaties IS one of those powers.
There was concern that government would usurp additional powers - well justified in light of previous and subsequent history. The Bill of Rights was intended to prevent this, by prohibiting government from doing certain things. Amendments 9 and 10 are catch-alls. They say that (9) the fact that a right isn't mentioned does not mean that it doesen't exist, and (10) any powers not specifically reserved to the US Govt, or prohibited to the States, are rights of the States or of the People.
Franklin Roosevelt turned those ideas on their heads when he created the New Deal. He took the position that the government could do anything that was not specifically prohibited, and he stretched some of those prohibitions when it suited him. We haven't had a constitutional government since 1933.
So in response to Jim and sushi - yes, there's a difference, but it no longer has any practical significance.
Strelnikov
The Founders took the position that the US Government had certain enumerated powers - those specifically listed in the Constitution - and no others. For example, there was debate over the legality of the Louisiana Purchase, resolved when it was handled as part of a treaty with France since making treaties IS one of those powers.
There was concern that government would usurp additional powers - well justified in light of previous and subsequent history. The Bill of Rights was intended to prevent this, by prohibiting government from doing certain things. Amendments 9 and 10 are catch-alls. They say that (9) the fact that a right isn't mentioned does not mean that it doesen't exist, and (10) any powers not specifically reserved to the US Govt, or prohibited to the States, are rights of the States or of the People.
Franklin Roosevelt turned those ideas on their heads when he created the New Deal. He took the position that the government could do anything that was not specifically prohibited, and he stretched some of those prohibitions when it suited him. We haven't had a constitutional government since 1933.
So in response to Jim and sushi - yes, there's a difference, but it no longer has any practical significance.
Strelnikov
Oblesklk
2nd Level Yellow Feather
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2001
- Messages
- 3,392
- Points
- 48
Given the course we're going now, the reality is that we will become one world government. I welcome that day, even though I'll never live to see it.
If you've paid close attention to history, you'd notice that capitalism, and all its bastard forms, is tending to win out over other forms of economics. Why is this important? Because we are exporting our culture in a mass market fashion. With the advent of radio, television, and the internet, technology will soon overcome communication barriers that existed since human inception. In the society of the future, there won't really be any reason for borders, tariffs, or skirmishes. You can try to protect American workers and products by any number of tariffs you like, but in the end, capitalism will find a way.
We already see it happening. Labor is being outsourced overseas from American companies at ridiculous levels. You do the math...an American corporation can pay a unionized American worker about $30/hour for his services (including appropriate federal and local employment taxes) or can outsource the same work to a foreigner (perhaps over the internet) for about $3/hour for the same job. Ethical dilemmas aside, it's not a tough decision to make, and several companies are making the plunge.
Like it or not, it will happen, assuming we don't annihilate ourselves in some fashion before it does 🙂 Progress will force us to evolve.
Then again, I may just one of those crazy people that believe our cultural differences are dwarfed by the sheer fact that we are all homo sapien. That, in itself, in the grand scheme of things, makes us all kin.
If you've paid close attention to history, you'd notice that capitalism, and all its bastard forms, is tending to win out over other forms of economics. Why is this important? Because we are exporting our culture in a mass market fashion. With the advent of radio, television, and the internet, technology will soon overcome communication barriers that existed since human inception. In the society of the future, there won't really be any reason for borders, tariffs, or skirmishes. You can try to protect American workers and products by any number of tariffs you like, but in the end, capitalism will find a way.
We already see it happening. Labor is being outsourced overseas from American companies at ridiculous levels. You do the math...an American corporation can pay a unionized American worker about $30/hour for his services (including appropriate federal and local employment taxes) or can outsource the same work to a foreigner (perhaps over the internet) for about $3/hour for the same job. Ethical dilemmas aside, it's not a tough decision to make, and several companies are making the plunge.
Like it or not, it will happen, assuming we don't annihilate ourselves in some fashion before it does 🙂 Progress will force us to evolve.
Then again, I may just one of those crazy people that believe our cultural differences are dwarfed by the sheer fact that we are all homo sapien. That, in itself, in the grand scheme of things, makes us all kin.
ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,702
- Points
- 36
Re: one world government
Cannablism in Africa???..............................Someones moking the weed. 🙄
areenactor said:god forbid!
and the cradle of man, africa. where it's eat your enemy, or be eaten by him!
steve
Cannablism in Africa???..............................Someones moking the weed. 🙄
strtbottomjim
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 156
- Points
- 0
I don't think actual cannibalism was what was being talked about.
Africa has many of the worst governments on the planet...moreso than any other continent, now that Chile and Argentina are no longer in the "outright muderous" category.
Africa has many of the worst governments on the planet...moreso than any other continent, now that Chile and Argentina are no longer in the "outright muderous" category.
ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,702
- Points
- 36
Only because of colonialism and being divided into territories next to another tribe they couldnt stand. If anyone had asked the Africans on how theyd liked to be grouped togeather these horrible governments wouldnt be here now..... 😡
Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
Must... restrain... myself... AARGH!
OK, Ice, you asked for it. It wasn't colonialism that caused the mess in Africa, other than that the colonialists didn't go far enough. Main problem is the continuation of tribalism, now armed with automatic weapons.
And before you brace me over "racism", it isn't just the Africans. Same situation in Afghanistan and Former Yugoslavia.
Strelnikov
OK, Ice, you asked for it. It wasn't colonialism that caused the mess in Africa, other than that the colonialists didn't go far enough. Main problem is the continuation of tribalism, now armed with automatic weapons.
And before you brace me over "racism", it isn't just the Africans. Same situation in Afghanistan and Former Yugoslavia.
Strelnikov
- Status
