So i know there's many people who think there is a plot for a new world order, im not trying to dispute it's truth or not. I was thinking though, would a new world order, a world-wide country, if it was decentralized or based on a constitution type thing, be bad? Is it inherently because it is the size of the world that makes it bad or is it authoritarian and therefor bad? Because i appose authoritarianism at any size. Would anyone here WANT to see a NWO that was run according to your own ideals or ideals like certain nations? how would it run? or do you prefer our own small nations with wars and whatnot, but also a better sense of sovereignty?
Good and bad. Good, I feel they can reduce the population and perhaps return earth back to it's pristine state. Bad, I won't be the only calling the shots. Simple as that.
Yes it would be bad, you think the connection between Washington and the people is bad now, just imagine a globalized bureaucracy trying to represent billions of people it has no connection too whatsoever.
The main problem with a one world govt is you will have to force people against their will to join...is that really how you want to start a new govt?
Government has a monopoly on force. As it stands now, you can choose between which nations you want to live in. You can't opt out of global governance. So therefore, the potential for abuse of power is astronomical.
There is power in numbers. I don't think it will be the originally inspired one world governance however. Sooner or later the US and her allies may break away from the UN and form their own global unity, and China will likely do the same. The simple fact is global governance as we have right now is diluting US and China's power in the world so these two powers will only put up with that for so long. I support it though, it's a wild world.... (one world government isn't what I support and will never happen)
[quote name='"TheAtmansPath"']So i know there's many people who think there is a plot for a new world order, im not trying to dispute it's truth or not. I was thinking though, would a new world order, a world-wide country, if it was decentralized or based on a constitution type thing, be bad? Is it inherently because it is the size of the world that makes it bad or is it authoritarian and therefor bad? Because i appose authoritarianism at any size. Would anyone here WANT to see a NWO that was run according to your own ideals or ideals like certain nations? how would it run? or do you prefer our own small nations with wars and whatnot, but also a better sense of sovereignty?[/quote] Dude imagine we didn't have states rights. You want to put the whole world in one boat? First we need to completely rid ourselves of religion.
Lots of good points here I think overall the people everywhere have a lot more maturing before anyone can say that a man can be allowed that amount of power. A maturing that won't happen until we rid ourselves of the current style of thinking
Having one person or group be in charge of everyone is about as far from the ideology I prescribe to as it gets. The further removed the individual is from the rules/rights they have the less likely those rules/rights are applicable.
You have no clue what the NWO is about do you? So since it's nothing like you think it is do you support it?
Is anyone here actually suggesting that we adopt a single world currency or a system of world governance? *crickets*
No. Just more cooperation between governments and oppressive regimes being held accountable by the world community.
I'm all for a global government to represent the human race of planet earth, but only if it's run by the Icelandic government.
So what happens when governments cooperating decide to merge into collectives similar to the European Union?
The exact same thing that happens when there's absolutely zero evidence of such a plan conspiring - nothing.
Anybody who smokes marijuana and thinks they have a right to decide what they put into their bodes would be a fucking idiot for supporting the NWO. You are scum to them an undesirable! And you want to give the international bankers and the politicians who work for them control of the entire planet?
A one world government would never happen in the way people would expect it to. There would be nothing to compare it to. There would have to be massive sessions of brainstorming. But would a one world government be good? Possibly but the opportunities for good would be squandered as they are today In the US. We could do well with global governance, but this would (in my opinion) only happen with the dismantling of organized religion. Religions that convince people to hate and/or propose laws on others that limit choice and freedom such as gay marriage being banned or the religions that want to eradicate the use of birth control. If people could get the massive sticks out of their asses long enough to realize that someone else's happiness may come from smoking weed or knocking back a few brews on a hot summers night. But the imposition of people's beliefs conflict greatly with personal freedoms. We have begun the police states. We the citizens are the ones who are imposing stricter sentences. We do not act to uphold our own freedoms until they are gone. (thusly when they are gone often times people cry conspiracy) The lives we lead now will be the lives we lead then if a global government were to occur. We provide the judgement that we force everyone to live under. They may not be your beliefs or my own, but the beliefs of the majority. Until we the minority can convince everyone that the decisions we make that hurt no one other than ourselves should be legalized we will constantly live with less freedoms. But the chances of convincing those who have allowed themselves to become the moral/religious police of our respective countries are slim because of the organized religion that is so deeply engraved into them. I am not against spirituality. God lives in those who believe whether the name be Allah or otherwise. And those who don't believe aren't harmed either. People can be great if it weren't for the moral tyranny we've allowed to take place, that we have allowed to skew our laws to fit religious agendas. If we could all agree on disagreeing, but still reminding ourselves that even though those who we disagree with deserve the same freedoms that we hold dear we could and would prosper under a government that is run by the world. There would be no need to change your money from the American dollar to the Turkish lira or the English pound or Chinese yen. We could have no walls no barriers to trade. No hatred based on nationalism. We would all have an actualized citizenship of the world. We would all be one. Do you see how powerful that could be? How empowering it would be to know you are a brother or sister to an Iraqi civilian who respects your decision to practice atheism or catholicism while they respectfully practice their religion of choice without wanting to impose their creed onto you? The world would be free of feuding denominations and yet be so filled with peaceful ones. But this could never happen with how the world is today, but one day I hope we can all look beyond our nationalities and which books our beliefs are based upon. But we can't. Because we still allow others to hold onto their badges and police morals and creeds. We should all be able to look beyond it at one point though. I just hope it comes when I'm alive and I can say that you and I are truly free.