United Earth - New World Order or One World Government?

a reply to: NightFlight

The UN as it stands now are more mocked and feared than respected.

Give them more bite?

a reply to: Serdgiam

I think that long ago, some people with foresight and power realized that such a thing was an inevitability. So, they went about creating new chapters of our cultural story that lead to no one working towards a unified planet other than those already in control.

A very similar idea I have as well about control and how our beliefs if manipulated can keep us divided.

There is no need for everyone to be in agreement about everything for people to work together.

Yes just one thing really and humanity can move forward from there,

the one thing in my opinion which just about all humans know is that we are humans and we make up humanity, each one of us has a part to play.

That unity of us all being human and residents of earth needs to be put above where we were born on this planet or where we reside and what ideologies we believe in.

How to do that, well you cant force change on another and it has to come from somewhere that will guide by asking instead of push by telling.

Its a very delicate situation as interpretation comes into play on an individual basis as what might guide one might be pushing another.

Hey but with many minds looking to solve the issue of division on this planet and create a unity that most if not all would be happy with then I believe it might be a reality we could experience or at least experience the beginnings of and let our next generations reap the rewards of living in peace and harmony with ourselves and the planet.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Antisemits are real, they would blow up Israel within the blink of an eye, if they were crazy enough to let their guards down. Part of the xenophobic problem on the way to tolerance, religions, focussing on whatis different, instead of accepting the fact, we all eat, drink, # and piss.
And you're right, I am very impatient. Starting with getting all mankind to read and learn basic nature sciences would be definetly a good start.

a reply to: SLAYER69

Yeah, I get that, but it would have to have a "buy in" not unlike the UN. The ultimate governing union would have to be the last word on everything that is brought before its representatives. There would have to be some smart, empathetic people to be elected/appointed to it.

a border is what defines a 'sovereign people's' boundary. remove the border, you open gates to molesters...no sovereignty.

before we pick and choose our rulers' we should weed-out the molesters, so nobody gets molested.

it is 'for the people' we are aiming to create a global solution?

keep out of my business dammit!

Origin of MOLEST

Middle English, from Anglo-French molester, from Latin molestare, from molestus burdensome, annoying; akin to Latin moles mass
First Known Use: 14th century

rid us of molesters, and i'll board that vessel.

a reply to: Peeple

Paradigm shifts of the type that you are describing don't happen in the span of a single lifetime. They take many lifetimes. You have to educate the indoctrination out of them, and that starts with the children. Then when those children grown up, they can educate their own children better or try to reach a new generation of children to further break the indoctrination.

People dedicate their whole lives to religion; many would feel like it is a life wasted if they found out they were dedicating themselves to a lie, so it reaffirms their belief and they become more firmly entrenched in the lies. That is why the key to breaking it is educating the children. They haven't built up a lifetime of rationalizations to keep their beliefs going.

Request

Although that aspect is open for discussion and applicable in content let's not let 'Israel' [pro or con or other] Highjack the threads over all topic and discussion please.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: NightFlight

The UN as it stands now are more mocked and feared than respected.

Give them more bite?

A good start would be dissolving the power of the Permanent Five Security Council Members who can each vote no on a resolution that the rest of the world wants and make it go away.

Make the members rotate every two or three years on all councils. Secretary Generals may serve ONE 4-5 year term. With a little restructuring, it could be viable. Three or four nations would get their panties in a bunch. Namely, the US, Israel, Russia, and maybe China. They stand the most to lose by bringing the whole of the world up to no poo in the water status. More people have access to cell phones than clean water. Priorities are messed up.


And NATO must be dissolved as well. Let the UN handle disputes. NATO is a relic and unnecessary. Make that part of the deal with Russia and China to accept the dissolution of the permanent Security Council.

How do I think it will happen (now that I'm done playing John Lennon)?

Google...

AI. Robots. Quantum computing. Unchecked expansion. How many people have used a Google product or service at least once today? It is happening slowly.

originally posted by: the owlbear

And NATO must be dissolved as well. Let the UN handle disputes. NATO is a relic and unnecessary. Make that part of the deal with Russia and China to accept the dissolution of the permanent Security Council.

Which brings up a good question.

By what mechanism would you imagine regions would resolve their differences with?

a reply to: SLAYER69

If it's possible to have a United earth, then a massive shift in collective consciousness would have too take place IMO.

The NWO as l see it is the restructuring of the current order based on old systems of governance or models that are becoming outdated in a technological world. Methods and models of governance have dramatically shifted due too advances in modern day ways and means of information sharing and speed of service.

Is it possible to continue planning and governing using antiquated methods, which in hindsight could not of predicted today's advances.

It may be inevitable that the world evolves into a more modern model that reflects the capabilities and advances it's made in the past 30 years alone.

Surely 40 years ago the world order worked just fine, however, with the advent of the internet and superior information sharing, the world as we know it now, will eventually transform and evolve or go by the wayside.

The NWO may set the stage for a one world government, however, uniting people may prove more difficult.

originally posted by: SLAYER69

originally posted by: the owlbear

And NATO must be dissolved as well. Let the UN handle disputes. NATO is a relic and unnecessary. Make that part of the deal with Russia and China to accept the dissolution of the permanent Security Council.

Which brings up a good question.

By what mechanism would you imagine regions would resolve their differences with?

United Nations?
We are playing the "what if" game here. If the world is to put its collective trust in one organization to settle disputes of finance, resources, or aid with sectarian violence, the UN outlined above should be the place where all nations have a voice.

a reply to: Daedal

The internet already is the biggest and greatest democratic, global tool, we the people share
And we're just beginning to learn how to use it, that is why so many non-democratic nations are trying to censor it.
But that still leaves the problem with people not being educated enough to use it right.
Falling blindly for youtube vids, comes to mind, when one click and one right question further, there would be a ton of valid information disproving the propaganda, or personal agenda, or attempt to sell snake oil as medicine...

I AM a Globalist ---- plain and simple. It is the only logical and inevitable evolution of government.

As I've stated before: it's not If and When --- its How and Who.

I don`t think it would be so bad having a one world government. in the U.S. we have 50 states each with their own governments and state laws, and we have a federal government that has federal laws.. Things seem to be working ok so, I don`t see why a world government wouldn`t work just as good.
countries could still have their own governments and laws to regulate things inside their borders and the world government would have laws to regulate things that cross national borders..

We are all in the same boat, we only have one planet that we all must share.We have been acting like little kids in a playground maybe it`s time that we had some parental supervision from a world government.The actions of even just one country affects us all so shouldn`t we all have a voice in what that country does outside of their own borders?

a reply to: SLAYER69

The only way I would trust a thought of a one-world government is if "Earth's Constitution", much of it based on the early documents of the America government, expanded to include the rights of animals, the full protection and rehabilitation of the injured areas of the environment (forests, oceans, clean and - as much as possible - undammed rivers), a push for the entire human race to just up and quit eating animal products (I'm not an expert on the ability of the race to do that, it took me most of my life to get to that point), an end to the stupid and tragic worldwide war on some drugs, and an agreement with the Islamic culture to ease up on the women (yes?). Then, with all of that written down, signed, and started upon, maybe I'd start to trust that the concept has merit.

I say #1 --- government must be secular.

Personal belief is control of the wrong kind. It does not belong in government. Only logic and analytical thinking can create fairness for 7 billion people.

a reply to: Annee

True
#2 free-information, everybody has to have access to the truth, no secrets

originally posted by: Annee
I say #1 --- government must be secular.

Personal belief is control of the wrong kind. It does not belong in government. Only logic and analytical thinking can create fairness for 7 billion people.

Might work.

But Mankind has another 10,000 years to go.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee
I say #1 --- government must be secular.

Personal belief is control of the wrong kind. It does not belong in government. Only logic and analytical thinking can create fairness for 7 billion people.

Might work.

But Mankind has another 10,000 years to go.

I also always say: Culture is the hardest thing to change.

So yeah, bring out the fireworks ---- you and I have agreed on something.