Global unification of Earth; are you for it or against it and why?

I seems the ideology of world peace is; that it must come through global unification, with no separate countries, just state hoods. It seems that the plan for this has been underway for quite some time, with proponents and opponents. World peace doesn't seem to be just something cute a child wishes for or the typical pander response of beauty contestants.

It seems the idea of world peace has a political ideology, and the political answer for this to happen is globalization. This first seems to happen with trade agreements, and setting up central banks, that then turns into trade unions of neighboring countries and a single currency good across all borders; such as the EU and Euro.

Logic would say this would occur locally with border countries first as it has been, and the countries that refuse get squeezed out from pressure from neighbors and global trade partners in the form of sanctions... tow the line join globalization for a one world government or good luck making it on only the resources you have... with the UN playing referee for how much squeezing or fast the process moves against those dragging their feet.

Eventually they will submit and join the chorus and a complete union is formed. So the European union; the not yet formed Americas union, Arabian union that has been in a constant state of upheaval for quite some time, the Asiatic union basic unification by regions in other words, then all of these join into one global union comprising state hoods with a one world currency, eventually dissolving even the state hoods at some point, just one large melting pot of people.

That's the stage or game board of what is being played in global politics... I can see it clearly and I am sure you can too; though not exactly in the possible unions stated but that's the general idea.

Ok so since that is the direction the world on the political and trade level have been moving to for quite some time and will continue towards unless they decide this one world one government for world peace ideology is unobtainable and drop out. Like the UK recently wanting to leave the European union. We can expect to see this agenda pushed all the way to fruition.

The pros I can see for a global unification, is no more borders where humans are free to travel with no imaginary lines in the dirt to stop anyone from traveling or living where ever in the world they may want too, the custom of currency the same with the same value no matter where one may happen to go without conversion. That is the biggest positive I see from this, aside from no major wars between separate countries... there may arise civil war of such a global world against a government but not between individual countries because they wouldn't exist.

The con of course, is the possibility of an Orwellian nightmare; where we humans are just a cog in a machine, that we have no control over and are just dictated to... where every aspect of our lives are controlled, from cradle to grave. (yes I know it seems many places are like that already or getting worse)

I see this global agenda heading for a unified Earth; and a lot of feet dragging along the way. I am not sure who set this all in motion but it is in motion, once accomplished... I am not sure of any agenda afterwards either; is it for global freedom or global repression... I have no idea. So curiosity has led me to ask, the general ATS public; Are you for a united Earth or against this ideology, wanting to retain separate countries of sovereignty, and why you choose the for or against position.

The current Global Unification agenda is an agenda for oppression and the reintroduction of direct slavery or an advanced debt slavery system similar to what we have now.

I do not support a current goal Global Unification.

If a Global Unification was to occur, some major changes would have to happen first in the Political status and operation of the Governing body.

This world will unite globally at some point in our future, of that I have no doubts.
However I am firm believer of population control, do not read it as support of depopulation.
There are several countries that have birth control statutes in place to limit their population growth and I support that.
If a Global Unification were to happen, these stipulations would have to remain in place for the races of those countries and countries that do not, would have to also have stipulations on population growth.
Otherwise we would see a MASSIVE boom in population growth GLOBALLY to a rate of unsustainable in terms of economy AND ecology.

We also need to radically rethink our agricultural practices to support the World as a whole as there is a lot of poverty... Mainly monoculture would have to cease immediately and a lot of farm lands have to be revitalized.
Hidden technologies would have to be released so that we can start desalinizing the ocean and greening a lot of our deserts... ONCE however, a Global Environment Impact Assessment has been completed to assess whether or not greening the deserts wouldn't negatively impact the Global weather patterns.

There is a lot of work to be done if Global Unification can be seriously discussed and the way the world is run...
We have no hope for a prosperous Unification unless a major Earth impacting event occurs.

reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness


I guess it very much depends on those whom actually sign such treaties, if it is within the current system of capitalism, central banks, corruption and constant information and MSM sensorship than it would be a total nightmare to live under such unification. It would sound like a dream to live without borders, but a one world government means less and much powerful people at the top and to be honest i'm already scared the # out of them. At least by the few who are powerful in every single country, the law does not apply to them and just imagine how it's going to be with only one world government... So who's gonna watch the watchers?

The other option is an enlightened one, with the realization that we are all one, and we are nature and not apart from nature, and we must treat it as our home and thus take care of it and one another. That would probably be something like the Venus project idea with "making the Earth and its resource a common heritage for all beings" type of statement.

But i'm afraid our specie is too much in the dark to ever realizing something greater than himself on a collective level, so I guess that i'm against the global unification of the Earth.

Global unification simply is not possible.

There are too many people with different ethics, values, religions, and beliefs in different laws to fit them all under one umbrella. How can you expect people in Canada and people in Saudi Arabia to have the same rules?

You can't. They are totally different cultures. Global unification has also been tried throughout history and failed miserably. The Romans, Charlamagne, Genghis Khan, all tried it and what happens is that you simply have too much territory to control. Factions at the outskirts of your control begin to splinter away and there is not enough military to keep them all in line.

This is why the only way a NWO could exist would be to stay in the shadows and quietly manipulate things without being seen.

reply to post by Hopechest


If global unification is not the purpose for creating something like the EU and proposing more unions between other countries; then what do you believe their real purpose for creating them is? Do you not see such large unification eventually leading to a one world centralized government with countries becoming state hoods of such a government?

The overall aim of the EEC/EU, since its foundation in 1958, is to promote peace; the values of human rights; democracy; equality; the rule of law; and the well-being of its peoples. These values are the bedrock of the EU’s work and its role in the world.

EU mission statement

Global government is a certainty, eventually. For now, we are not mature enough as a species to produce a global, representative government, based on our good friends, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

If we see global government in our lifetimes, it would not be a pleasant one. It would be a resource hungry, corporation driven entity, with no goals other than exploitation and profit.

But in time, I'm hopeful that humanity will band together, and move out into the solar system. Even then, the process would start over. Colonies, war, independence...then start again.

On the face of it, the idea of a unified Earth appeals, quite understandably. Who does not want an end to war, an end to the possibility of a nuclear apocalypse, bought on by the ridiculous jingoism of a gaggle of idiotic politicians and world leaders?

But things are never what they seem, nor are they ever as wholesome as they ought to be. The gaggle of idiotic politicians I mentioned before, would be the same ones which would be instrumental in actually putting a unification plan into effect, and it is a pretty solid bet that this particular effort would be no better for the species than would nuclear destruction on a world wide basis.

The only way I would accept global unification, is if the thing which unified all peoples, was self governance under a system administrated by a constantly changing group of normal folk. Not high fliers in society, not business persons and bankers, and not Bullingdon club graduates. Just regular folks. Plumbers, Chippies (woodworkers), Shop Assistants, Street Sweepers, beat Coppers, Farm managers, honest, hardworking folk.

Under any system which requires the position of carreer politicians, any construct like Whitehall, of unelected powerbrokers, any remnant of the old power structures being in place and active, will be unacceptable, and must surely result in the whole of the people of the Earth rising up to smite these foul constructions, with the hammers and axes, and great machinery of destruction, which are thier tools of thier trade.

The current unification/globalization strategy started during the cold war, during a time when the threat of global nuclear holocaust seemed possible. Because of that, a no holds barred strategy was embraced for globalization at all costs. Basically the idea was world peace through distributed interests: US buys all its goods made in China, China gets much of its food from Russia, Russia gets tech products from us, etc. Global interdependence, so a strike on one is a strike on all.

Now that most superpowers are on the same page about not nuking each though, that old strategy looks pretty bad. The people who stepped up to the plate to make this happen were folks like the old KGB in Russia (who became the business oligarchs) etc. So now that Americans have these crazy ideas, like producing their own goods instead of buying from China, but get slapped down by CIA/KGB tied business interests with their hands deep in government in all countries. The business elite that created this International interdependence consider themselves totally immune to any kind of reproach, because the plan has been effective at preventing global nuclear conflict. However it makes for a rotten business environment and a lifestyle of restricted freedoms, as a global business elite with government control and almost limitless power decide our futures.

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
reply to post by Hopechest

 

If global unification is not the purpose for creating something like the EU and proposing more unions between other countries; then what do you believe their real purpose for creating them is? Do you not see such large unification eventually leading to a one world centralized government with countries becoming state hoods of such a government?

Certainly it is a large unification but it is far from a global unification.

The EU is mostly made up of like-minded countries who are already similar. You will also notice that the majority of their laws deal with nothing more than economics.

It is possible to have very large unifications on one or two issues but you will never see a complete global unification where countries no longer exist.

Originally posted by Midnight4444

If we see global government in our lifetimes, it would not be a pleasant one. It would be a resource hungry, corporation driven entity, with no goals other than exploitation and profit.

Does it not appear to be this way in some countries now?

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness

Originally posted by Midnight4444

If we see global government in our lifetimes, it would not be a pleasant one. It would be a resource hungry, corporation driven entity, with no goals other than exploitation and profit.

Does it not appear to be this way in some countries now?

Absolutely, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Even the best nations on the planet are corrupt and seemingly always on the verge of devolving into something...less.

In the short term that isn't going to change, but I'm a long distance optimist. I'm pessimistic in the short term and wildly hopeful about the future, even when it comes to government, global or otherwise.

reply to post by Hopechest


Agreed but there is an agenda to create more of these types of unification... such as the North American unification. What I am suggesting is If the EU the impending NAU and the others trying to form occur; they could easily blend into one... right now I feel we are on the trade battlefield; for the formation of more such unification. The wars etc going on over; trade, resources and human rights; all fall under the values stated by the proponents of these unions.

reply to post by tridentblue


I see that that's why it has roots and is the description of the current climate; but that agenda has powerful steam and momentum in many world affairs.

Right now it's a battle front pushing this agenda... and we are stuck in the middle of what those in power are pushing. I know Russia is a very strong proponent for sovereignty, and stand behind countries wishing to keep or acquire theirs.

But I beg to ask the question for or against? Or if you'd rather not answer; since you seem pretty knowledgeable on the topic why Russia flip flopped to be against such unification in favor of sovereignty?

reply to post by TrueBrit


A form of socialism with democratic overtones?

I can kind of see that sort of government working with what the forefathers of the US intended... but what that has been twisted into from; poor interpretation and corruption in the name of wealth generation, I agree there's no way to have a good outcome, with that.

I think the global unification of the nations of Earth is inevitable for the survival of our race and any hope of us colonizing both our own solar system and other star systems. Lets do it for the right reasons all the same and keep the Illuminati out of it and for gods sake do not let America run the show.

reply to post by andy06shake


Interesting; I see that pro in this as well, a lot of science fiction writers with a future timeline did too. That petty human squabbles are keeping us from the stars... arguing about lines in the dirt and resources when sustainability can be found off world; if most of our effort and expenses weren't tied up in barbaric property claims, and materialistic pursuits. Many sci fi writers also seem to incorporate a sparse materialistic environment as well when it comes to film. You don't see typically see huge plasma TV's etc in living quarters. Many of their lives seem to just focus around work and co-workers living in a corporate or military structure, with fond memories of family living in some idealistic Earth conditions.

Personally; out of all the futuristic writing s sci fi goes, I think the series Cowboy Bebop depicts it more accurately... you can take humans out of nature but you can't take the nature out of humans.

In my opinion global unification is unavoidable. This is part of natural process - tribe,city,state,union,world. But there is no way that it can happen in the near future. Maybe in a century or even more. Trying to implement it now will result in enormous corruption, rise of bureaucracy,inefficiency and numerous conflicts.
What will eventually allow for such an unification to be efficient and prevent inner conflicts is simply better technology but it will be 1984ish future with little to none personal freedom.
It will not solve corruption and injustice - the opposite actually, but it will prevent major wars and allow for major projects to be undertaken. Not sure that it is worth it but i am sure that it will happen, if we survive that long.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge


If global unification brings about free energy and eventually the means of departing this rock we wont need to worry about any 1984 scenario being implemented since the Multiverse is rather large any draconian type of government simply could not function due to the vast distances between worlds.

IMHO we pretty much live in Mr Orwell's version of society now!

Personally, I view this as global slavery. Unfortunately many will go willing, because we have been conditioned to desire "things".

We have forgotten the beauty of living as one with the planet and each other. There is no ruler or keeper, when we live in unity. When we live as one, we have all our needs met. We have no desire to own anything or anyone. We would have no desire to destroy anything or anyone without gain for the whole. It is possible, but not while we allow ourselves to be controlled, manipulated, and deceived.

You can only be controlled when you allow yourself to be controlled. You can't miss what you never had or don't want. What do we really "need"? Most of what we "need" can be found without much effort and in the right places are bountiful.

What we have been taught to desire, comes at great cost. We use our power and energy in search of those things that destroy us and the planet. They allow us to become weak, easily controlled and expendable.

I think it is time for those of us that are wise enough to see the handwriting on the wall, to stop playing the game of destruction, and if we are too weak to break free of the addiction of death, to at least teach our young to live the game of life.

Sometimes I think the best thing that could happen to this planet is for the grid to fail. I sometimes think the grid has become a dome to our planet that is preventing us from reaching our full potential. It makes us lazy, it keeps us stupid, it keeps us physically apart, and it prevents us from connecting with each other and the universe.

I know I have left myself wide open for the mega ATS attackers. Go ahead. Have yourself a ball. It is how and why they will win. Ever wonder what happens to the winner? What happens when you have succeeded in destroying everyone else? What happens when you are the last man standing? Maybe it is something you need to start thinking about.

reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn


Moving from self reliance and understanding how things work and what you really need to live has been going on for a really long time. There is profit in making things "easier" here this tractor will plow your field; instead of the horse or ox, this gas will fuel your tractor instead of the grass of the field for hoses or oxen. So now you have to rely on something other than what you could provide all on your own to do the job... other people. The tractor company is in the city and it offers pay and fortune not found on the farm... so you don't even have to live on a farm but in the city...

This thing expands into a town, the town into a city where people are working to supply their needs by supplying work producing another's need or want at their job. It's a very odd concept, to go from working for your own needs and self reliance, to working for others need for self reliance. Many don't see it as working for another's needs but that's really what most people are doing. Is there anything wrong with it?

Well, you give up control of your ability to be self sustaining and self reliant for one. Eventually, what was freedom to plan and go about your day as you wished for yourself and your family... reliance on someone else's work has become a requirement to survive in society. We have turned away from a free to roam and produce mentality to one of a hive mind.

What's good for you and your family and it's health is no longer important... public health and safety of the hive takes center stage, personal freedom wants and desires goes out the window; to be decided by the hive what you can and cannot do. No you cannot dig a well you must use the hives water, not you can build your house as you want if you leave it has to meet the requirements for someone else in the hive. No you can't cut the power from your house it is part of the hives power grid... and on and on and on.

You simply cannot in a first world country just live; you are required to learn and obey the customs, history and law of the hive. It may sound anti social but where's the choice... if you don't want to be part of or indebted to the hive? There are very few places one can go and live outside of the hive left. What isn't leased land in the form of a mortgage is a state or federal property. Even if it's leased and taxes paid if it benefits the hive to take it the hive will.

Perhaps; I was born way too late, or am just wake at how much of a dystopia this society or hive actually is. I know it isn't just myself there are millions of people feeling out of the loop and disenfranchised by the agenda of their government, that is happy to sell out everything it's real citizens hold dear to the fake citizen called corporate interests. Profit is the corporate interest, anything that can be bought and sold or taxed, will eventually become regulated by corporations very little left that isn't... but eventually it all will be gone in the name of growth, profit, globalization, public health and public safety for the hive.

No one is free from the hive, but two at both extremes have relative freedom... those at the highest economic class living off the corporate profit of the human hive enslavement, and those at the bottom living on the streets crushed by it.

I know I have left myself wide open for the mega ATS attackers.

I think you're safe people have to star and flag posts and threads to bring in the usual suspects.