This video does not make any arguments, it just shows various photos, a recording from Google Earth, and a few quotes. Weak. Please read the Road to Serfdom, and see why centralized authority is inefficient and leads to tyranny.
3- good feelings. Elites ever made use of good feelings to disam peoples. A worldwide tyrannt will have all tne propaganda channels to keep millions of stupid well-thinkers happy with little more than political correctness, pan et televised circus. And perhaps a shjt religion that talk about things that you stupid seeps appreciate: armony, enviromnment , the planet and stupidities like that.
My experience has always been that in order to change something, start with yourself...after that the ones that mean most to you, keep your family safe and happy, stay vigilant, obey the basic laws of physics and morality and spread a little hope and charity. What would happen if the cost of global governance was the life of your family, would you consent?
Global Governance is nice idea, but I don't think it can happen now. The idea would have to wait for the old leaders to die or become ill beheld leading like Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and even the US.
As long as its not USA ideals of corperate governance Im good. If global I think we should model after sweden and france. Those two nations polices combined would make a great world.
But americans would throw that idea out the window. Dont know why. I dont understand why that they accept their heathcare the way they do. Anytime a member of the family gets sick, usualy bankrupts the whole family. Since their HMO's like to be snakes about it.
Why NOT Global Governance? Becuz 2 smaller attempts at it [the League of Nations, followed by the UN] failed miserably!
It's hard enuff to get a room of ppl to agree. Or even to get along for long. So getting all people & cultures of the world to form a uniform set of laws to live by will be impossible.
And as can happen in the UN, r we going to allow the veto of a single important member to rule the day? I dont want to allow distant nations/people that kind of power over my everyday life!
That being said however ,new elected officals are needed.That means NONE of the old politicians,or power structure.Its time to replace the old guard that has misused its power for too long.
Based on peer reviewed science and scientists not funded by corperations, GW does not exist.
Tree ring data, core samples, temp. graphs and sediment samples all prove this. There is no such thing as consensus in science, as they state at IPCC. Consensus is politics, science is paradigm shifts, varification and falsification and the numbers, unlike words, don't lie. Be back later.
1.5 billion chinese, 2 billion indians, 600 million europeans. You've got your numbers wrong. I never insisted the rights of one random group of people should trump all others. I respect the sovereinty and will of free countries to do as they see fit within the boundaries of their nations laws. I expect them to do the same with ours. National sovereignties are not fuzzy, they are well defined within their countries boundaries, supported by their own laws and ideoligies.
Aw dude, those numbers are projections, speculations, not scientific claims. It's just a thought experiment. Why don't we give it a rest eh? We are just annoying each other at this stage, and I find thats when it gets nasty and people start calling each other names. Ciao for now:-)
You never stated they were projections when you wrote it. And projections based on what?
Currently, the approx. pop., in billions, of China are 1.35, India 1.1 and you say europe has never been so prosperous, kind of like the U.S. used to be. America produces 33% of the worlds wealth. Unemployment in europe is at 8.5%. The last time our unemployment was that high, we were in a recession, 1980-81.
Chinese economy 3 times U.S.? In billions, China's GNP = 1.36, U.S. GNP = 10.8.
"I want you to do a thought experiment. Cast your mind forward 30 years. The Chinese economy has just recently increased to 3 times the US .... ".
The projection part would be the "cast your mind forward 30 years". Like I said, we are merely annoying each other now, and you don't even appear to be reading what I'm posting, so I'd recommend a break:-)
The UN and EU are both big supporters of global warming w/Kyoto treaty. This is nothing but an end around the will of the free peoples of the world to consolidate their ideology.
Yes they support it, but not for the conspiracy theory reasons you cite, but because its real. The only developed economy in the world where this is in doubt is the US, because of a large well financed and completely open (no conspiracy here) effort by the fossil fuel lobby to swing public opinion. Think about the moon landing conspiracy and why its nonsense, then apply the same reasoning to AGW denial.
The U.S. is not special? Every nation of the world is special in that they have sovereignty to protect them against the forcefull will of the utopian agendas like the globalists.
I want you to do a thought experiment. Cast your mind forward 30 years. The Chinese economy has just recently increased to 3 times the US, the Chinese middle class is now double the US's and India is not far behind. Who are your natural political allies in a world of 1.5 billion Chinese, 2 billion Indians and a mere 600 million North Americans? The billion Eurasians in the expanded Eurasian Union of a billion + citizens, with a core of 600 million Europeans, thats who.
Who says sovereignity is the end all and be all? Where does sovereignity start, where does it end? The individual, county, state, nation state, supranation state or the world? Clearly its a flexible term with fuzzy boundaries. We need creative solutions to face the problems of the future, & insisting that the rights of one random group of humans trump all others is not helpful.
We have our own laws in america to protect the american people. We don't need or wan't an outside entity punishing us becouse they don't like or agree with our laws. You can call it a democracy if you wan't, but it is a form of centralised gov.
So do the Russians, and the Chinese. Your nation is not "special", above scrutiny or existing in a vacuum, this really is a notion Americans urgently need to grasp.
Keep dreaming, It'll never happen here. The global warming scam, which is a guise the globalist are using as a vehicle to coerce their will on the people of the world, along it's cohort the EU will slowly but surely errode away. A lie cannot sustain itself forever.
I see you are a space enthusiast, from your page. I enjoyed the Apollo Launch montage, brilliant stuff:-)
No doubt you've had the occasional run in with the kind of people that claim the moon landings never happened, more bizarre still that humans have never even BEEN in space, or even the beyond the pale wackos that claim all of the above AND that the earth is flat.
Both you and I shake our heads in disbelief at these people, because the evidence and the relevant scientific community is overwhelmingly against them. A worldwide decades long conspiracy of tens of thousands of people to lie to the public. Yeah, sure!
The mix of contempt, pity and bewilderment we BOTH feel at these absurd claims, is what I feel when you make a comment like "The global warming scam, which is a guise the globalist ... ".
The Eu? Are you kidding me. They're taking wealth and redistributing it. The British fishing industry has been ruined by it. Many people in europe are against the EU. And yes, I think about my local county and state gov. and how their authority is being overriden by our federal gov. A North American Union would do the same by circumventing our own constitution and overriding our judicial and legislative laws and thereby impinging directly on the individual.
Yeah. Heres the thing, the 80% of people that aren't millionaires, or brain washed free market ideolouges, are kind of OK with a little wealth distribution. The British fishing industry has been ruined, true, ... by over fishing; & while some EU citizens object to further integration, an EU military, or Turkish accession, it's conspicously obvious that no one is leaving. With 500 million people & 27 nations, its challenging to get on the same page. Yet, it gets done, year after year.
Europe has never been as prosperous, peaceful or significant as it is today. Kind of like the US used to be. All of that is thanks to the EU, you guys should join ... I suspect in 20 or 30 years, you will.
Imping on the individual, my ass. This is nothing but centralized power. We all know how succesful bolshevism was. This governance crap (New World Order) will never pull the wool over the eyes of the people. The only enemies of sovereign states are Stalinists and Nazis. Keep on dreaming, fools.
Yeah. A consensual tiered system of global governance, elected by the people of the planet, with judicial, legislative and executive power crafted with a mind to everything we've learned about governance in the last two millenia is EXACTLY the same as a murderous, totalitarian, dictatorship held together by coercion. Thanks for your nuanced, and carefully thought through comment.
Think about your local region or county. Is it better to have it governed by elected officials, or not? Think about your state, and your nation state. Democracy or Anarchy, which is better? Now think about your continent, why is this not run along similar lines? In Europe of course the EU IS run like this, and it has resulted in dramatic improvements in peace, freedom and prosperity. Now take the next step. The entire world, democracy or anarchy, which is better?
If we don't have global governance, how can we defend ourselves from the aliens when their ancient technology appears on our world and heralds their invasion?
Well, if by "free", you mean those reserving the right to kill, maim and incinerate whomever they choose, you are of course, quite correct. However, I see freedom in a wider and reciprocal context. My freedom, ends where yours begins. The trick is to agree these lines of demarcation without killing each other. We've managed it in our nation states and super federations like the EU, why not take it to the next level?
the Bible clearly perdicts precisely this @! As to the people demanding the government take their individual and collective rights,,, how else could the governments achieve this passivity from it's people? by making it seem neccesary and good.
Thruout- You are not an atheist , so I assume you have read the Bile and are just trying to mess with me. YOu may be wrong in your judgement , but you are not that stupid.
No I'm afraid I'm mostly an atheist these days, largely in part thanks to actually reading the Bible. I see nothing but vague generalities, certainly no cast iron predictions.
Sorry to hear that. Do you believe God created the world , or do you find it mathematicaly acceptable that we evolved? How's your heatlhcare system over there? Looks like we will be adopting your system. I am worried that I won't get any medical attention atleast timely attn.
I try not to believe anything, rather I'm strictly evidence based. The evidence of evolution is utterly overwhelming. Sweden has universal health care, free (or mostly free) at the point of distribution.
HA HA you passed the basic atheist question - if answered incorrectly would affirm you do have faith. How is the muslim influence ? Do you find it benign? Obama's taher was muslim -which makes him a muslim or an apostate - which do you find evidence for?
The influence of muslims in Sweden is benign, but I'm no fan of Islam. Obama claims to be a Christian, and I guess I take him at his word. His father may have been a Muslim but that doesn't make him one, unless you think religion genetic? Passed on in the DNA from father to son?
He is muslim according to sharia law - not me . This " rule " has been around for quite some time . IMO Christians don't support Farrakhan and the nation of islam , they don't deny Jews are Gods chosen people and Israel is their homeland promised to them by God. HIs church had a " black value system".
Well if you accept Sharia law as some kind of divinely inspired system, then I guess that is that. However I consider it merely a flawed system of mumbo jumbo designed by primitive humans, why should Obama or you or I consider ourselves bound by it in any sense whatever?
Many people in this world do take it very seriously. We are electing a president who may have inherited conflicet with these nations because He is an apostate. Do you think Iran will talk with Obama? People who make cartoons and say negative things about Islam are usually killed .
I think they'll cut him some slack. He could hardly have a worse relationship with the Islamic world than George Bush, or "lets bomb Iran" McCain. As far as I can tell, the Islamic world is breathing a sigh of cautious relief that someone with some international exposure may end up President. Iran won't talk to McCain, because McCain won't talk to them. Obama seems more flexible.
I also think you are defining christianity in quite narrow terms. There are roughly 2 billion Christians, many of them with wildly differing opinions on what constitutes a "true christian". I also think you are parroting a lot of right wing noise about Obama.
You are of course allowed an opinion, just not an unchallenged one:-) I feel sorry for the Palestinians, I feel sorry for the Isrealis too. Messy situation.
You appear to be of the opinion that one is a Muslim if one's father is a Muslim. Where is your evidence for this? One must confirm oneself as a Muslim by taking shahada, did Obama take shahada? If not, he was not a Muslim as he did not confirm himself as such.
I know you muslims can't seem to agree on what islam really preaches, but can you tell me ( your version ) of why muslim women cannot marry Christian men and muslim men may marry Christian women ? All that is HOly in the Bible is unholy in the koran and vice versa .
"... The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you) when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honour, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines...." (Qur'an 5:5)
Do you know any Muslims who can overrule this Qur'anic verse?
"... The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you) when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honour, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines...." (Qur'an 5:5)
Do you know of any Muslims who can overrule the Qur'an?
You say that like a bad thing. Islam requires no 'middle man' between man and God - no priesthood. So why would a Muslim not be expected to find their 'own' meaning in the Qur'an? Sure, certain things have been discussed by scholars, but guess what, scholars can be wrong, they can have an opinion, but even scholars disagree on somethings, therefore, a Muslim must use their own judgement to decide what the best meaning is.
Additionally, this verse talks of marriage:"Wed not idolatresses till they believe; for lo! a believing bondwoman is better than an idolatress though she please you; and give not your daughters in marriage to idolaters till they believe..." 2:221
So *both* Muslim men and women cannot marry idol worshippers unless the idol worshippers convert to belief (though this does not necessarily mean convert to Islam!).
There is also explanation about who can be married in verses 4:22-25.
BTW. I posted this video on a forum as a counter argument to a guy who was talking about the New World Order. Oh me oh my! Apparently everything you have said in this video is "vile, unneccesary, anti-humanist and anti-sovereign controlling policies that seek to exploit the people in the interests of big business and government."
Damn I wish I WAS. I wish there was a coherent something that might pass for a "new world order":-) I get that a lot, americans are especially paranoid about this, which is odd, because they started off their federation of 13 states by embracing the exact principles I outline. Sigh ... we'll just have to keep talking, eventually the best messages will bubble to the top ...
For the avoidance of doubt. Some people may believe that early verses in the Qur'an can be "abrogated" by a verse which comes later in the Qur'an. I have yet to see any compelling evidence why this should be so and it is my opinion that anybody who thinks that one verse can "abrogate" (or "trump" as we British might say) another under any circumstances probably has trouble understanding the concept of context.
LOL . . . that pole thing was funny. I hope that made you feel like a grown up. Hitler was aiming for an international dictatorship. He was looking to build a global empire. He was not the first. Have you ever heard of Rome or Alexander the great? Their empires were more global and self sustaining than his ever was. You need to understand the difference between imperialism and federalism.
bxjam85, sorry I came across harshly, it's just that being open minded about things you disagree with won't hurt you either, best of whatever to you on whatever you think
Your syllogism would be valid if your premise were, but it's not: that global non-governmental institutions are inevitable. They are not. Here's a syllogism which actually is valid: power corrupts. You advocate power on a global scale, naively assuming that such power won't corrupt. The solution is not to magnify power in the world, but to devolve it. Destroy civilization wherever you find it. Mercilessly.
bxjam85, you make little sense so fuck off already cause there's no point in debating things with people like you, you're shitty child like attitude is what gives you away as just some annoying asshole, get over yourself and realize there's always more things to learn, jackass
I normally wouldn't waste my time with people like you who like to call people names, but fuck it. I make little since to you, because you refuse to even try and understand my point. My point is why world federalism is needed (even though this video makes the point very clear) and then on to why government is needed when debating an anarchist.
I have contemplated the theory of anarchism and found it to be unproductive, uncivil, lawless, juvenile, and unethical. There is always more to learn, but there is a difference between learning about something and agreeing with what you learn. With that said I throw the same statement back at you. This is my new slogan . . . 'federal world government . . . there is always more to learn' . . . lol.
This village idiot seems to have overdone it with the cool aid and granola bars. If you think you can hijack the absolute fudamental individualism and free will that all people are born with and aspire to with your constipated global governance crap then you need to find another cause along with that bad excuse for a human being george mobiot who you seem to love so much and take a long drive off of the edge of the flat planet you live on back into the butthole you came from.
From studying history you know that the least able to weild power are the ones that seek it out...we would end up with a one world fascist orstalinist slave state. But that is what you want right? Imagine Bush as world Dick-Tater.
Government is a disease of the mind, just like religion. It serves the select few at the expense of everyone else.
The only answer is anarchy and freedom, no rule, no government..NADA.Corporations would cease to exist as well.
Anarchy is useful for people who don't want to be held accountable for their actions. Our current system of global "governance" is anarchy and if you can't see how much of a failure this system is then you are willfully blind. Humans have had a way of governing their societies even before civilization. In fact, all social animals govern their society in some way.
Bunnydancer777, you are a pessimist, which doesn't surprise me seeing that you are also an anarchist. Sure things are not perfect. Sure the human race still has a lot of growing to do. Sure it doesn't happen in the blink of an eye. If you do not see that human society is evolving then you are willfully blinded. Consider the socio-political growth that human civilization has experienced in the last 200 years alone. This trend will continue; that is unless there is anarchy.
I am not a pessimist, i am looking at THE EVIDENCE. I am a scientist. I am looking at the pathetic sordid written history of civillization. Humanity have developed technology but are little better than vicious animals.
The EVIDENCE does not give cause for any optimism whatsoever. The fact that most people today have less freedom than the serfs of medeival europe tells me much.
Government of the craven sh*ts that rule us is a form of mental disease, worse than any religion.
Also, if your reason for believing in anarchism is because society is so vicious why do you support anarchism? Do you think anarchism (non-accountability and no order) will make society more civil?
If there is no room in your book for accountability then you are a pessimist by definition. Pessimism seems to be an element of anarchism. If you think modern society is vicious today then you will have hell in the ancient world. As I said you can always go live the hunter gatherer culture if you think its best. If you think that everything will be peachy and that hunter gatherer society is not vicious then you have another thing coming. I suggest you stay in the modern world.
There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic, but you just refuse to realize them? If you refuse to accept the sociopolitical progress that has been made in the last 200 years then you are being unreasonable. That is what makes you a pessimist. You also didn't answer my question regarding whether or not you would be willing to live in a hunter gatherer culture or if you believed anarchism equals civility?
I disagree, there is No reason whatsoever to be optimistic. The feudal serfs in europe had more freedom than most americans. Progress in what?Better ways to kill the 200 million that were slaughtered in the 20th century?
Yes i would be willing to live in a hunter gatherer culture. Actually my drive is to get enough money to completely withdraw from society and live in the wilderness.
Like i said, GIVEN THE EVIDENCE there is NOTHING to be optimistic about.
lol . . . Well if you want to live in a hunter gatherer culture then go for it if you're being honest about wanting to do it. You're going to hate it when you realize they have no healthcare system and when your life is in danger of wild animals, among other things. Good luck to you! Indeed 200 million were slaughtered during the world wars. I do not deny the fact that bad things have happened and are happening, but to deny that any progress is being made is to be a pessimist.
Your dying patient analogy was bad. Society is not dying. People in the developed world are living longer healthier lives than ever before. Good luck trying to survive in the woods . . . lol! Seeing that you have finally admitted that you are a pessimist there is no need for me to argue with you. Go get on some medication and get a grip.
Also, do you even know what serfdom was! That is your idea of freedom? I believe in liberalism, but anarchy is just disorder. What exactly is your idea of freedom?
You anarchists are really messed up in the head. You think the wild west was a good thing? It seems like civility doesn't matter at all to you anarchists. You talk about how uncivil our society supposedly is and yet you feel like the wild west was a good thing. That is very hypocritical. What you want is a societ without rules or limitations. Your idea of freedom has nothing to do with human suffering at all.
We have a society without rule NOW, the wealthy here in the US do as they please through government literally pludering the rest of the world. The US government breaks its own laws on a daily basis. It creates the problems it claims to solve.
What you are saying about "civility" is that it is okay for murderers and thievexs to kill and steal as long as they are called"government" and have a veneer of "civlity"...quaint
I was going to just leave this alone after you referred to the wild west as "real freedom", but once again you go and contradict yourself. First, stop making inaccurate statements like "we have a society without rule". Have you ever heard of the constitution and U.S. law? Secondly, the very reason why I support the political theory of a federal world government is because I feel that government leaders need to be held accountable for their actions.
You mean the constitution that is suppossed to circuscribe the powers of the federal government, which only the federal government itself can now interpret?
Like foxes guarding the henhouse?
Federal government breaks its own laws with impunity, as it does constitutional law.
World government will only lead to a bigger abuse of power; just like federal government has led to abuse of power over states in the US.
You said that we live in a society without rules. That is a false statement! It is self-evident that we live in a society with the rule of law, whether you believe in those rules or not. If you're going to debate then be logical. If not then go to the woods and hunt a deer. How in the hell does the federal government abuse power over the states?
Red herring. No i implied we live in a society where the rule of law is whatever those who claim to rule by law SAY it is.
Massah government OWNS all the land, evident because i am FOCRED, by a point of a gun, to pay to live on that land No one can get free of massah's reach..excspt perhaps al-CIA-da which is false flag funded by massah.
It is hard to make the kind of argument needed in 500 characters and you know that,& you like it because it keeps it simple for you.
Let's debate by personal message. I have no problem with that. I prefer to debate that way. Oh and you are not forced to live on "massah's" land by gun point. You can even own your own land in a capitalist society, but you have to work for it. When you work you not only help yourself, but you contribute to society as a whole. We are a community and one level affects the other. Even in a hunter gatherer society you will people at higher positions and primitive laws.
You just don't know when to quit do you? I have made my point and you have only helped me make it. You are constantly contradicting yourself in order to try and make your point. First the argument is about how uncivil our society is and then you show admiration for the Wild West, which was an extremely violent and lawless society. Then you talk about how governments are not held accountable for their actions (which is anarchy by the way) and that was my point to begin with.
No you dcon't know when to quit. It bothers you that my thought is more complicated than simple black and white, obviously and you cannot leave it alone or think things through for yourself. You have to be spoon fed like a child.
Government is like taking a mass murderer and insititutionalizing his mindset and making it into a "rule" that you live by.
Wild west you only had seperate indicviduals acting abhorently occassionaly, and they did not siphon other people's labor to fund it.
Practice what you preach. If you feel that you are not free then leave our society. What the hell are you waiting for? Time isn't going any slower. Anarchists always talk about how they hate society and the state. Then leave society and the state. It's that simple.
I don't have time for this..i just lost someone in my family and my patience is exhausted with this..because the necessary arguments are more than a few paragraphs long i cannot post them..i know you enjoy this format though because it keeps things very simple, very black ot white.
I am sorry for your loss. If you want to debate directly through personal messages then that is fine with me. In fact I preferred that from the beginning. I just didn't think we would debate this long. You have a problem with sticking to your original point and you contradict yourself. Personal message me if you want to have a better debate.
Anarchy is below the human level and maybe even below the social animal level in general. Without organized government we would not have civilization as we know it and we would not have even begun to evolve at the social level.
Government is below the human level originating in the R-complex which is concerned with control and dominance.
I fail to see why civillization a good thing.If this is evolution we should have stayed in the caves. the hunter gatherer societies had a near idyllic life unlike the near total slavery of today's system where 85% of our labor is stolen to pay for the controllers.(if you add in the cost of government at every level in all goods and services). Civillization is a human farm.
Bunnydancer777, I agree that there are pros and cons to the agricultural settled lifestyle we have, but there are pros and cons to the hunter gatherer lifestyle as well. You know that you can always become hunter gather if you want to. Go to some indigenous tribe in South America, Asia, or Africa and you can live a hunter gather type lifestyle. If you think its best then go for it! Civilization was developed to increase living standards. That is why everyone went along with it.
You have a profound misunderstanding of what a federal world government would be like. Your paranoia and pessimism is the disease. Go live in the woods like you want to. That way our society can flush out your anarchist theories with the rest of the shit sociopolitical theories.
Without George Orwell and his paranoid vision of the future globalism would have a much easier time of it.. we all know whenever someone writes a book it automatically makes the hypothetical situation contained within it factual.
I'm not saying its a great (or even good) system, merely pointing out that vast areas of the earth are stable. I'm as liberal as they come, and I would much prefer a US versus a Chinese system. However, consider that the US currently imprison more than 1% of their entire population. The Chinese, for all their faults, don't match that. Food for thought:-)
I have just completed my PhD in international law and global governance. It appears that world federalism has the greatest prospect of achieving minimal interference whilst also achieving global policy objectives. The key reason why the present international legal system cannot prevail is that sovereign states pursue their individual foreign policy objectives and nobody speaks for global objectives. Please don't bother replying that the UN does - it doesn't.
And come on who are they fooling we can't get city counsils to agree what is best for everyone there how can it be done globally there will always be injustice as long as man is involved. That is the evil hat much be purged before real heaven sent peace will be acheived with Yeshua as king
we will have a global goverment and it will crash and burn and mankind will be judged by the most high God argue the point all you want it is inescapable no matter how smart the man or woman they cannot rule all the world.
world goverment has been tried and it has failed. period no debate needed. America is not a democracy it is a republic. democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep arguing over what for dinner a republic is a well armed sheep
You are sick my friend don't you realize that the same people that push this global goverment are the same that propiagate the wars that make you want this ideology
It is eliminating "Our consent". The procedure would not be democratic, it would be commercially driven by competition in advertisement strengths in mass-media with influence of specific media ownership, ergo putting us back to cold war between privately owned media versus media owned by already by defined governments. Deep psychological war would emerge, our we reasonable enough to overcome that?
Video of hope and good wishes. But, i would point out that democracy which you defined in the beginning as rule of people, never existed. It has been used as a term to float on, but never implemented. And i have different view on the process of integration, basically who gets the right to construct the unified government, it will look differently if socialist, or capitalist would construct it.
I disagree, a global government would tend towards nordic socialism. With no external threats, and thus transparency in government corruption would become much harder to hide. With living standards similar across the world, and uniform or at least similar educational and taxation companies would have little incentive to move around, and even less scope to abuse workers.
Problem: It is your will for it to be nordic socialism? Or is it based on analytic reasoning? You would need to prove that largest amount of people agree with or consent to nordic socialism. At least backed up by some figures, if you want to be serious about it, that clearly show such consent. Which as i see it is not happening now. At least the process of constructing the system that drives unification would need to be formed.
There may certainly be an element of wishful thinking in my comments certainly. I base them on an imagined future world free of war, major resource shortages and with a fairly uniform living standard and level of education. That situation requires more coherent global governance however, so it is jumping the gun somewhat.
That said, once there I think nordic socialism is a likely outcome, because all developed societies are either there or heading there. Note the discussion vis a vis health care in the US.
Like most humans, like me, you've got a narrow view of the world and what's happening in it. The exponential and explosive growth of technology is not once taken into account. Any way of life that can be imagined currently will be impossible in thirty to fifty years due to this growth. Not taking this very near future into account, there is no valid argument that could be made about anything global.
The singularity right? Nonsense I suspect, at least in the time frame you claim here. It's just the rapture with technology. Religion dressed up in techno speak.
Good observation and good argument. But hey, if you ignore the time frame in which cell phones and the internet were implemented and widely accepted by countries which could handle them, which is a couple of decades, along with the multitude of inventions in the past century, you're right on the money.
Never say never. You could be right:-) Nonetheless, I'll be impressed if we get to feed, house and provide email for the projected 9 billion or so around in 2050. Then we can start work on the singularity:-)
The freedom to do what i please so long as i do not harm anyone else, or infringe upon anyone elses freedom.
Laws are nothing more than control mechanisms which allow a small group of people to dominate the rest.
If you want global governance then it sounds like you've forgotten what it means to be human and free.. sounds like you need them because you've forgotten how to be without the "rule of law".
And who decides what an infringement is? You? Them? What if you disagree?
Roughly 35 million people have died in wars since the end of WWII. Still think we don't need law?
Your liberty becomes responsibility where it intersects with the liberty of another. Large societies require laws to smooth other the rough patches these intersections sometimes cause. Simple really.
All wars for the last 100 years (at least) have had both sides funded by the banksters, and need not have happened.. so don't talk to me about laws. Wars are planned out before they happen, the most recent example being the Lebanon conflict with Israel.
Look, global governance is a bad idea because the system we have now is TOTALLY corrupt. If we set it up, you can be damn sure it will not serve the best interests of humanity.
States fund fundamental research, while "markets" only do directed one. Directed can't exist without fundamental.
States fund orphan disease research, while markets don't. "Not valuable" they say... Such nice people. Yes, if someday the bubble-kids heal, it will be thx to those "immoral" taxes.
Because taxes are immoral (they are based on the threat of violence/aggression). If you create global taxes, then you are creating global violence/aggression. You must find another way, if you want to make the world a better place.
This video does not make any arguments, it just shows various photos, a recording from Google Earth, and a few quotes. Weak. Please read the Road to Serfdom, and see why centralized authority is inefficient and leads to tyranny.
J0rE1 2 years ago 3
for some reason the sound has changed or stuffed up, vid used to have monologue throughout video, similiar to the reply vid he did.
federali84 2 years ago
3- good feelings. Elites ever made use of good feelings to disam peoples. A worldwide tyrannt will have all tne propaganda channels to keep millions of stupid well-thinkers happy with little more than political correctness, pan et televised circus. And perhaps a shjt religion that talk about things that you stupid seeps appreciate: armony, enviromnment , the planet and stupidities like that.
s.
unusedName1 2 years ago
Global governance has the more dangeros worst case evolution that no other regime can bring: Global dictatorship. No exliliation possible.
Ando global gobernance WOULD derive into global dictatorship because:
1- is actively promoted by the elites. Elites prosecute its own interests nor yours, you buch of nerds.
unusedName1 2 years ago 2
My experience has always been that in order to change something, start with yourself...after that the ones that mean most to you, keep your family safe and happy, stay vigilant, obey the basic laws of physics and morality and spread a little hope and charity. What would happen if the cost of global governance was the life of your family, would you consent?
ratsmoc123 2 years ago
Global Governance is nice idea, but I don't think it can happen now. The idea would have to wait for the old leaders to die or become ill beheld leading like Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and even the US.
crazyC88 3 years ago
I WOKE UP SCREAMING FUCK THE WORLD !
HerraIce 3 years ago 3
As long as its not USA ideals of corperate governance Im good. If global I think we should model after sweden and france. Those two nations polices combined would make a great world.
But americans would throw that idea out the window. Dont know why. I dont understand why that they accept their heathcare the way they do. Anytime a member of the family gets sick, usualy bankrupts the whole family. Since their HMO's like to be snakes about it.
1Vaudevillian1 3 years ago
Why NOT Global Governance? Becuz 2 smaller attempts at it [the League of Nations, followed by the UN] failed miserably!
It's hard enuff to get a room of ppl to agree. Or even to get along for long. So getting all people & cultures of the world to form a uniform set of laws to live by will be impossible.
And as can happen in the UN, r we going to allow the veto of a single important member to rule the day? I dont want to allow distant nations/people that kind of power over my everyday life!
clhoyt1003 3 years ago 3
There is no proof that global governance will fail since it hasnt been tried.
RebelsLiberator 3 years ago
That being said however ,new elected officals are needed.That means NONE of the old politicians,or power structure.Its time to replace the old guard that has misused its power for too long.
RebelsLiberator 3 years ago
Read Revelation. Heh...it will fail....miserably. But don't say I didn't warn ya.
TUInHighDef 2 years ago
modestagnostic are you a Member of the Association of World Federalists by any chance ? truth now
ItchyClickfinger 3 years ago
absolute power in the hands of an elite few . sounds like a great idea !
ItchyClickfinger 3 years ago
Great video. Finally amongst all the conspiracy theory crap there's someone who understands the necessity of planetary unity.
neorevo7 3 years ago
I, for one, welcome our NWO overlords. Why? The people of the world deserve who they are getting.
littleredbirdy 3 years ago
Fuck the NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
eman8111 3 years ago 2
God bless the New World Order!
greenhermit 3 years ago
Based on peer reviewed science and scientists not funded by corperations, GW does not exist.
Tree ring data, core samples, temp. graphs and sediment samples all prove this. There is no such thing as consensus in science, as they state at IPCC. Consensus is politics, science is paradigm shifts, varification and falsification and the numbers, unlike words, don't lie. Be back later.
apollo1268 3 years ago
1.5 billion chinese, 2 billion indians, 600 million europeans. You've got your numbers wrong. I never insisted the rights of one random group of people should trump all others. I respect the sovereinty and will of free countries to do as they see fit within the boundaries of their nations laws. I expect them to do the same with ours. National sovereignties are not fuzzy, they are well defined within their countries boundaries, supported by their own laws and ideoligies.
apollo1268 3 years ago
Aw dude, those numbers are projections, speculations, not scientific claims. It's just a thought experiment. Why don't we give it a rest eh? We are just annoying each other at this stage, and I find thats when it gets nasty and people start calling each other names. Ciao for now:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
You never stated they were projections when you wrote it. And projections based on what?
Currently, the approx. pop., in billions, of China are 1.35, India 1.1 and you say europe has never been so prosperous, kind of like the U.S. used to be. America produces 33% of the worlds wealth. Unemployment in europe is at 8.5%. The last time our unemployment was that high, we were in a recession, 1980-81.
Chinese economy 3 times U.S.? In billions, China's GNP = 1.36, U.S. GNP = 10.8.
apollo1268 3 years ago
"I want you to do a thought experiment. Cast your mind forward 30 years. The Chinese economy has just recently increased to 3 times the US .... ".
The projection part would be the "cast your mind forward 30 years". Like I said, we are merely annoying each other now, and you don't even appear to be reading what I'm posting, so I'd recommend a break:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
The UN and EU are both big supporters of global warming w/Kyoto treaty. This is nothing but an end around the will of the free peoples of the world to consolidate their ideology.
apollo1268 3 years ago
Yes they support it, but not for the conspiracy theory reasons you cite, but because its real. The only developed economy in the world where this is in doubt is the US, because of a large well financed and completely open (no conspiracy here) effort by the fossil fuel lobby to swing public opinion. Think about the moon landing conspiracy and why its nonsense, then apply the same reasoning to AGW denial.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
The U.S. is not special? Every nation of the world is special in that they have sovereignty to protect them against the forcefull will of the utopian agendas like the globalists.
apollo1268 3 years ago
I want you to do a thought experiment. Cast your mind forward 30 years. The Chinese economy has just recently increased to 3 times the US, the Chinese middle class is now double the US's and India is not far behind. Who are your natural political allies in a world of 1.5 billion Chinese, 2 billion Indians and a mere 600 million North Americans? The billion Eurasians in the expanded Eurasian Union of a billion + citizens, with a core of 600 million Europeans, thats who.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Who says sovereignity is the end all and be all? Where does sovereignity start, where does it end? The individual, county, state, nation state, supranation state or the world? Clearly its a flexible term with fuzzy boundaries. We need creative solutions to face the problems of the future, & insisting that the rights of one random group of humans trump all others is not helpful.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
You do not understand. The idea of a global governance system is great, but in practice IT WILL BE ABUSED!
It is that simple.
Cheers.
littleredbirdy 3 years ago 3
We have our own laws in america to protect the american people. We don't need or wan't an outside entity punishing us becouse they don't like or agree with our laws. You can call it a democracy if you wan't, but it is a form of centralised gov.
apollo1268 3 years ago
So do the Russians, and the Chinese. Your nation is not "special", above scrutiny or existing in a vacuum, this really is a notion Americans urgently need to grasp.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Keep dreaming, It'll never happen here. The global warming scam, which is a guise the globalist are using as a vehicle to coerce their will on the people of the world, along it's cohort the EU will slowly but surely errode away. A lie cannot sustain itself forever.
apollo1268 3 years ago
I see you are a space enthusiast, from your page. I enjoyed the Apollo Launch montage, brilliant stuff:-)
No doubt you've had the occasional run in with the kind of people that claim the moon landings never happened, more bizarre still that humans have never even BEEN in space, or even the beyond the pale wackos that claim all of the above AND that the earth is flat.
This is important context, bear with me:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Both you and I shake our heads in disbelief at these people, because the evidence and the relevant scientific community is overwhelmingly against them. A worldwide decades long conspiracy of tens of thousands of people to lie to the public. Yeah, sure!
The mix of contempt, pity and bewilderment we BOTH feel at these absurd claims, is what I feel when you make a comment like "The global warming scam, which is a guise the globalist ... ".
Its just beyond absurd, and for the same reasons.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Agnostic
The Eu? Are you kidding me. They're taking wealth and redistributing it. The British fishing industry has been ruined by it. Many people in europe are against the EU. And yes, I think about my local county and state gov. and how their authority is being overriden by our federal gov. A North American Union would do the same by circumventing our own constitution and overriding our judicial and legislative laws and thereby impinging directly on the individual.
apollo1268 3 years ago
Yeah. Heres the thing, the 80% of people that aren't millionaires, or brain washed free market ideolouges, are kind of OK with a little wealth distribution. The British fishing industry has been ruined, true, ... by over fishing; & while some EU citizens object to further integration, an EU military, or Turkish accession, it's conspicously obvious that no one is leaving. With 500 million people & 27 nations, its challenging to get on the same page. Yet, it gets done, year after year.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Europe has never been as prosperous, peaceful or significant as it is today. Kind of like the US used to be. All of that is thanks to the EU, you guys should join ... I suspect in 20 or 30 years, you will.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Imping on the individual, my ass. This is nothing but centralized power. We all know how succesful bolshevism was. This governance crap (New World Order) will never pull the wool over the eyes of the people. The only enemies of sovereign states are Stalinists and Nazis. Keep on dreaming, fools.
apollo1268 3 years ago
Yeah. A consensual tiered system of global governance, elected by the people of the planet, with judicial, legislative and executive power crafted with a mind to everything we've learned about governance in the last two millenia is EXACTLY the same as a murderous, totalitarian, dictatorship held together by coercion. Thanks for your nuanced, and carefully thought through comment.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Think about your local region or county. Is it better to have it governed by elected officials, or not? Think about your state, and your nation state. Democracy or Anarchy, which is better? Now think about your continent, why is this not run along similar lines? In Europe of course the EU IS run like this, and it has resulted in dramatic improvements in peace, freedom and prosperity. Now take the next step. The entire world, democracy or anarchy, which is better?
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
If we don't have global governance, how can we defend ourselves from the aliens when their ancient technology appears on our world and heralds their invasion?
But seriously, great video.
Scentless 3 years ago
whopper in the face of free people - this vid.
UPRsupport 3 years ago
Well, if by "free", you mean those reserving the right to kill, maim and incinerate whomever they choose, you are of course, quite correct. However, I see freedom in a wider and reciprocal context. My freedom, ends where yours begins. The trick is to agree these lines of demarcation without killing each other. We've managed it in our nation states and super federations like the EU, why not take it to the next level?
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
the Bible clearly perdicts precisely this @! As to the people demanding the government take their individual and collective rights,,, how else could the governments achieve this passivity from it's people? by making it seem neccesary and good.
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
Where does the bible predict "this", and what is "this"?
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Thruout- You are not an atheist , so I assume you have read the Bile and are just trying to mess with me. YOu may be wrong in your judgement , but you are not that stupid.
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
No I'm afraid I'm mostly an atheist these days, largely in part thanks to actually reading the Bible. I see nothing but vague generalities, certainly no cast iron predictions.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Sorry to hear that. Do you believe God created the world , or do you find it mathematicaly acceptable that we evolved? How's your heatlhcare system over there? Looks like we will be adopting your system. I am worried that I won't get any medical attention atleast timely attn.
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
I try not to believe anything, rather I'm strictly evidence based. The evidence of evolution is utterly overwhelming. Sweden has universal health care, free (or mostly free) at the point of distribution.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
HA HA you passed the basic atheist question - if answered incorrectly would affirm you do have faith. How is the muslim influence ? Do you find it benign? Obama's taher was muslim -which makes him a muslim or an apostate - which do you find evidence for?
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
The influence of muslims in Sweden is benign, but I'm no fan of Islam. Obama claims to be a Christian, and I guess I take him at his word. His father may have been a Muslim but that doesn't make him one, unless you think religion genetic? Passed on in the DNA from father to son?
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
He is muslim according to sharia law - not me . This " rule " has been around for quite some time . IMO Christians don't support Farrakhan and the nation of islam , they don't deny Jews are Gods chosen people and Israel is their homeland promised to them by God. HIs church had a " black value system".
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
Well if you accept Sharia law as some kind of divinely inspired system, then I guess that is that. However I consider it merely a flawed system of mumbo jumbo designed by primitive humans, why should Obama or you or I consider ourselves bound by it in any sense whatever?
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Many people in this world do take it very seriously. We are electing a president who may have inherited conflicet with these nations because He is an apostate. Do you think Iran will talk with Obama? People who make cartoons and say negative things about Islam are usually killed .
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
I think they'll cut him some slack. He could hardly have a worse relationship with the Islamic world than George Bush, or "lets bomb Iran" McCain. As far as I can tell, the Islamic world is breathing a sigh of cautious relief that someone with some international exposure may end up President. Iran won't talk to McCain, because McCain won't talk to them. Obama seems more flexible.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
I also think you are defining christianity in quite narrow terms. There are roughly 2 billion Christians, many of them with wildly differing opinions on what constitutes a "true christian". I also think you are parroting a lot of right wing noise about Obama.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
I said in my opinion . I am allowed to have one , atleast for now. How do you feel about the Palestinians?
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
You are of course allowed an opinion, just not an unchallenged one:-) I feel sorry for the Palestinians, I feel sorry for the Isrealis too. Messy situation.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Please quote the part of sharia law which makes a son bound by the religion of his father.
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
You appear to be of the opinion that one is a Muslim if one's father is a Muslim. Where is your evidence for this? One must confirm oneself as a Muslim by taking shahada, did Obama take shahada? If not, he was not a Muslim as he did not confirm himself as such.
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Huh ... I KNEW that guy was talking through his hat, now I know why:-) Thx:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
I know you muslims can't seem to agree on what islam really preaches, but can you tell me ( your version ) of why muslim women cannot marry Christian men and muslim men may marry Christian women ? All that is HOly in the Bible is unholy in the koran and vice versa .
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
"... The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you) when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honour, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines...." (Qur'an 5:5)
Do you know any Muslims who can overrule this Qur'anic verse?
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
"... The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you (lawful for you) when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honour, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines...." (Qur'an 5:5)
Do you know of any Muslims who can overrule the Qur'an?
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Since you muslims find your own meanings in verses - you tell me what you think this means .
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
You say that like a bad thing. Islam requires no 'middle man' between man and God - no priesthood. So why would a Muslim not be expected to find their 'own' meaning in the Qur'an? Sure, certain things have been discussed by scholars, but guess what, scholars can be wrong, they can have an opinion, but even scholars disagree on somethings, therefore, a Muslim must use their own judgement to decide what the best meaning is.
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Additionally, this verse talks of marriage:"Wed not idolatresses till they believe; for lo! a believing bondwoman is better than an idolatress though she please you; and give not your daughters in marriage to idolaters till they believe..." 2:221
So *both* Muslim men and women cannot marry idol worshippers unless the idol worshippers convert to belief (though this does not necessarily mean convert to Islam!).
There is also explanation about who can be married in verses 4:22-25.
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Jesus Christ made it possible for all of us to be forgiven and go to heaven -if we accept Him. Your religion has lno way -but to murder infidels.
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
"Say: O disbelievers!
I worship not that which ye worship;
Nor worship ye that which I worship.
And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion."
Qur'an 109:1-6
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Stop messing up our prejudices! We know what we believe, we don't need no stinkin' facts!
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Hehehe. You always make me chuckle.
BTW. I posted this video on a forum as a counter argument to a guy who was talking about the New World Order. Oh me oh my! Apparently everything you have said in this video is "vile, unneccesary, anti-humanist and anti-sovereign controlling policies that seek to exploit the people in the interests of big business and government."
Zoiks! You are part of the New World Order!
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Damn I wish I WAS. I wish there was a coherent something that might pass for a "new world order":-) I get that a lot, americans are especially paranoid about this, which is odd, because they started off their federation of 13 states by embracing the exact principles I outline. Sigh ... we'll just have to keep talking, eventually the best messages will bubble to the top ...
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
has this been abrigated by a newer verse?
sunnytoppil 3 years ago
For the avoidance of doubt. Some people may believe that early verses in the Qur'an can be "abrogated" by a verse which comes later in the Qur'an. I have yet to see any compelling evidence why this should be so and it is my opinion that anybody who thinks that one verse can "abrogate" (or "trump" as we British might say) another under any circumstances probably has trouble understanding the concept of context.
whypatcondellisntfun 3 years ago
Bxjam, ya schtick, when the nwo put a pole up yore asse, then you will know that NWO one world government is exactly what Hitler was aiming at
sansttorm 3 years ago
sansttorm,
LOL . . . that pole thing was funny. I hope that made you feel like a grown up. Hitler was aiming for an international dictatorship. He was looking to build a global empire. He was not the first. Have you ever heard of Rome or Alexander the great? Their empires were more global and self sustaining than his ever was. You need to understand the difference between imperialism and federalism.
bxjam85 3 years ago
bxjam85, sorry I came across harshly, it's just that being open minded about things you disagree with won't hurt you either, best of whatever to you on whatever you think
suspiciousthinker 3 years ago
Your syllogism would be valid if your premise were, but it's not: that global non-governmental institutions are inevitable. They are not. Here's a syllogism which actually is valid: power corrupts. You advocate power on a global scale, naively assuming that such power won't corrupt. The solution is not to magnify power in the world, but to devolve it. Destroy civilization wherever you find it. Mercilessly.
ciggy2012 3 years ago
bxjam85, you make little sense so fuck off already cause there's no point in debating things with people like you, you're shitty child like attitude is what gives you away as just some annoying asshole, get over yourself and realize there's always more things to learn, jackass
suspiciousthinker 3 years ago
suspiciousthinker,
I normally wouldn't waste my time with people like you who like to call people names, but fuck it. I make little since to you, because you refuse to even try and understand my point. My point is why world federalism is needed (even though this video makes the point very clear) and then on to why government is needed when debating an anarchist.
bxjam85 3 years ago
I have contemplated the theory of anarchism and found it to be unproductive, uncivil, lawless, juvenile, and unethical. There is always more to learn, but there is a difference between learning about something and agreeing with what you learn. With that said I throw the same statement back at you. This is my new slogan . . . 'federal world government . . . there is always more to learn' . . . lol.
bxjam85 3 years ago
This village idiot seems to have overdone it with the cool aid and granola bars. If you think you can hijack the absolute fudamental individualism and free will that all people are born with and aspire to with your constipated global governance crap then you need to find another cause along with that bad excuse for a human being george mobiot who you seem to love so much and take a long drive off of the edge of the flat planet you live on back into the butthole you came from.
apollo1268 3 years ago
apollo1268, fuck you!
bxjam85 3 years ago
I'd like to second that heartfelt Fuck You!:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Same to you buster...you are paert of the disease.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Global governance huh?
From studying history you know that the least able to weild power are the ones that seek it out...we would end up with a one world fascist orstalinist slave state. But that is what you want right? Imagine Bush as world Dick-Tater.
Government is a disease of the mind, just like religion. It serves the select few at the expense of everyone else.
The only answer is anarchy and freedom, no rule, no government..NADA.Corporations would cease to exist as well.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Anarchy is useful for people who don't want to be held accountable for their actions. Our current system of global "governance" is anarchy and if you can't see how much of a failure this system is then you are willfully blind. Humans have had a way of governing their societies even before civilization. In fact, all social animals govern their society in some way.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Society is a failure...the human race is devolving not evolving.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Bunnydancer777, you are a pessimist, which doesn't surprise me seeing that you are also an anarchist. Sure things are not perfect. Sure the human race still has a lot of growing to do. Sure it doesn't happen in the blink of an eye. If you do not see that human society is evolving then you are willfully blinded. Consider the socio-political growth that human civilization has experienced in the last 200 years alone. This trend will continue; that is unless there is anarchy.
bxjam85 3 years ago
I am not a pessimist, i am looking at THE EVIDENCE. I am a scientist. I am looking at the pathetic sordid written history of civillization. Humanity have developed technology but are little better than vicious animals.
The EVIDENCE does not give cause for any optimism whatsoever. The fact that most people today have less freedom than the serfs of medeival europe tells me much.
Government of the craven sh*ts that rule us is a form of mental disease, worse than any religion.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Also, if your reason for believing in anarchism is because society is so vicious why do you support anarchism? Do you think anarchism (non-accountability and no order) will make society more civil?
bxjam85 3 years ago
If there is no room in your book for accountability then you are a pessimist by definition. Pessimism seems to be an element of anarchism. If you think modern society is vicious today then you will have hell in the ancient world. As I said you can always go live the hunter gatherer culture if you think its best. If you think that everything will be peachy and that hunter gatherer society is not vicious then you have another thing coming. I suggest you stay in the modern world.
bxjam85 3 years ago
I'm sorry, I meant optimism, not accountability.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Optimism without evidence is called faith...i am afraid i do not have that kind of faith, cetrtainly not in humankind.
We HAVE anarchism of government NOW, just not anarchism of the masses who are kept on a human farm and milked of their lives..and experimented on.
As one of our patriots said,"live free or Die".
If you want to have pie in the sky kind of faith then that is fine, expect some very steep opposition from those of us who do not have that faith.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic, but you just refuse to realize them? If you refuse to accept the sociopolitical progress that has been made in the last 200 years then you are being unreasonable. That is what makes you a pessimist. You also didn't answer my question regarding whether or not you would be willing to live in a hunter gatherer culture or if you believed anarchism equals civility?
bxjam85 3 years ago
I disagree, there is No reason whatsoever to be optimistic. The feudal serfs in europe had more freedom than most americans. Progress in what?Better ways to kill the 200 million that were slaughtered in the 20th century?
Yes i would be willing to live in a hunter gatherer culture. Actually my drive is to get enough money to completely withdraw from society and live in the wilderness.
Like i said, GIVEN THE EVIDENCE there is NOTHING to be optimistic about.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
lol . . . Well if you want to live in a hunter gatherer culture then go for it if you're being honest about wanting to do it. You're going to hate it when you realize they have no healthcare system and when your life is in danger of wild animals, among other things. Good luck to you! Indeed 200 million were slaughtered during the world wars. I do not deny the fact that bad things have happened and are happening, but to deny that any progress is being made is to be a pessimist.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Pessimism is warranted...if a patient is dying do you smile and tell them everything is gonna be okay if we all believe hard enough?
As a backpacker, i know how to survive in the deep woods if i have to.
Serfdom is paying 80% of your labor to propigate government.
Read some Morris Berman, and get a grip.
"Progress" very funny indeed.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Your dying patient analogy was bad. Society is not dying. People in the developed world are living longer healthier lives than ever before. Good luck trying to survive in the woods . . . lol! Seeing that you have finally admitted that you are a pessimist there is no need for me to argue with you. Go get on some medication and get a grip.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Western civilization IS dying. If you haven't noticed it, it is because you have no depth of knowledge.We are about to enter a "dark age".
Please read Decline and Fall ofthe Roman Empire if you haven't and get back to me.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Also, do you even know what serfdom was! That is your idea of freedom? I believe in liberalism, but anarchy is just disorder. What exactly is your idea of freedom?
bxjam85 3 years ago
You need to go read up on what the wild west was like here in the US before the government got out of control.That was freedom.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
You anarchists are really messed up in the head. You think the wild west was a good thing? It seems like civility doesn't matter at all to you anarchists. You talk about how uncivil our society supposedly is and yet you feel like the wild west was a good thing. That is very hypocritical. What you want is a societ without rules or limitations. Your idea of freedom has nothing to do with human suffering at all.
bxjam85 3 years ago
UHUH(nice ad hominems)
Lysander Spooner was a lawyer turned "anarchist".
We have a society without rule NOW, the wealthy here in the US do as they please through government literally pludering the rest of the world. The US government breaks its own laws on a daily basis. It creates the problems it claims to solve.
What you are saying about "civility" is that it is okay for murderers and thievexs to kill and steal as long as they are called"government" and have a veneer of "civlity"...quaint
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
I was going to just leave this alone after you referred to the wild west as "real freedom", but once again you go and contradict yourself. First, stop making inaccurate statements like "we have a society without rule". Have you ever heard of the constitution and U.S. law? Secondly, the very reason why I support the political theory of a federal world government is because I feel that government leaders need to be held accountable for their actions.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Wow talk about profound ignorance.
You mean the constitution that is suppossed to circuscribe the powers of the federal government, which only the federal government itself can now interpret?
Like foxes guarding the henhouse?
Federal government breaks its own laws with impunity, as it does constitutional law.
World government will only lead to a bigger abuse of power; just like federal government has led to abuse of power over states in the US.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
You said that we live in a society without rules. That is a false statement! It is self-evident that we live in a society with the rule of law, whether you believe in those rules or not. If you're going to debate then be logical. If not then go to the woods and hunt a deer. How in the hell does the federal government abuse power over the states?
bxjam85 3 years ago
Red herring. No i implied we live in a society where the rule of law is whatever those who claim to rule by law SAY it is.
Massah government OWNS all the land, evident because i am FOCRED, by a point of a gun, to pay to live on that land No one can get free of massah's reach..excspt perhaps al-CIA-da which is false flag funded by massah.
It is hard to make the kind of argument needed in 500 characters and you know that,& you like it because it keeps it simple for you.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Bunnydancer777,
Let's debate by personal message. I have no problem with that. I prefer to debate that way. Oh and you are not forced to live on "massah's" land by gun point. You can even own your own land in a capitalist society, but you have to work for it. When you work you not only help yourself, but you contribute to society as a whole. We are a community and one level affects the other. Even in a hunter gatherer society you will people at higher positions and primitive laws.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Just give it up because now you're making my points.
bxjam85 3 years ago
You are not making any actual points..and that is your problem.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
You just don't know when to quit do you? I have made my point and you have only helped me make it. You are constantly contradicting yourself in order to try and make your point. First the argument is about how uncivil our society is and then you show admiration for the Wild West, which was an extremely violent and lawless society. Then you talk about how governments are not held accountable for their actions (which is anarchy by the way) and that was my point to begin with.
bxjam85 3 years ago
No you dcon't know when to quit. It bothers you that my thought is more complicated than simple black and white, obviously and you cannot leave it alone or think things through for yourself. You have to be spoon fed like a child.
Government is like taking a mass murderer and insititutionalizing his mindset and making it into a "rule" that you live by.
Wild west you only had seperate indicviduals acting abhorently occassionaly, and they did not siphon other people's labor to fund it.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Your idea of freedom has nothing to do with human suffering or ethics at all.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Practice what you preach. If you feel that you are not free then leave our society. What the hell are you waiting for? Time isn't going any slower. Anarchists always talk about how they hate society and the state. Then leave society and the state. It's that simple.
bxjam85 3 years ago
I don't have time for this..i just lost someone in my family and my patience is exhausted with this..because the necessary arguments are more than a few paragraphs long i cannot post them..i know you enjoy this format though because it keeps things very simple, very black ot white.
Goodbye!
Have fun with yourself.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
I am sorry for your loss. If you want to debate directly through personal messages then that is fine with me. In fact I preferred that from the beginning. I just didn't think we would debate this long. You have a problem with sticking to your original point and you contradict yourself. Personal message me if you want to have a better debate.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Anarchy is below the human level and maybe even below the social animal level in general. Without organized government we would not have civilization as we know it and we would not have even begun to evolve at the social level.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Government is below the human level originating in the R-complex which is concerned with control and dominance.
I fail to see why civillization a good thing.If this is evolution we should have stayed in the caves. the hunter gatherer societies had a near idyllic life unlike the near total slavery of today's system where 85% of our labor is stolen to pay for the controllers.(if you add in the cost of government at every level in all goods and services). Civillization is a human farm.
Bunnydancer777 3 years ago
Bunnydancer777, I agree that there are pros and cons to the agricultural settled lifestyle we have, but there are pros and cons to the hunter gatherer lifestyle as well. You know that you can always become hunter gather if you want to. Go to some indigenous tribe in South America, Asia, or Africa and you can live a hunter gather type lifestyle. If you think its best then go for it! Civilization was developed to increase living standards. That is why everyone went along with it.
bxjam85 3 years ago
You have a profound misunderstanding of what a federal world government would be like. Your paranoia and pessimism is the disease. Go live in the woods like you want to. That way our society can flush out your anarchist theories with the rest of the shit sociopolitical theories.
bxjam85 3 years ago
Didn't The Netherlands have a republic for two hundred years that ended shortly after the American Constitution.
johnny1083 3 years ago
Is the Chinese gov't one we really want to emulate?
StuartGalore 3 years ago
No, but neither is the US. We need to have a discussion about how best to square such circles.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Without George Orwell and his paranoid vision of the future globalism would have a much easier time of it.. we all know whenever someone writes a book it automatically makes the hypothetical situation contained within it factual.
Broyles86 3 years ago
indeed, join us on the current thread to discuss this further. BaOoDjyU0zI
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
i smell orwell
iamtexas 3 years ago
Oh we are coming and Texas is ... last.
Iamasockpuppet 3 years ago
check out my latest video, I think it addresses some of these concerns.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Thank You!!!
Bosco239 3 years ago
interesting
mutiny116 3 years ago
Planetary Congress sounds much more.. epic than Planetary Parliament, in my opinion anyhow.. so yeah, I cast my vote for a "Planetary Congress".
Broyles86 3 years ago
Yeah does have a better ring.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Don't cite China and its slave labor camps, draconian system as a shining example for Globalism.. just don't.
You had me for a while there, until that little snippet.
Broyles86 3 years ago
I'm not saying its a great (or even good) system, merely pointing out that vast areas of the earth are stable. I'm as liberal as they come, and I would much prefer a US versus a Chinese system. However, consider that the US currently imprison more than 1% of their entire population. The Chinese, for all their faults, don't match that. Food for thought:-)
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Don't cite China and its slave labor camps, draconian system as a shining example for Globalism.. just don't.
You had me for a while there, until that little snippet.
Broyles86 3 years ago
check out my latest video, I think it addresses some of these concerns.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
Why do you assume that a one world government would end up a democracy... What would happen if the world fell into the wrong hands?!?
joe1354 3 years ago
I don't "assume". This is the whole point.
TheModestAgnostic 3 years ago
you want world government hey? Didnt Nazi Germany also want world governance? hmmm interesting, you think that one over my friend.
bigboyburnsy 4 years ago
Yes, and Hitler loved German sheperds. Something to think about too!
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
lol hilarious
btw nazi's wanted world domination over democratic world governance
federali84 3 years ago
we have to change ourselves as individuals
be fair and humble
Energyium 4 years ago
Global governance is merely a pipe dream.
professorfoxtrot 4 years ago
I have just completed my PhD in international law and global governance. It appears that world federalism has the greatest prospect of achieving minimal interference whilst also achieving global policy objectives. The key reason why the present international legal system cannot prevail is that sovereign states pursue their individual foreign policy objectives and nobody speaks for global objectives. Please don't bother replying that the UN does - it doesn't.
mishymail 4 years ago
And come on who are they fooling we can't get city counsils to agree what is best for everyone there how can it be done globally there will always be injustice as long as man is involved. That is the evil hat much be purged before real heaven sent peace will be acheived with Yeshua as king
bignick5469 4 years ago
we will have a global goverment and it will crash and burn and mankind will be judged by the most high God argue the point all you want it is inescapable no matter how smart the man or woman they cannot rule all the world.
bignick5469 4 years ago
world goverment has been tried and it has failed. period no debate needed. America is not a democracy it is a republic. democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep arguing over what for dinner a republic is a well armed sheep
bignick5469 4 years ago
You are sick my friend don't you realize that the same people that push this global goverment are the same that propiagate the wars that make you want this ideology
bignick5469 4 years ago
Global Crooks & Cheats.... Coming soon.
OcalaFlorida 4 years ago
Deep psychological war would emerge, "are"* we reasonable enough to overcome that?
There is big work yet in front of us, let's not rush it if we aren't ready yet.
bezvezeceda 4 years ago
It is eliminating "Our consent". The procedure would not be democratic, it would be commercially driven by competition in advertisement strengths in mass-media with influence of specific media ownership, ergo putting us back to cold war between privately owned media versus media owned by already by defined governments. Deep psychological war would emerge, our we reasonable enough to overcome that?
bezvezeceda 4 years ago
Biggest problem 8:52 "Passed by ..."
bezvezeceda 4 years ago
Video of hope and good wishes. But, i would point out that democracy which you defined in the beginning as rule of people, never existed. It has been used as a term to float on, but never implemented. And i have different view on the process of integration, basically who gets the right to construct the unified government, it will look differently if socialist, or capitalist would construct it.
bezvezeceda 4 years ago
I disagree, a global government would tend towards nordic socialism. With no external threats, and thus transparency in government corruption would become much harder to hide. With living standards similar across the world, and uniform or at least similar educational and taxation companies would have little incentive to move around, and even less scope to abuse workers.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
Problem: It is your will for it to be nordic socialism? Or is it based on analytic reasoning? You would need to prove that largest amount of people agree with or consent to nordic socialism. At least backed up by some figures, if you want to be serious about it, that clearly show such consent. Which as i see it is not happening now. At least the process of constructing the system that drives unification would need to be formed.
bezvezeceda 4 years ago
There may certainly be an element of wishful thinking in my comments certainly. I base them on an imagined future world free of war, major resource shortages and with a fairly uniform living standard and level of education. That situation requires more coherent global governance however, so it is jumping the gun somewhat.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
That said, once there I think nordic socialism is a likely outcome, because all developed societies are either there or heading there. Note the discussion vis a vis health care in the US.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
Like most humans, like me, you've got a narrow view of the world and what's happening in it. The exponential and explosive growth of technology is not once taken into account. Any way of life that can be imagined currently will be impossible in thirty to fifty years due to this growth. Not taking this very near future into account, there is no valid argument that could be made about anything global.
PenguinJin 4 years ago
The singularity right? Nonsense I suspect, at least in the time frame you claim here. It's just the rapture with technology. Religion dressed up in techno speak.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
Good observation and good argument. But hey, if you ignore the time frame in which cell phones and the internet were implemented and widely accepted by countries which could handle them, which is a couple of decades, along with the multitude of inventions in the past century, you're right on the money.
PenguinJin 4 years ago
Never say never. You could be right:-) Nonetheless, I'll be impressed if we get to feed, house and provide email for the projected 9 billion or so around in 2050. Then we can start work on the singularity:-)
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
FUCK the rule of "law".. why should i be told how to live my life, what i can or can not put in my body or my mind?..
Global governance is a very very bad idea, simply because consolidated power breeds corruption. It is unavoidable at our level of civilization.
Wars happen when the elite say so.. its been that way for 100+ years.
Why should we sacrifice even more of our liberty when our current governments evidently do not care for liberty at all!
shrunkensimon 4 years ago
Define liberty.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
The freedom to do what i please so long as i do not harm anyone else, or infringe upon anyone elses freedom.
Laws are nothing more than control mechanisms which allow a small group of people to dominate the rest.
If you want global governance then it sounds like you've forgotten what it means to be human and free.. sounds like you need them because you've forgotten how to be without the "rule of law".
shrunkensimon 4 years ago
And who decides what an infringement is? You? Them? What if you disagree?
Roughly 35 million people have died in wars since the end of WWII. Still think we don't need law?
Your liberty becomes responsibility where it intersects with the liberty of another. Large societies require laws to smooth other the rough patches these intersections sometimes cause. Simple really.
TheModestAgnostic 4 years ago
All wars for the last 100 years (at least) have had both sides funded by the banksters, and need not have happened.. so don't talk to me about laws. Wars are planned out before they happen, the most recent example being the Lebanon conflict with Israel.
Look, global governance is a bad idea because the system we have now is TOTALLY corrupt. If we set it up, you can be damn sure it will not serve the best interests of humanity.
shrunkensimon 4 years ago
I am so glad others are thinking of Empathy for all humans , all equal and lucky to be born together in time.
bryceronie 4 years ago
Great job, man.
You've won a subscriber.
Keep it up.
oogashakaooga2 4 years ago
States fund fundamental research, while "markets" only do directed one. Directed can't exist without fundamental.
States fund orphan disease research, while markets don't. "Not valuable" they say... Such nice people. Yes, if someday the bubble-kids heal, it will be thx to those "immoral" taxes.
States grant us healthcare, access to education.
LMickee 4 years ago
There's two sides on a flip coin.
LMickee 4 years ago
Why such a thing isn't done ? Simple !
If any group/state/community/whatever, like EU or US was to do it, the risk that the "markets" run away is very probable.
To be done and efficient, such a thing needs to be done worldwide and once. So they can't escape.
How do you do that with no global entity that have the (representative) power to do it ?
LMickee 4 years ago
Because taxes are immoral (they are based on the threat of violence/aggression). If you create global taxes, then you are creating global violence/aggression. You must find another way, if you want to make the world a better place.
tvfrihed 4 years ago