Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   


Wave bye bye to sovereignty......
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conspiracies and Theories
Author Message
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Yep. And a world government as a whole.


And in this world government, would all nations have equal say...and veto power?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
An article from the Heritage Foundation on the WTO, GATT and NAFTA etc:
http://www.heritage.org/Resear...../HL497.cfm
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:

And in this world government, would all nations have equal say...and veto power?


You're still thinking in terms that define nations as being different from each other in some important way.

In reality, we're all human.

You might compare it to the state of affairs after the american revolution, and the people who feared a strong central government (versus a confederacy of states).
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Xerxes wrote:

And in this world government, would all nations have equal say...and veto power?


You're still thinking in terms that define nations as being different from each other in some important way.

In reality, we're all human.

You might compare it to the state of affairs after the american revolution, and the people who feared a strong central government (versus a confederacy of states).


But my point is that our govmint is corrupt now. Why would they be in favor of something that could potentially steal that opportunity from them....unless there was a promise of all new uncharted territories of corruption that would be available to them? Plus why are they doing it covertly. It steals States' Rights! AND There are many states now that are opposing this.
Back to top
thelast007
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 502

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Xerxes wrote:

And in this world government, would all nations have equal say...and veto power?


You're still thinking in terms that define nations as being different from each other in some important way.

In reality, we're all human.

You might compare it to the state of affairs after the american revolution, and the people who feared a strong central government (versus a confederacy of states).


people are still fighting the strong central government and want more power to stay within the states.

federal government is too big and intrusive now and still steadily growing.

why do it to the entire world?
Back to top
thelast007
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 502

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
thelast007 wrote:

Jesse Ventura moved to Mexico becasue he was disgusted with certian things in the U.S. government policy. If he felt Mexico was in bed with the U.S. he might have felt like he had no where to run or would have had to go somewhere else.


The only person responsible for jesse ventura's feeligns is jesse ventura. The rest of civilization is not obliged to make him feel nice.

Quote:

If people feel policy is all connected in any way even on small scales they might not like it.


Policy should be interconnected.

Life isn't neatly compartmentalized - all things affect all other things. A failure to recognize that, and make policy accordingly, will lead to stupid decisions. And those lead to failure.

And, as i said before: no one is responsible for a person's 'feelings' (in this case, paranoia) but that person.

Quote:

And that's a valid fear. We fight to keep our same rights and the same vision grated by the U.S. forefathers years later down the line. Who knows how far things can stray in the future from the original purpose intened?


Tough luck. The world has changed - it is no longer the world the founders envisioned. And the future will be even more different.

Quote:

One thing about #1&#2 it's not an objection to world government by definition itself. But it would be an issue to the dislikers of the disliked if " Twisted Evil their Twisted Evil " world gorvernment was the actual world government we were actually going to get. Some people believe it is so they are really against those creators and anything " Twisted Evil those people Twisted Evil " produce and maybe not world government per se. I'm not sure though.


Such beliefs have no place in good decision making. The wisdom of a policy exists separately from the person who comes up with it.

Or, put differently, even stupid people can have good ideas.

Quote:

#5- an objection is an objection.


You can claim as much if you'd like, but that doesn't make it so.

Quote:

this objection just shows it would be a good idea for more information & questions/concerns be answered/addressed before moving in that direction.


It's always a good idea to learn as much as you can about anything.

The fact that some (or even a lot of) people are very behind on understanding the world that they live in doesn't change the wisdom of any particular idea regarding that world.



who said an objection makes anything so...???... I said an objection is just an objection. a no is a no.

Forefathers part.--- Meaning the intenions of worl dgovernment might begin and be limited to one thing and years later turn into something totally different. An example being how our forefathers created one thing and we still have to fight to keep the vision on track.

creator and policy part--- if you trust a devil to create a heaven so to speak then that is too far out there for me. nothing i can say could reach that kind of mind.

i understand the benefits of a world government.
i also understand malicious people.

The understanding of the latter makes me worried about how they will handle the former.

governments become mislead and corrupt all over the world. people live in exile and as refugees. worse case senario in a 1 world government where do you run?

parts of the world fight againt U.S. trade policies, "Western Ways" etc. We are religiously tolerant. Down the line majority could come into power and base the world govenment off of different values.

world communism could be decided by majority to be the best policy for the world. the richer population is lesser than the poorer population.

majority could propose lets get rid of all nukes and any government that won't corporate is a tyrant.

there are a lot of factors that makes the situation good for healthy caution.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:

But my point is that our govmint is corrupt now. Why would they be in favor of something that could potentially steal that opportunity from them....unless there was a promise of all new uncharted territories of corruption that would be available to them?


Corruption is not a force unto itself. It's a name that we give to a category of behaviors that involve a person abusing their power for personal gain.

Anything you might perceive as sinister or evil actually has its roots in much more mundane motivations.

Quote:

Plus why are they doing it covertly. It steals States' Rights! AND There are many states now that are opposing this.


Like i said: it's reasonable to object to the methodology.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thelast007 wrote:
majority could propose lets get rid of all nukes and any government that won't corporate is a tyrant.


And I don't think D.C. would be going for that very quick.


Last edited by Xerxes on Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thelast007 wrote:

people are still fighting the strong central government and want more power to stay within the states.
federal government is too big and intrusive now and still steadily growing.
why do it to the entire world?


For the sake of progress.

Without a path towards a united humanity, progress will grind to a halt, potentially within a short amount of time.

Perhaps some people would be happy living in log cabins without electricity, growing their own food and sewing their own clothes, and dying at 40.

They're welcome to it. There's plenty of space in the wilderness.
Here in civilization, there are things to be done.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
thelast007 wrote:
people are still fighting the strong central government and want more power to stay within the states.
federal government is too big and intrusive now and still steadily growing.
why do it to the entire world?


For the sake of progress.

Without a path towards a united humanity, progress will grind to a halt, potentially within a short amount of time.

Perhaps some people would be happy living in log cabins without electricity, growing their own food and sewing their own clothes, and dying at 40.

They're welcome to it. There's plenty of space in the wilderness.
Here in civilization, there are things to be done.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thelast007 wrote:

Forefathers part.--- Meaning the intenions of worl dgovernment might begin and be limited to one thing and years later turn into something totally different.


Of course. It will and it should.

Change is inevitable. Better to control the nature of the change than to try fighting it.

Quote:

An example being how our forefathers created one thing and we still have to fight to keep the vision on track.


We shouldn't keep it on their track. They did not envision the society that we have today.

Quote:

creator and policy part--- if you trust a devil to create a heaven so to speak then that is too far out there for me. nothing i can say could reach that kind of mind.


If a liar says that the sky is blue, does that mean that the sky isn't blue?

No.

Objective truth exists apart from the nature of the person stating it. Good ideas coming from the mouth of a malicious fool are no less good because of that fact.

Or, put another way - just because bad people want a world government does not mean that a world government is a bad idea.

Quote:

i understand the benefits of a world government.
i also understand malicious people.
The understanding of the latter makes me worried about how they will handle the former.


You believe that evil people exist?

There are greedy people, and there are sociopaths, but there isn't really such a thing as a person who derives joy from destruction and doing evil.

Quote:

governments become mislead and corrupt all over the world. people live in exile and as refugees. worse case senario in a 1 world government where do you run?


That's far too general for me to offer any reasonable response.

Quote:

parts of the world fight againt U.S. trade policies, "Western Ways" etc. We are religiously tolerant. Down the line majority could come into power and base the world govenment off of different values.


Yep. Anything could happen.

And?

Quote:

world communism could be decided by majority to be the best policy for the world. the richer population is lesser than the poorer population.


Yeah. Anything's possible.

What's your point? Disaster is always possible in any endeavor.

Quote:

majority could propose lets get rid of all nukes and any government that won't corporate is a tyrant.


I...don't think you understand what a world goverment trully represents.

When someone asks you to specify your culture of origin, do you tell them the name of your state, or the name of your country?

A world government isn't an overbearing body that forces individual nations to do as it wills. A world government is a world government.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Corruption is not a force unto itself. It's a name that we give to a category of behaviors that involve a person abusing their power for personal gain.


"Corruption", a force, which is what is hatching this whole scheme. How can anything good be borne out of it?

exton wrote:
Anything you might perceive as sinister or evil actually has its roots in much more mundane motivations.


There is nothing mundane about wanting the right of the US to act on the format that has been laid down by our forfathers. It is the Govmints constitutional responsibility to protect and defend the borders of the United States. If, by doing this, they would be in clear violation of the constitution.

Entering into such a treaty would have to be ratified by all 50 states. They are not asking the states for it either
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:

"Corruption", a force, which is what is hatching this whole scheme. How can anything good be borne out of it?


I said that corruption *is not* a force unto itself.

And like i've said more than once now: whether or not a particular course of action is a good idea has nothing to do with the person(s) that promotes it.

Quote:

There is nothing mundane about wanting the right of the US to act on the format that has been laid down by our forfathers. It is the Govmints constitutional responsibility to protect and defend the borders of the United States. If, by doing this, they would be in clear violation of the constitution.

Entering into such a treaty would have to be ratified by all 50 states. They are not asking the states for it either


You've lost me.
Back to top
thelast007
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 502

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Xerxes wrote:

But my point is that our govmint is corrupt now. Why would they be in favor of something that could potentially steal that opportunity from them....unless there was a promise of all new uncharted territories of corruption that would be available to them?


Corruption is not a force unto itself. It's a name that we give to a category of behaviors that involve a person abusing their power for personal gain.

Anything you might perceive as sinister or evil actually has its roots in much more mundane motivations.


h Laughing i Laughing l Laughing a Laughing r Laughing i Laughing o Laughing u Laughing s.

then he is probably referring to the roots of the much more mundane motivations he perceives as sinister or evil, and what ever those motivations are. if those motivations drive that person to abuse power entrusted in them for their own personal gain it is the name you give to that category of behaviors that involes a person doing such a thing. the name in which you yourself desribed as corruption!

oh please with the semantics. go back to the question.


Last edited by thelast007 on Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:31 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1548
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
I said that corruption *is not* a force unto itself.


And I say that corruption is a force once the corruption becomes so great. Once power is acheived, it is not relinquished easily.


Xerxes wrote:
There is nothing mundane about wanting the right of the US to act on the format that has been laid down by our forfathers. It is the Govmints constitutional responsibility to protect and defend the borders of the United States. If, by doing this, they would be in clear violation of the constitution.

Entering into such a treaty would have to be ratified by all 50 states. They are not asking the states for it either


exton wrote:
You've lost me.


Entering into an agreement, with a North American Union is in fact a "treaty" it is not legal. Like us entering the UN. The US can't enter into a treaty of that magnitude unless it is ratified by all 50 states.
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conspiracies and Theories All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 2 of 8

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Add to My Yahoo!

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites