|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 12:37:56 GMT -5
The reality is that power will attract the very sort of people who should not have it, who will do anything to get it, and therefore once they have it, will do anything with it. Human history proves that as soon as we are all slaves to a one world government, it is inevitable that this government will fall into the hands of another Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or Torquemada. No purported safeguards can prevent that from happening. Hitler was elected by the German people, and our own recent history proves that elections can be rigged by powerful individuals or agencies. Imagine the world today if Hitler had won WW2. That is the world which MUST sooner or later come to exist, cannot help but come to exist, under a one world government. That danger alone, of the creation of a one world dictatorship waiting to be plucked as a prize by the most ruthless cutthroat that humanity can breed, is alone reason to abandon the suggestion of a one world government. "Think of a multi-nationed world as a ship with multiple water tight compartments. No matter what happens to any one compartment, the ship as a whole sails onward. A one world government is a ship with only one compartment. If that compartment gets into trouble, the whole ship must sink. Even today, the absence of international barriers to trade means that economic folly by one government can have disastrous consequences for all others. Compartmentalization is a good thing, for ships, economies, and governments." If a dictator takes power eventually people will revolt and form a democracy or aristocracy. That is what has been happening since the times of ancient Greece. If a dictator takes control of a world government the same will happen eventually. But I don't think a dictator would seize control of a world government, at least not if it is based on western culture as it is now. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 12:38:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 12:38:49 GMT -5
Well I think the government should take care of education, security and ensuring basic needs for everyone. But I don't think they should get involved with people's personal lives. That's what they were doing in the USA with the NSA... that's a problem. NSA is nothing compared to what's going on now. But yah, that was an outrage. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 12:39:07 GMT -5
That's what they were doing in the USA with the NSA... that's a problem. It is indeed a problem, and things will only get worse as time passes by. Scientists think it will be possibly to read brain signals in the near future... and later they could even change your brain's signals... That would make it even easier to control people's personal lives. Still controlling people to some extend isn't necessarily bad, as long as it isn't done by some power-hungry being with emotions and prejudices... so not by a human... I don't want to lose the things that make me human. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 12:41:09 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 12:41:09 GMT -5
And so what exactly do you think Mr King of the World will do to anyone who thinks he shouldn't have so much power?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 12:41:50 GMT -5
The reality is that power will attract the very sort of people who should not have it, who will do anything to get it, and therefore once they have it, will do anything with it. Human history proves that as soon as we are all slaves to a one world government, it is inevitable that this government will fall into the hands of another Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or Torquemada. No purported safeguards can prevent that from happening. Hitler was elected by the German people, and our own recent history proves that elections can be rigged by powerful individuals or agencies. Imagine the world today if Hitler had won WW2. That is the world which MUST sooner or later come to exist, cannot help but come to exist, under a one world government. That danger alone, of the creation of a one world dictatorship waiting to be plucked as a prize by the most ruthless cutthroat that humanity can breed, is alone reason to abandon the suggestion of a one world government. "Think of a multi-nationed world as a ship with multiple water tight compartments. No matter what happens to any one compartment, the ship as a whole sails onward. A one world government is a ship with only one compartment. If that compartment gets into trouble, the whole ship must sink. Even today, the absence of international barriers to trade means that economic folly by one government can have disastrous consequences for all others. Compartmentalization is a good thing, for ships, economies, and governments." If a dictator takes power eventually people will revolt and form a democracy or aristocracy. That is what has been happening since the times of ancient Greece. If a dictator takes control of a world government the same will happen eventually. But I don't think a dictator would seize control of a world government, at least not if it is based on western culture as it is now. Over time, new social systems evolve to displace old ones. Often, wars are fought for this purpose, such as the one fought between some colonists who thought a Congress might be a good idea, and George III who thought rule by divine right was as good as it got. The process by which one social system replaces others is a process of evolution. Under a one world government, such social evolution would stop. There would be no tolerance for alternative systems, no experimentation with new social orders, no possibility of recovery from socio-political trends detrimental to the people. The only person who would claim the power would be a Dictator. History shows over and over that complete power is a bad thing. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 12:42:39 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 12:42:39 GMT -5
That's what they were doing in the USA with the NSA... that's a problem. It is indeed a problem, and things will only get worse as time passes by. Scientists think it will be possibly to read brain signals in the near future... and later they could even change your brain's signals... That would make it even easier to control people's personal lives. Still controlling people to some extend isn't necessarily bad, as long as it isn't done by some power-hungry being with emotions and prejudices... so not by a human... Yay, Planet Cyberman. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 12:43:39 GMT -5
And so what exactly do you think Mr King of the World will do to anyone who thinks he shouldn't have so much power? Exactly. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 12:44:20 GMT -5
It is indeed a problem, and things will only get worse as time passes by. Scientists think it will be possibly to read brain signals in the near future... and later they could even change your brain's signals... That would make it even easier to control people's personal lives. Still controlling people to some extend isn't necessarily bad, as long as it isn't done by some power-hungry being with emotions and prejudices... so not by a human... I don't want to lose the things that make me human. You don't have to. I'm just saying that humans are too flawed to handle power. But some other being, or possibly a machine could do better. Democracy also has it dark sides, while I do still prefer it over other systems. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 12:45:38 GMT -5
And so what exactly do you think Mr King of the World will do to anyone who thinks he shouldn't have so much power? If western culture as it is now become dominant and spreads around the world (which is already happening) it's unlikely a king will rise to take all power. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 12:46:55 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 12:46:55 GMT -5
I don't want to lose the things that make me human. You don't have to. I'm just saying that humans are too flawed to handle power. But you think ONE human being charge of six billion people is a good idea? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 12:49:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 12:49:21 GMT -5
And so what exactly do you think Mr King of the World will do to anyone who thinks he shouldn't have so much power? If western culture as it is now become dominant and spreads around the world (which is already happening) it's unlikely a king will rise to take all power. If we're all one nation, there'll be a small group that controls everything. Then you get a Stalin, a Hitler, someone who kills and forces everyone to think like them. But in this case, there is NOTHING on the Earth that can stop them. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 12:52:31 GMT -5
You don't have to. I'm just saying that humans are too flawed to handle power. But you think ONE human being charge of six billion people is a good idea? No I don't. I said it would be a bad idea... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 12:57:03 GMT -5
But you think ONE human being charge of six billion people is a good idea? No I don't. I said it would be a bad idea... In my opinion, Human Nature will eventually choke out anything else. You can give a man power, but that power will drive him mad. I don't dislike the idea of a world government just to dislike it, I dislike it because we know what humans are capable of, even if you give them a little power. If we try to engineer outcomes, if we overturn tradition to make everyone the same, we ruin society. If we upset tradition to allow for an equal shot at the starting gate, everyone wins, except for the charlatans and would be dictators. Ben Stein |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 12:57:32 GMT -5
If we're all one nation, there'll be a small group that controls everything. Then you get a Stalin, a Hitler, someone who kills and forces everyone to think like them. But in this case, there is NOTHING on the Earth that can stop them. Why would there be a small group that controls everything? Is there a small group that controls our countries right now? Only the people that we elected. A world government wouldn't have to be different (of course it could be just as well as anything else). And there will be ways to stop them. In ancient Greek Citystates people could overthrow tyrants without help from outside. But in a world were people are all raised democratic it's unlikely a tyrant will be able to take control. Just like it's unlikely a tyrant would gain power in the Netherlands soon (not taking in account that a tyrant could conquer it). |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:01:51 GMT -5
No I don't. I said it would be a bad idea... In my opinion, Human Nature will eventually choke out anything else. You can give a man power, but that power will drive him mad. I don't dislike the idea of a world government just to dislike it, I dislike it because we know what humans are capable of, even if you give them a little power. If we try to engineer outcomes, if we overturn tradition to make everyone the same, we ruin society. If we upset tradition to allow for an equal shot at the starting gate, everyone wins, except for the charlatans and would be dictators. Ben Stein I agree you can't humans can't handle power. But what if there's no world government and a tyrant would take control of a country with nuclear weapons, what would happen then? That would be even more dangerous. If he seizes control of the entire world at least he'd be less likely to use his nuclear weapons. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 13:02:34 GMT -5
If we're all one nation, there'll be a small group that controls everything. Then you get a Stalin, a Hitler, someone who kills and forces everyone to think like them. But in this case, there is NOTHING on the Earth that can stop them. Why would there be a small group that controls everything? Is there a small group that controls our countries right now? Only the people that we elected. A world government wouldn't have to be different (of course it could be just as well as anything else). And there will be ways to stop them. In ancient Greek Citystates people could overthrow tyrants without help from outside. But in a world were people are all raised democratic it's unlikely a tyrant will be able to take control. Just like it's unlikely a tyrant would gain power in the Netherlands soon (not taking in account that a tyrant could conquer it). You are counting on political views that stand here and now. And a small group controls any country. Even America truly isn't Democratic, especially with the president and government we have now. You have to look at things in light of pure humanity. No one can say for sure that democracy will hold the great prestige is has now in 50 years. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:05:40 GMT -5
You are counting on political views that stand here and now. And a small group controls any country. Even America truly isn't Democratic, especially with the president and government we have now. You have to look at things in light of pure humanity. No one can say for sure that democracy will hold the great prestige is has now in 50 years. The US are a representative democracy, it isn't a full democracy but it's still democratic. And no, we don't know how people will look at democracy in 50 years, that's why I said if things would stay the way they're now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 13:11:18 GMT -5
In my opinion, Human Nature will eventually choke out anything else. You can give a man power, but that power will drive him mad. I don't dislike the idea of a world government just to dislike it, I dislike it because we know what humans are capable of, even if you give them a little power. If we try to engineer outcomes, if we overturn tradition to make everyone the same, we ruin society. If we upset tradition to allow for an equal shot at the starting gate, everyone wins, except for the charlatans and would be dictators. Ben Stein I agree you can't humans can't handle power. But what if there's no world government and a tyrant would take control of a country with nuclear weapons, what would happen then? That would be even more dangerous. If he seizes control of the entire world at least he'd be less likely to use his nuclear weapons. In a world government, the dictator would never have to use his weapons. He's in control of everything. Everyone can have their own opinions in a multi nation world, even if those opinions are formed by existing political ideology. Basic human values are knowledge and understanding. We can do both of those within our own society. But if you put everything under the same roof, in a sense, when a new idea or concept arises no One would accept it |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 13:11:56 GMT -5
You are counting on political views that stand here and now. And a small group controls any country. Even America truly isn't Democratic, especially with the president and government we have now. You have to look at things in light of pure humanity. No one can say for sure that democracy will hold the great prestige is has now in 50 years. The US are a representative democracy, it isn't a full democracy but it's still democratic. And no, we don't know how people will look at democracy in 50 years, that's why I said if things would stay the way they're now. Didn't see it. Oops. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:16:59 GMT -5
I agree you can't humans can't handle power. But what if there's no world government and a tyrant would take control of a country with nuclear weapons, what would happen then? That would be even more dangerous. If he seizes control of the entire world at least he'd be less likely to use his nuclear weapons. In a world government, the dictator would never have to use his weapons. He's in control of everything. Exactly. I'd rather have dictator that doesn't use weapons than one that would. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:17:48 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:17:48 GMT -5
No system is perfect. If someone figures out how to manipulate the system, manipulate the people into giving him power, then they can take control. It may take some time for someone to destroy America's system but IT CAN HAPPEN. It doesn't matter his long it takes some one to take over the world. It can happen. And once it does, what happens? End of humanity as we know it. No one to fight it. Nothing to stop it. Hell descends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:21:44 GMT -5
No system is perfect. If someone figures out how to manipulate the system, manipulate the people into giving him power, then they can take control. It may take some time for someone to destroy America's system but IT CAN HAPPEN. It doesn't matter his long it takes some one to take over the world. It can happen. And once it does, what happens? End of humanity as we know it. No one to fight it. Nothing to stop it. Hell descends. Actually a dictator with control over the world would be easier to beat. The larger the area controlled by a dictator the harder it will be for him to keep control over all of it. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:21:46 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:21:46 GMT -5
In my opinion, Human Nature will eventually choke out anything else. You can give a man power, but that power will drive him mad. I don't dislike the idea of a world government just to dislike it, I dislike it because we know what humans are capable of, even if you give them a little power. If we try to engineer outcomes, if we overturn tradition to make everyone the same, we ruin society. If we upset tradition to allow for an equal shot at the starting gate, everyone wins, except for the charlatans and would be dictators. Ben Stein I agree you can't humans can't handle power. But what if there's no world government and a tyrant would take control of a country with nuclear weapons, what would happen then? That would be even more dangerous. If he seizes control of the entire world at least he'd be less likely to use his nuclear weapons. So you're saying it'd be better if Kim-Jong-Un was king of the world? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:24:12 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:24:12 GMT -5
No system is perfect. If someone figures out how to manipulate the system, manipulate the people into giving him power, then they can take control. It may take some time for someone to destroy America's system but IT CAN HAPPEN. It doesn't matter his long it takes some one to take over the world. It can happen. And once it does, what happens? End of humanity as we know it. No one to fight it. Nothing to stop it. Hell descends. Actually a dictator with control over the world would be easier to beat. The larger the area controlled by a dictator the harder it will be for him to keep control over all of it. A dictator with control over the world would be easier to beat? What? If he has control over the world, there's no one to beat him. If you try, there's an entire world of military to kill you. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:24:50 GMT -5
I agree you can't humans can't handle power. But what if there's no world government and a tyrant would take control of a country with nuclear weapons, what would happen then? That would be even more dangerous. If he seizes control of the entire world at least he'd be less likely to use his nuclear weapons. So you're saying it'd be better if Kim-Jong-Un was king of the world? If Kim-Jong-Un would have been king of the world he would have been dead at this point... But if Kim-Jong-Un would actually use nuclear weapons I'd rather have him as king of the world, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:27:04 GMT -5
A dictator with control over the world would be easier to beat? What? If he has control over the world, there's no one to beat him. If you try, there's an entire world of military to kill you. Then explain to me why there are 51 dictatorships at this moment? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:27:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:27:13 GMT -5
So you're saying it'd be better if Kim-Jong-Un was king of the world? If Kim-Jong-Un would have been king of the world he would have been dead at this point... But if Kim-Jong-Un would actually use nuclear weapons I'd rather have him as king of the world, yes.  Do you even know what it's like to live in North Korea? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:28:12 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:28:12 GMT -5
A dictator with control over the world would be easier to beat? What? If he has control over the world, there's no one to beat him. If you try, there's an entire world of military to kill you. Then explain to me why there are 51 dictatorships at this moment? What? How is that relevant to one man ruling the world? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:30:07 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:30:07 GMT -5
Look, if you'd rather have a world without freedom or individuality than a world with war than I have nothing to say to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:30:20 GMT -5
Then explain to me why there are 51 dictatorships at this moment? What? How is that relevant to one man ruling the world? You're saying it would be easier to overthrow a dictator when there is no world government. Yet there are 51 dictatorships in the world right now. |
|
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself? 