Topic: What would you give for peace? Unifism: And the Blue Print towards World Peace
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Here's the thing though, how many people actually do cherish the everyday freedoms they have? Isn't the voting turn out for the US elections 20%? How many people take such freedoms for granted take EVERYTHING for granted and hope the problems will go away or that government will solve everything, will willingly become lazy because they know if they don't work nothing bad will happen, the economy will get along without them just fine etc etc. The evryday problems of survival of a people an ocean away don't matter for as long as the generic person gets his computers and ipods, "who cares who gets elected they're all the same anyways"?
The point is to create the most brutal and effective government of history, ensure that every spec of humanity knows what the greatest horror can be, live in an everyday situtation where they KNOW that they long ago through inaction lost their voice, lost their say.
By creating such an effective and total government that is that is nearly omnipresent in its ability to control people, by through its very oppression creates the very enemies they use in turn to justify their brutality.
Humanity will learn its lesson the hard way and when the leader dies and the politicians reshuffle themselves and they're means of control become less effective and less subtle the system will begin to fray on the edges, the students will crowd the streets and the government squares and through circumstance the government will fall and newly democratic elections will take place, and thus build on foundations of concrete and building of social world democracy will take its place and never again will humanity allow politics to slide so far from public control, never again will the People ALLOW such a brutal NWO to take place, the United Nations/United Earth Directorate will remain in place and the world will know true peace and true freedom from oppression.
For a government to run the world effectively already as was the case for regional administration zones will have to decentralize to the point where the world does become an evolution of the United States, but different, more free, more prosperous and no more fear. From either above or around.
Often the best results are gained not through constant modification of an artwork but through its shattering and reconstruction, into something far greater and more beautiful then before.
IP: Logged |
posted
Piffle. Hitler wasn't bad enough to teach such a lesson? 'The only thing we learn from history, is that we learn nothing from history'. Your 'lesson' would last a generation, two at most; then it would fade, along with the older tyrannies of Stalin, Hitler, the Kaiser Wilhelm, Leopold of Belgium, the 1848 repressions... And the cycle would begin anew. Why not skip the middleman and learn from the examples we already have?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just for reference, the voter turnout for the 2004 US election was 55.3%, not 20%. The rest of your post is too ridiculous for me to take the time to comment on.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ElJay, is that higher or lower than the election before? In the recent Canadian election, voter turnout (which hit an all-time low in the preceding election) nudged upward somewhat at least partly because it was a close race. I'm curious to know if the same happened in the U.S. election.
Added: Or I could look it up myself. I think it took longer to write the post than it did to find my answer. >_<
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
It is no surprise to me that the midterm elections always have a smaller turn-out than the presidential elections, but I find it somewhat distressing that the decline in turn-out since 1960 is more for the midterm elections as well. The gap is getting wider. Even though I don't like some aspects of y'all's election system, I do think it's good that you don't run into that particular problem.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, turnout in our 2004 election was the lowest ever -- 61% or some such. Here is a graph I Googled up. According to Elections Canada, turnout in the 2006 election was 64.9%.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
I haven't read Jennifer Government, but I've played the game. I have a friend who read it and thought it was interesting, but wasn't overly enthusiastic about it.
Blayne, So you're willing to sacrifice thousands of people to overcome apathy? Here's a thought, why don't you put your powers of reasoning into creating a person or institution that everyone wants to run towards rather than from?
I think that one of the things that the US has done well is become something that the masses want to run toward. If we could just identify and amplify those qualities that made thousands leave home, hearth and family to create a life here, then we may be able to stage a bloodless coup.
I'm not saying that the US doesn't have its problems. It has its malnourished, the homeless, the impoverished and plenty of crime and corruption. Despite all this, people continue to come and I think that it is because the US has gotten many things right in an attempt to serve both the majority and the individual.
In any case, I think that effort is better spent trying to create a carrot than a stick.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
I haven't read Jennifer Government, but I've played the game. I have a friend who read it and thought it was interesting, but wasn't overly enthusiastic about it.
It's a game? I'll have to look this up.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
"Nation States" I believe.
To an extent it is voluntary to the degree that a good many nations would have to agree to giving the General Secretary make or break powers to begin with. Voluntary to the extent that some nations could break away at certain times, the point is that it becomes the perfect excuse due to circumstances for control to be cemented.
Do any of us honestly believe that the world will in a heart beat agree to drop all our arms and agree to free trade and open borders unless we're forced to?
After all look at the EU referendum, France refused the new constitution dispite all the pressure the government was trying to push it through.
Next, your looking only skin deep. What did happen after WWII? Didn't major wars on the scale of WWII stop? Didn't the UN get founded? The nuclear age? The creation of the state of Israel all good things and all directly related to the end of WWII.
WWI? Didn't international politics change to the degree that wars were becomming nolonger the de facto tool of governments with the exception of militeristic ones? The League of Nations? The Repulic of China etc etc?
1905, The Russo Japanese war, allowed the Japanese people to be the first asian nation to defeat a western power for the first time and forced the Russians to consider reforms.
Each war I think did in fact have some good to come out of it, you just need one catastrohpic war and totalitarian government horrible enough that no one will ever want it to happen again AND have a strong enough of a foundation that the democratization won't have the same effect as Russia's Glavnost.
IP: Logged |
I disagree. If you are going to use fear and violence to create world peace, the threat would need to come from an external agent. A human based threat will cause partisanship, not unification.
You've sited several wars that both justify and knock down your theory that war begets peace. I'm a big believer in the virtical threat theory; we won't abandon war between nations and cultures until a greater, more alien threat causes us to draw together in a common cause.
And even if you could create
quote:one catastrohpic war and totalitarian government horrible enough that no one will ever want it to happen again
a government powerful and intolerable enough to cause worldwide hate, would also be powerful enough and in control of enough resources to perpetuate itself indefinitely.
So you'd end up with a world without war, but also a world without peace.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
