Why Can't We Have a World Government? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14596587
Because the forces of conformity would not leave me alone. They fear anyone who thinks for them self and they can not have individuality under any circumstances.

So they must come after me one way or another.

So I have no other choice in the matter.




I so want you to be serious.
#14596642
I think Saeko means that "Iron Ant" and "Ayn Rand" are assonant phrases, Decky. They don't rhyme, but the vowel sounds are similar.
#14596659
Well don't taunt those of us who went to comprehensives with your use of terms and concepts we have never been exposed to.

A crane went over the other day (if it had went over onto its other side it would have went a long way down and possibly killed the driver) and I said that they shouldn't have parked it so close to the precipice anyway and they looked at me like I was insane, apparently it is a "proper university challenge word."

Anyway the point is that to become a top brickie I need to work on contracting my vocabulary not expanding it! Don't pollute my mind with your bourgeois concept of internal rhymes!
#14596674
Globalisation has done immense good by dragging billions out of poverty, but this has been opposed at every step by the lefties. Of course in the leftie fantasy world prosperity is created by trade unions and socialist government. In the leftie fantasy world every mid Victorian worker could have had a smart phone, a wide screen tv, a university education and free child care, if only the labour movement had been strong enough.

The problem is we constantly have to struggle against both demented Socialism and demented Libertarianism. I've seen some interesting stuff about the importance of light manufacturing in development and that this has limited the space for development of those trying to follow behind the original industrialisers.
Potemkin wrote:As a matter of fact, Decky, yes I did. I was a scholarship boy.
So you went to a non state school then, because you didn't need scholorships to go to State Grammar schools. I went to a state Grammar school. The reason we're so angry is because State Grammar schools allowed working class and lower middle class kids to get a decent education, without having to grovel to rich peoples charity. Leftie filth like Diane Abbot made sure they were abolished while sending their own children to private school.

This is why I really don't see much difference between socialists and libertarians. They both want to abolish State grammar schools.
#14597179
Wow, interesting conversation guys.
First let me be clear. Some of you:
layman wrote:What does "support" mean? ......
among others argued that "it is not 'our' responsibility to fix the world governments if they are corrupt. Why cant the people over there change their own governments?"
I have to admit, there is some truth to that argument. I feel like a lot of people here- speaking of Saudi Arabia at least- don't really want a "good" government. Or if they want anything other than what we already have, they probably want something that is equally bad or maybe even worse. (Don't ask me why, it is a long discussion for later.)

On the other hand:
Frollein wrote:Does that mean that Germany should stop selling weapons to Saudia Arabia (by your definition, they are "bad guys", because they are surely fucking up living conditions in Yemen right now)? But then Saudia Arabia would buy weapons from Russia or (gasp!) France! We can't have that! If they have to buy weapons, they should buy German weapons.

Why should you guys sell "weapons" to Saudi Arabia? Why not flowers or Q-tips? You see, Q-tips don't hurt anyone.

But when Iron Ant says:
Iron Ant wrote:The most productive societies are made of happy people, and they are happy because their own individual needs are being seen to.

A society that gives nothing to the individual and only takes from the individual, is nothing more than a tyranny, and quite possibly a form of vampirism, sucking us all dry.

I place more importance on the individual rather than the collective...

I don't know, I kinda agree with his philosophy.

But I am interested in what Rich means when he says:
Rich wrote:The problem is we constantly have to struggle against both demented Socialism and demented Libertarianism.....
This is why I really don't see much difference between socialists and libertarians.

How are they alike Rich? Consider me an ignorant, how is Libertarianims like Socialism?

Zamuel wrote:What you are envisioning is known as a Utopia...

Interesting. I'll have to take a look at those articles.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:..... you'd need to be more specific to get useful replies.

You're right, I cant just pretend all world problems are cause by The West as if it is controlled by some formal Illuminati. (Or is it )
This kind of thinking is unhelpful and doesn't really help improve anything or anyone.
#14597270
alithinker wrote:I cant just pretend all world problems are cause by The West as if it is controlled by some formal Illuminati. (Or is it ).

Of course it is. like Jeff Spicoli says "Scio Logos" dude.

Most Governments are never "In" control. Mostly they're out of control. In every popular endeavor, it's the hidden people you don't see that are making things happen.

Zam
#14597348
Zamuel wrote:Of course it is. like Jeff Spicoli says "Scio Logos" dude.

Most Governments are never "In" control. Mostly they're out of control. In every popular endeavor, it's the hidden people you don't see that are making things happen.

Zam


You're right, it is the "hidden people". But this hidden people could be an elite few, or in some cases, could be entire populations.
So to pretend that the world "is"- and "has been"- governed by a specific elite group of people who was in control since ancient times, is just.... well, let's say it would make for a good sci-fi movie.
#14597363
They're not exactly hidden. There's a small group of financial institutions, owned mostly by a small number of people, which either own or fund most of the businesses around the world, and are highly involved in politics, and all these financial institutions are highly interconnected.
#14597366
Brother of Karl wrote:They're not exactly hidden. There's a small group of financial institutions, owned mostly by a small number of people, which either own or fund most of the businesses around the world, and are highly involved in politics, and all these financial institutions are highly interconnected.

Well I mean, obviously there are people in this world who are much more powerful than others. I am not arguing that everybody in this world- or even in a single state- has an "equal" amount of power.
I mean in democratic states people might try and pretend that everybody has an "equal" amount of power. That is obviously not true. And that is why you have laws and regulations to protect the poor and the weak.

Now if you are arguing that the current state of affairs in say America- or the world- is messed up and that "financial institutions" have too much power, well you may be right. But that can be changed if people work hard and try to change it. It probably requires a lot of hard work and time but I suppose it is possible.
#14597492
Frollein wrote:No, not that world govenment. Alithinker meant the other one, you know, the wise and gentle one!
Brother of Karl wrote:You mean the UN? :?:
The one with the rainbows and unicorns.
#14597494
Frollein wrote:Does that mean that Germany should stop selling weapons to Saudia Arabia (by your definition, they are "bad guys", because they are surely fucking up living conditions in Yemen right now)? But then Saudia Arabia would buy weapons from Russia or (gasp!) France! We can't have that! If they have to buy weapons, they should buy German weapons.

alithinker wrote:Why should you guys sell "weapons" to Saudi Arabia? Why not flowers or Q-tips? You see, Q-tips don't hurt anyone.
But the Saudis are for some unfathomable reason quite eager to buy our weapons. Flowers not so much. And they pay good money for our weapons. So why let them give that money to, oh I don't know, let's say, the French? Despite our deep and eternal friendship with France *coughhack*, we can't let them sell their weapons to Saudia Arabia. Even friendship doesn't go that far. You know, business is business.

But that idea of a "world government" is quite fascinating. Would it be more like Switzerland's government or more like the IS? I mean, we'd have to settle for one common model for all of mankind. And we have a lot of competing models. So who would you suggest should have the final say? And, more importantly, who would enforce the agreement? I mean, so many countries cling to the old fashioned concept of having their own armed forces. So if some countries wouldn't be happy with the suggested "world government", I think it might be possible that they'd refuse to participate and perhaps even forcefully resist any attempts to make them accept the legitimacy of that "government" and then we'd have wars...

...kinda the state of the world as it is now.

Seriously, why would anyone even want to have a world government? Isn't it enough that national governments are constantly fucking with a limited part of the world's population, do you really want a government that holds sway over all of us? What if you're unhappy with the way the world is governed? Where'd you emigrate to? If the government is corrupt (and it would be, trust me), which foreign government would finance and train your rebel movement? I mean, imagine the whole world was governed like North Korea. Or Saudia Arabia. Or Greece...

It is possible but Zelensky refuses to talk... no[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@skinster Hamas committed a terrorist attack(s)[…]

"Ukraine’s real losses should be counted i[…]

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]