Which would you prefer; A New World Order or a World Caliphate?

[Dalek Prime]

What do you have against a Western type of world government?

The world has been heading that way for a long time now.

Regards
DL

Just because something heads in a certain direction, doesn't make it good. A world government would be even less representative of the people it's meant to serve.

[Obvious Leo]

Do we really reckon that those jihadist shitheads have got what it takes to establish a world caliphate? They're just ordinary gangsters exploiting the psychologically vulnerable to fulfill a wealth and power agenda of their own.

"Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose"....Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr....The more things change, the more they remain the same.

What kind of gangsters would you name our present political talking heads if not just ordinary gangsters?

Regards
DL

Are you suggesting some sort of equivalence between our current crop of world leaders and the leaders of the jihadist movement? In what way do you reckon they are motivated by similar goals?

[Arising_uk]

Part of my point. We all want the same. One faction seems to want to include freedom of speech while the other would ban freedom of speech.

Regards
DL

I think this just a myth, none of the large nations wants a world government neither do the multi-nationals. If you look around the world appears to be heading to more and more nations not less. Now they might be joining larger groups but I seriously doubt any will be giving over their nationhood to a 'New World Order'.

[Greatest I am]

What do you have against a Western type of world government?

The world has been heading that way for a long time now.

Regards
DL

Just because something heads in a certain direction, doesn't make it good. A world government would be even less representative of the people it's meant to serve.

Who knows if we might find a non-corrupted leader.

We have 0 representation now so going to 0 is to be exactly the same.

I see it as having just one set of corrupt politicians than the what, 300 set of corrupt politicians we now have.

So again, what do you have against a world government?

Regards
DL

[Dalek Prime]

What do you have against a Western type of world government?

The world has been heading that way for a long time now.

Regards
DL

Just because something heads in a certain direction, doesn't make it good. A world government would be even less representative of the people it's meant to serve.

Who knows if we might find a non-corrupted leader.

We have 0 representation now so going to 0 is to be exactly the same.

I see it as having just one set of corrupt politicians than the what, 300 set of corrupt politicians we now have.

So again, what do you have against a world government?

Regards
DL

I just said, and you haven't addressed it. People are better represented in smaller organizational groups.

[Greatest I am]

Do we really reckon that those jihadist shitheads have got what it takes to establish a world caliphate? They're just ordinary gangsters exploiting the psychologically vulnerable to fulfill a wealth and power agenda of their own.

"Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose"....Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr....The more things change, the more they remain the same.

What kind of gangsters would you name our present political talking heads if not just ordinary gangsters?

Regards
DL

Are you suggesting some sort of equivalence between our current crop of world leaders and the leaders of the jihadist movement? In what way do you reckon they are motivated by similar goals?

Our oligarch owners rule the West as well as the East. The wars you see are just entertainment and a par5t of the bread and circuses that humans have always craved.

Our oligarch owners are funding both sides just as the emperors did for the slaughter in the Roman arenas.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Part of my point. We all want the same. One faction seems to want to include freedom of speech while the other would ban freedom of speech.

Regards
DL

I think this just a myth, none of the large nations wants a world government neither do the multi-nationals. If you look around the world appears to be heading to more and more nations not less. Now they might be joining larger groups but I seriously doubt any will be giving over their nationhood to a 'New World Order'.

Yet the E.U. nations are giving up theirs to their larger coalition.

That is the trend and it will eventually culminate in a one world government.

People are getting fed up with the corruption of so many and will opt for the corrupted few.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

[
Just because something heads in a certain direction, doesn't make it good. A world government would be even less representative of the people it's meant to serve.

Who knows if we might find a non-corrupted leader.

We have 0 representation now so going to 0 is to be exactly the same.

I see it as having just one set of corrupt politicians than the what, 300 set of corrupt politicians we now have.

So again, what do you have against a world government?

Regards
DL[/quote]
I just said, and you haven't addressed it. People are better represented in smaller organizational groups.[/quote]

Tell that to NATO and the U.N., the E U and the Group of 20.

Regards
DL

[Obvious Leo]

So again, what do you have against a world government?

How could you expect a question like this to generate a sensible conversation without defining such a government? Are you literally talking about a government which enacts legislation which is legally binding on the entire world's population? How would such legislators be appointed? How would they enforce their laws?

You haven't offered us much to go on and the caliphate bullshit is just a myth. That will never happen.

[Greatest I am]

So again, what do you have against a world government?

How could you expect a question like this to generate a sensible conversation without defining such a government? Are you literally talking about a government which enacts legislation which is legally binding on the entire world's population? How would such legislators be appointed? How would they enforce their laws?

You haven't offered us much to go on and the caliphate bullshit is just a myth. That will never happen.

Why should I need to define a Western type of government or a Caliphate type?

We all know what a Western type government is and does and most have a good idea what a Caliphate would look like as well.

Regards
DL

[Obvious Leo]

We all know what a Western type government

I don't know of any two which are the same. Which particular model of government are you suggesting?

most have a good idea what a Caliphate would look like as well.

Bullshit. Nobody's got a fucking clue, least of all those who are seeking to install such a system.

[Arising_uk]

Yet the E.U. nations are giving up theirs to their larger coalition. ...

No they're not, they are still nations fighting their corners, it's half the problem but from the looks of it there is about to be a big step back from further integration, at least amongst the Euro club, once the 'people' realise that the plan is to give their accounts over to the Bundesbank.

That is the trend and it will eventually culminate in a one world government.

And yet it is a faltering project?

People are getting fed up with the corruption of so many and will opt for the corrupted few. L

They appear to be voting for their own corrupted and not the corrupted of other nations? As the right-wing nationalist is back in force in many European countries and getting louder. In the rest of the world 'people' can essentially go fuck themselves as they have no say or power, it's why the fundies are getting a hearing.

[Arising_uk]

Who knows if we might find a non-corrupted leader.

Apparently this is what the Caliph is meant to be.

We have 0 representation now so going to 0 is to be exactly the same.

Not sure where you live but here in the UK why have some representation. The main problem appears to be that people can't be bothered to vote.

I see it as having just one set of corrupt politicians than the what, 300 set of corrupt politicians we now have.

Again, not sure where you live but I think this a very bad message to promote, by-and-large our MP's are not corrupt.

So again, what do you have against a world government?

Nothing apart from the fact that you are giving no idea what it is supposed to be?

[Obvious Leo]

by-and-large our MP's are not corrupt.

I'm in no doubt that this is the case in Australia also. More than likely there will be one or two crooks amongst them but I'm willing to accept that the majority of people in this country who go into politics do so with the intention of trying to make the world a better place. Whether I agree with their proposed way of going about it is neither here nor there because that's what democracy is all about.

The main problem appears to be that people can't be bothered to vote.

This is a problem which we don't have. Many people erroneously assume that voting is compulsory in Australia but this is not the case. Engaging with the electoral process is a compulsory adjunct to the social contract but all this means is that it is compulsory for all citizens over 18 to register to vote and then to present themselves at a polling booth on election day and submit a ballot paper. They don't have to mark this ballot paper in any way, they can deliberately mark it incorrectly, they can write obscene messages on it if they want to and all such ballots are then regarded as informal "none of the above" votes. I reckon this is a bloody good system because it basically makes everybody at least give some thought to the way we govern ourselves. What's more I reckon people who don't even bother to vote are then being fucking hypocrites if they dare to pass judgement on political matters.

[Arising_uk]

I've been all for the NOTA vote with compulsory voting for this country. One because I'm sick of the generation who say 'It's just too difficult or I'm too busy to vote', there's a polling station pretty much within 500 yds of your fucking house you lazy prat!! And two, I want to hear and see the politicians explain why they came second to the NOTA vote but should still be in charge.