rhino 0 #1 August 21, 2002 o.k. Shall we continue.. Rhino >Bill, how do you see a worldwide government coming about. I > assume you would want a democracy. No, a republic, which is what we have (in general.) Elected representatives from each country. >Which type of government would be chosen? The Chinese have the >largest population, would that mean they have the largest vote? Dunno. Our system of two houses seems to work pretty well. In one house it's one vote per country, the other is based on population. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #2 August 21, 2002 I think BillVon is campaigning to be king of the world! _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #3 August 21, 2002 I'm voting for bill... As long as we see free skydiving, lots of boobies and free beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #4 August 21, 2002 Bad In most countries of the world, the way I live my life, I would be branded a criminal. In the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal. I don't see us all getting along that well. So, if there were a world government I'll be it's first "rebel" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Muenkel 0 #5 August 21, 2002 QuoteIn the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal When you say ALMOST, you're referring to the beastiality aren't you? _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #6 August 21, 2002 Question here: The UN is a representative form of "world government", right? How many UN representatives utilize the "vote" option in the UN, but come from another kind of government which does not utilize the vote/representational form of government in their own country? Ciels and Pinks- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bivar 0 #7 August 21, 2002 I vote for me as world dictator. Free skydiving for everyone. BI---------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhino 0 #8 August 21, 2002 Damn good question... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Scoby 0 #9 August 21, 2002 I think world government is going to come about in a creeping, incremental sense and not a revolution. Basically, the world government is going to happen in a way similar to the way that the countries of Europe became the European Community, then became the European Union, and will inevitably became the United States of Europe, in fact if not in name. If you told someone 50 years ago that in 2002, Germany and France would have the same currency, he would probably ask, "Who conquered who?" What is likely is that the supra-national bodies such as the WTO and World Bank will continue to gain power as the global community becomes more interweaved. Ultimately, world government is the best possible chance we have for a better future. It won't be a utopia, and it will create plenty of new problems, but it is the logical conclusion of political history and a laudable goal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,077 #10 August 21, 2002 >The UN is a representative form of "world government", right? How > many UN representatives utilize the "vote" option in the UN, but > come from another kind of government which does not utilize the > vote/representational form of government in their own country? Quite a few. However, even here in the US we have a pretty wide variation on how things are handled state-to-state. California has ballot initiatives where anyone can collect signatures for a bill, get it put on the ballot, and voted on directly - and that's about as democratic as you can get. Other states do not have such a provision in their election laws. For any world government to work, it has to be pretty permissive of its individual members provided no serious human rights violations are going on. Heck, we would need such tolerance ourselves - clearly we did not elect the presidential candidate that got the most votes in our last election, due to how our process (electoral college) works (or, in some cases, malfunctions.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,077 #11 August 21, 2002 >In most countries of the world, the way I live my life, I would be > branded a criminal. In the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal. I would argue that nothing would change under a world government. Right now the UN has some pretty lax laws (i.e. no genocide) but no laws that say "you can't do drugs." That's left up to the countries themselves. Even in the US, laws vary. A woman can't legally be a prostitute in California, but can in Nevada. Can't use marijuana for any reason in NY, but can under some circumstances in CA. When I was growing up I was legal to drink in my home state, but not the state I went to college in. The federal government does not impose such laws externally; no reason a world government would either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #12 August 21, 2002 Quoteit has to be pretty permissive of its individual members provided no serious human rights violations are going on. That there is the problem and relates to what you said the other day about the US not backing the UN. The UN is anti-death penalty. It's in favor of an international tribunal for war crimes, it's in favor of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The US legislature opposes those views. One of these days we're going to have to realize that even though we were major contributors to the start of globalization and freedom for the common man, we have to make concessions to the beliefs of others who make up the majority if we want to be a member of that community. Otherwise it will eventually be the United Nations of the World vs. The United States of America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #13 August 21, 2002 Quoteno reason a world government would either. Uuummm...drug laws aren't what I was worried about. We have those already. What about UN "Arms Embargos" I'm kind of attached to my arsenal. I WON'T part with it. QuoteEven in the US, laws vary Exactly why I have resisted my sister's repeated urgings to move to California. PS...Bill, in some post earlier you said something about a government to keep people in "awe." Uuummm..the government should fear the people.....not the other way around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,077 #14 August 21, 2002 >Uuummm...drug laws aren't what I was worried about. We have those > already. What about UN "Arms Embargos" I'm kind of attached to > my arsenal. I WON'T part with it. You have far more to fear from the US government than from the UN when it comes to parting with your arsenal. If the US did outlaw private ownership of handguns, would you consider moving to a different country to keep them? >PS...Bill, in some post earlier you said something about a > government to keep people in "awe." Uuummm..the government > should fear the people.....not the other way around. Oh, I agree. I didn't say that, I was quoting Hobbes, who lived in such a different world than us (16th century) that even the words don't translate exactly any more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #15 August 21, 2002 QuoteIf the US did outlaw private ownership of handguns, would you consider moving to a different country to keep them? I'll just say....When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. QuoteOh, I agree OK...cool...you were starting to scare me there.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #16 August 21, 2002 When speed limits are implemented, only outlaws will speed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites goose491 0 #17 August 21, 2002 QuoteOtherwise it will eventually be the United Nations of the World vs. The United States of America. Acctually, this is inevitable... the history of mankind has seen many different world dominating powers... At one point, the Egyptians were the powers that be and were in controll of the entire known world! The Romans took their turn rulling over what was the discovered planet too! The British could definately say that at one point, there was no one more powerful than them. What about Babylon? (spelling?)... Hey, let's not forget that at one time, the world was ruled by large reptiles... The United States of America!!! an all mighty franchise, has stepped up to the plate and has done a great job of being "Big Brother" to the world but the not-so-sad fact is that the ball can only reamain in their court for so long... The other fact of the matter is that the world is getting smaller. As populations increase and communication couldn't be easier between different nations, the only way to move forward as a species is to drop all concepts of false lines and elect a world governing body. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #18 August 21, 2002 Quotedrop all concepts of false lines and elect a world governing body. Then we can have a newer and better version of "Canadian Health Care" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites fasterfaller 0 #19 August 21, 2002 *** You have far more to fear from the US government than from the UN when it comes to parting with your arsenal.Quote Total bullshit statement , sorry Bill . How many guns do you own Bill ? A one world government is a really bad idea . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,077 #20 August 21, 2002 >Total bullshit statement . Read the newspapers; there's another mothers-against-handguns group forming every week. And unlike some people on this board they vote. >How many guns do you own Bill? None! > A one world government is a really bad idea . I don't think so, and I think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #21 August 21, 2002 QuoteI think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Uuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Scoby 0 #22 August 21, 2002 QuoteUuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? In theory, a world government would not have any external enemies, so we can scratch the Gulf War and GW2 off the list. There would still be terrorism, so a 911 scenario could still happen. I'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. Also, in a one world situation, there would presumably be tighter controls on weapons of mass destruction. What we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites goose491 0 #23 August 21, 2002 Quote A one world government is a really bad idea . Why exactly is that? After all, there is only one world. "United" is the way to go! "United Nations"? sounds like "United States" but the States are all much BIGGER! My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nws01 0 #24 August 21, 2002 QuoteWhat we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. You want a little visit from ChromeBoy? He is really a nice guy. He will not invade. Maybe irratate a little but no invading. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #25 August 21, 2002 QuoteI'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. I'm really not. I think that there would always be enough jealousy/paranoia in the world to start wars. Then..you would have plenty of accusations of favoritism, bribery, whatever. What happens when one state gets jealous or paranoid of the other. Hmmm...sound kinda like how the Gulf War started? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
freeflir29 0 #4 August 21, 2002 Bad In most countries of the world, the way I live my life, I would be branded a criminal. In the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal. I don't see us all getting along that well. So, if there were a world government I'll be it's first "rebel" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #5 August 21, 2002 QuoteIn the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal When you say ALMOST, you're referring to the beastiality aren't you? _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #6 August 21, 2002 Question here: The UN is a representative form of "world government", right? How many UN representatives utilize the "vote" option in the UN, but come from another kind of government which does not utilize the vote/representational form of government in their own country? Ciels and Pinks- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bivar 0 #7 August 21, 2002 I vote for me as world dictator. Free skydiving for everyone. BI---------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #8 August 21, 2002 Damn good question... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoby 0 #9 August 21, 2002 I think world government is going to come about in a creeping, incremental sense and not a revolution. Basically, the world government is going to happen in a way similar to the way that the countries of Europe became the European Community, then became the European Union, and will inevitably became the United States of Europe, in fact if not in name. If you told someone 50 years ago that in 2002, Germany and France would have the same currency, he would probably ask, "Who conquered who?" What is likely is that the supra-national bodies such as the WTO and World Bank will continue to gain power as the global community becomes more interweaved. Ultimately, world government is the best possible chance we have for a better future. It won't be a utopia, and it will create plenty of new problems, but it is the logical conclusion of political history and a laudable goal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,077 #10 August 21, 2002 >The UN is a representative form of "world government", right? How > many UN representatives utilize the "vote" option in the UN, but > come from another kind of government which does not utilize the > vote/representational form of government in their own country? Quite a few. However, even here in the US we have a pretty wide variation on how things are handled state-to-state. California has ballot initiatives where anyone can collect signatures for a bill, get it put on the ballot, and voted on directly - and that's about as democratic as you can get. Other states do not have such a provision in their election laws. For any world government to work, it has to be pretty permissive of its individual members provided no serious human rights violations are going on. Heck, we would need such tolerance ourselves - clearly we did not elect the presidential candidate that got the most votes in our last election, due to how our process (electoral college) works (or, in some cases, malfunctions.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,077 #11 August 21, 2002 >In most countries of the world, the way I live my life, I would be > branded a criminal. In the US, ALMOST everything I do is legal. I would argue that nothing would change under a world government. Right now the UN has some pretty lax laws (i.e. no genocide) but no laws that say "you can't do drugs." That's left up to the countries themselves. Even in the US, laws vary. A woman can't legally be a prostitute in California, but can in Nevada. Can't use marijuana for any reason in NY, but can under some circumstances in CA. When I was growing up I was legal to drink in my home state, but not the state I went to college in. The federal government does not impose such laws externally; no reason a world government would either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #12 August 21, 2002 Quoteit has to be pretty permissive of its individual members provided no serious human rights violations are going on. That there is the problem and relates to what you said the other day about the US not backing the UN. The UN is anti-death penalty. It's in favor of an international tribunal for war crimes, it's in favor of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The US legislature opposes those views. One of these days we're going to have to realize that even though we were major contributors to the start of globalization and freedom for the common man, we have to make concessions to the beliefs of others who make up the majority if we want to be a member of that community. Otherwise it will eventually be the United Nations of the World vs. The United States of America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #13 August 21, 2002 Quoteno reason a world government would either. Uuummm...drug laws aren't what I was worried about. We have those already. What about UN "Arms Embargos" I'm kind of attached to my arsenal. I WON'T part with it. QuoteEven in the US, laws vary Exactly why I have resisted my sister's repeated urgings to move to California. PS...Bill, in some post earlier you said something about a government to keep people in "awe." Uuummm..the government should fear the people.....not the other way around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,077 #14 August 21, 2002 >Uuummm...drug laws aren't what I was worried about. We have those > already. What about UN "Arms Embargos" I'm kind of attached to > my arsenal. I WON'T part with it. You have far more to fear from the US government than from the UN when it comes to parting with your arsenal. If the US did outlaw private ownership of handguns, would you consider moving to a different country to keep them? >PS...Bill, in some post earlier you said something about a > government to keep people in "awe." Uuummm..the government > should fear the people.....not the other way around. Oh, I agree. I didn't say that, I was quoting Hobbes, who lived in such a different world than us (16th century) that even the words don't translate exactly any more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #15 August 21, 2002 QuoteIf the US did outlaw private ownership of handguns, would you consider moving to a different country to keep them? I'll just say....When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. QuoteOh, I agree OK...cool...you were starting to scare me there.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #16 August 21, 2002 When speed limits are implemented, only outlaws will speed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #17 August 21, 2002 QuoteOtherwise it will eventually be the United Nations of the World vs. The United States of America. Acctually, this is inevitable... the history of mankind has seen many different world dominating powers... At one point, the Egyptians were the powers that be and were in controll of the entire known world! The Romans took their turn rulling over what was the discovered planet too! The British could definately say that at one point, there was no one more powerful than them. What about Babylon? (spelling?)... Hey, let's not forget that at one time, the world was ruled by large reptiles... The United States of America!!! an all mighty franchise, has stepped up to the plate and has done a great job of being "Big Brother" to the world but the not-so-sad fact is that the ball can only reamain in their court for so long... The other fact of the matter is that the world is getting smaller. As populations increase and communication couldn't be easier between different nations, the only way to move forward as a species is to drop all concepts of false lines and elect a world governing body. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #18 August 21, 2002 Quotedrop all concepts of false lines and elect a world governing body. Then we can have a newer and better version of "Canadian Health Care" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #19 August 21, 2002 *** You have far more to fear from the US government than from the UN when it comes to parting with your arsenal.Quote Total bullshit statement , sorry Bill . How many guns do you own Bill ? A one world government is a really bad idea . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,077 #20 August 21, 2002 >Total bullshit statement . Read the newspapers; there's another mothers-against-handguns group forming every week. And unlike some people on this board they vote. >How many guns do you own Bill? None! > A one world government is a really bad idea . I don't think so, and I think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #21 August 21, 2002 QuoteI think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Uuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Scoby 0 #22 August 21, 2002 QuoteUuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? In theory, a world government would not have any external enemies, so we can scratch the Gulf War and GW2 off the list. There would still be terrorism, so a 911 scenario could still happen. I'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. Also, in a one world situation, there would presumably be tighter controls on weapons of mass destruction. What we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites goose491 0 #23 August 21, 2002 Quote A one world government is a really bad idea . Why exactly is that? After all, there is only one world. "United" is the way to go! "United Nations"? sounds like "United States" but the States are all much BIGGER! My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nws01 0 #24 August 21, 2002 QuoteWhat we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. You want a little visit from ChromeBoy? He is really a nice guy. He will not invade. Maybe irratate a little but no invading. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #25 August 21, 2002 QuoteI'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. I'm really not. I think that there would always be enough jealousy/paranoia in the world to start wars. Then..you would have plenty of accusations of favoritism, bribery, whatever. What happens when one state gets jealous or paranoid of the other. Hmmm...sound kinda like how the Gulf War started? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 3,077 #20 August 21, 2002 >Total bullshit statement . Read the newspapers; there's another mothers-against-handguns group forming every week. And unlike some people on this board they vote. >How many guns do you own Bill? None! > A one world government is a really bad idea . I don't think so, and I think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #21 August 21, 2002 QuoteI think it is preferable to things like 9/11, the Gulf War and our upcoming War with Iraq. Uuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoby 0 #22 August 21, 2002 QuoteUuummm....please explain how a WG would change any of that? In theory, a world government would not have any external enemies, so we can scratch the Gulf War and GW2 off the list. There would still be terrorism, so a 911 scenario could still happen. I'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. Also, in a one world situation, there would presumably be tighter controls on weapons of mass destruction. What we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #23 August 21, 2002 Quote A one world government is a really bad idea . Why exactly is that? After all, there is only one world. "United" is the way to go! "United Nations"? sounds like "United States" but the States are all much BIGGER! My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nws01 0 #24 August 21, 2002 QuoteWhat we really need is an alien invasion to unite us. You want a little visit from ChromeBoy? He is really a nice guy. He will not invade. Maybe irratate a little but no invading. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #25 August 21, 2002 QuoteI'm inclined to believe it would be less likely, however. I'm really not. I think that there would always be enough jealousy/paranoia in the world to start wars. Then..you would have plenty of accusations of favoritism, bribery, whatever. What happens when one state gets jealous or paranoid of the other. Hmmm...sound kinda like how the Gulf War started? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
