Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Back & Forth

Expand Messages
  • John Frazer
    ... Look at the record. Isolated nationalistic governments haven t done very well so far -in fact, they lead us again & again into wars which benefit only the
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      From Greg:
      >>Perhaps that is why your ONLY argument is sarcasm and sneer - no FACTS and
      >>less pragmatism.
      >>Get real - independent sovereign nations with the maximum of democracy
      >>possible as close to the peoples as possible are the check and the balance
      >>against global tyrany and corporatist destruction.

      Look at the record. Isolated nationalistic governments haven't done very
      well so far -in fact, they lead us again & again into wars which benefit
      only the rich.
      The separate, "ultimately sovereign" powers of Nation-States is the problem
      today, because there's nothing to prevent these nations & multinational
      corporates from doing exactly as they please.

      >>One World Government and the NWO are the dreams of an idealistic child or
      >>a megalomaniac. Either camp means disaster for the common man, for mankind
      >>and for peace, rights and freedom.

      Opinion, hyperbole & sarcasm.
      I maintain that a logical viewpoint is that nationalistic sovereignty is the
      threat, because there's no higher power to prevent nationalistic
      megalomaniacs from abusing that power.

      From: James
      >The idea that a system of independent sovereign states, with no
      >international law or body to control them, can exist without the threat of
      >nuclear war... is very naive and idealistic to say the least.
      >It's far more pragmatic to try and end the soveriegnty of the nation -state
      >and return it to the people -all of the people, not just rich white males
      >who control empires.

      Ending the sovereignty of the nation as a system of government can't work.
      Anarchy cannot stay free & open because the rich get too much power, and so
      things are run by them, for them, and the people have nothing but wars &
      poverty.
      Federalism is and should be intended as a system of laws to protect the
      freedoms of the people, and to control the wills of the rich & powerful.
      Without an overstanding system of laws, wars & loss of rights of the people
      must follow because nation-states and international NGOs simply cannot be
      trusted to do what's right.

      >Personally I don't think a centralised world government would work, but one
      >where power was devolved (with the only fuction of the centre being to
      >prevent militarism) would have a greater chance of succeding.

      Fine. Wonderful. All I ever write about. I never propose a single,
      super-powerful government to take over control of every present form of
      government -that always comes from hysterical detractors, who never listen
      to moderation.
      The powers of the world federalist government should be limited to
      protecting rights, and encouraging peaceful behaviour in the international
      arena -where there is no effective control now.
      As for centralised power, and the distance of that power from the people, I
      agree with Greg; levels of government between the people & the highest
      government levels must be limited, and the will of the people should be
      allowed to flow through directly to the highest levels.
      Delegates to the world federal congress (what ever it is called, or how ever
      it works) must be constrained to voting & acting as their constituents wish
      (no 'electoral college').

      >>There is no such thing in life as a plateau. Society is always swinging
      >>from one position or state of growth etc. to another
      >>... In the nightmare scenario of OWG and the NWO the swing will in and of
      >>itself capsise the entire structure, erradicate the swing and excorriate
      >>the competitive nature of mankind and you will have stagnation as a
      >>precursor to disintegration.

      Again, your nightmare scenario, not mine. Again, your use of hyperbole,
      sarcasm & sneer comments.
      Government must be dynamic, and responsive to the will of the people, and
      the people must be informed & active in the direction of the government.
      It's simple hysteria tactics to assert again & again that any type of
      world-wide governmental body must be oppressive.
      It is solely up to the people. If the people vote themselves out of control,
      and take interest only in what papparazi/tabloid media tell them, then we
      are in trouble, no matter what we do. _Especially_ if we leave Nations &
      NGOs to do as they will, unfettered by any considerations for rights &
      freedoms.

      >>To persue the nightmare scenario of OWG & the NWO is to sleep walk into a
      >>nightmare - the downside of permitting meglomaniacs or children's dreams
      >>run any complex structure.
      >
      >... Why do you never say global capitalism? thats what the institutions of
      >the NWO (I have a problem with the term "new" the institutions are over 50
      >years old) are there for. They are not there to promote human rights, peace
      >and a sustainable enviroment.

      As Greg says: sarcasm & sneer. Note that only the detractors of world
      federalism & the UN brand it with the label "NWO" & "OWG". We say things
      like "democratic", "transparent and accountable to the people" and "based on
      protecting rights & freedoms".

      >>If you wish to respond please try very hard to think it through rather
      >>than just use sarcasm and sneer, they are not arguments... I'll just mark
      >>you down as a crank and hit delete!

      You read my mind. I wrote the exact same thing months ago.

      >If a global economic system can be created and forced upon most of the
      >world then a Human rights culture and anti-militarism culture can also be
      >created on a global level, provided it is democratic, multi-cultural and
      >allows diverse soceities to co-exist.
      >We can start by reforming the UN to allow it greater power over governments
      >and multinationals so that a voice can be given to the third world.
      _________________________________________________________________
      Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
    • James
      Agree entirely with your comments John. James ... ===== __________________________________________________ Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail -
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 3, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Agree entirely with your comments John.

        James
        --- John Frazer <johnf4303@...> wrote: >
        From Greg:
        > >>Perhaps that is why your ONLY argument is
        > sarcasm and sneer - no FACTS and
        > >>less pragmatism.
        > >>Get real - independent sovereign nations with
        > the maximum of democracy
        > >>possible as close to the peoples as possible
        > are the check and the balance
        > >>against global tyrany and corporatist
        > destruction.
        >
        > Look at the record. Isolated nationalistic
        > governments haven't done very
        > well so far -in fact, they lead us again &
        > again into wars which benefit
        > only the rich.
        > The separate, "ultimately sovereign" powers of
        > Nation-States is the problem
        > today, because there's nothing to prevent these
        > nations & multinational
        > corporates from doing exactly as they please.
        >
        > >>One World Government and the NWO are the
        > dreams of an idealistic child or
        > >>a megalomaniac. Either camp means disaster
        > for the common man, for mankind
        > >>and for peace, rights and freedom.
        >
        > Opinion, hyperbole & sarcasm.
        > I maintain that a logical viewpoint is that
        > nationalistic sovereignty is the
        > threat, because there's no higher power to
        > prevent nationalistic
        > megalomaniacs from abusing that power.
        >
        > From: James
        > >The idea that a system of independent
        > sovereign states, with no
        > >international law or body to control them, can
        > exist without the threat of
        > >nuclear war... is very naive and idealistic to
        > say the least.
        > >It's far more pragmatic to try and end the
        > soveriegnty of the nation -state
        > >and return it to the people -all of the
        > people, not just rich white males
        > >who control empires.
        >
        > Ending the sovereignty of the nation as a
        > system of government can't work.
        > Anarchy cannot stay free & open because the
        > rich get too much power, and so
        > things are run by them, for them, and the
        > people have nothing but wars &
        > poverty.
        > Federalism is and should be intended as a
        > system of laws to protect the
        > freedoms of the people, and to control the
        > wills of the rich & powerful.
        > Without an overstanding system of laws, wars &
        > loss of rights of the people
        > must follow because nation-states and
        > international NGOs simply cannot be
        > trusted to do what's right.
        >
        > >Personally I don't think a centralised world
        > government would work, but one
        > >where power was devolved (with the only
        > fuction of the centre being to
        > >prevent militarism) would have a greater
        > chance of succeding.
        >
        > Fine. Wonderful. All I ever write about. I
        > never propose a single,
        > super-powerful government to take over control
        > of every present form of
        > government -that always comes from hysterical
        > detractors, who never listen
        > to moderation.
        > The powers of the world federalist government
        > should be limited to
        > protecting rights, and encouraging peaceful
        > behaviour in the international
        > arena -where there is no effective control now.
        > As for centralised power, and the distance of
        > that power from the people, I
        > agree with Greg; levels of government between
        > the people & the highest
        > government levels must be limited, and the will
        > of the people should be
        > allowed to flow through directly to the highest
        > levels.
        > Delegates to the world federal congress (what
        > ever it is called, or how ever
        > it works) must be constrained to voting &
        > acting as their constituents wish
        > (no 'electoral college').
        >
        > >>There is no such thing in life as a plateau.
        > Society is always swinging
        > >>from one position or state of growth etc. to
        > another
        > >>... In the nightmare scenario of OWG and the
        > NWO the swing will in and of
        > >>itself capsise the entire structure,
        > erradicate the swing and excorriate
        > >>the competitive nature of mankind and you
        > will have stagnation as a
        > >>precursor to disintegration.
        >
        > Again, your nightmare scenario, not mine.
        > Again, your use of hyperbole,
        > sarcasm & sneer comments.
        > Government must be dynamic, and responsive to
        > the will of the people, and
        > the people must be informed & active in the
        > direction of the government.
        > It's simple hysteria tactics to assert again &
        > again that any type of
        > world-wide governmental body must be
        > oppressive.
        > It is solely up to the people. If the people
        > vote themselves out of control,
        > and take interest only in what
        > papparazi/tabloid media tell them, then we
        > are in trouble, no matter what we do.
        > _Especially_ if we leave Nations &
        > NGOs to do as they will, unfettered by any
        > considerations for rights &
        > freedoms.
        >
        > >>To persue the nightmare scenario of OWG & the
        > NWO is to sleep walk into a
        > >>nightmare - the downside of permitting
        > meglomaniacs or children's dreams
        > >>run any complex structure.
        > >
        > >... Why do you never say global capitalism?
        > thats what the institutions of
        > >the NWO (I have a problem with the term "new"
        > the institutions are over 50
        > >years old) are there for. They are not there
        > to promote human rights, peace
        > >and a sustainable enviroment.
        >
        > As Greg says: sarcasm & sneer. Note that only
        > the detractors of world
        > federalism & the UN brand it with the label
        > "NWO" & "OWG". We say things
        > like "democratic", "transparent and accountable
        > to the people" and "based on
        > protecting rights & freedoms".
        >
        > >>If you wish to respond please try very hard
        > to think it through rather
        > >>than just use sarcasm and sneer, they are not
        > arguments... I'll just mark
        > >>you down as a crank and hit delete!
        >
        > You read my mind. I wrote the exact same thing
        > months ago.
        >
        > >If a global economic system can be created and
        > forced upon most of the
        > >world then a Human rights culture and
        > anti-militarism culture can also be
        > >created on a global level, provided it is
        > democratic, multi-cultural and
        > >allows diverse soceities to co-exist.
        > >We can start by reforming the UN to allow it
        > greater power over governments
        > >and multinationals so that a voice can be
        > given to the third world.
        >
        _________________________________________________________________
        > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
        > http://explorer.msn.com
        >
        >
        >


        =====


        __________________________________________________
        Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
        a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
      • Earthrise Press
        John Frazer wrote: Look at the record. Isolated nationalistic governments haven t done very well so far -in fact, they lead us again & again into wars which
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 8, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          John Frazer wrote:
          Look at the record. Isolated nationalistic governments
          haven't done very well so far -in fact, they lead us
          again & again into wars which benefit only the rich.
          The separate, "ultimately sovereign" powers of
          Nation-States is the problem today, because there's
          nothing to prevent these nations & multinational
          corporates from doing exactly as they please.
          --
           
          I couldn't agree more with you. Your emphasis on
          federalism makes sense to me too and always has. Alas,
          it's slow and evolutionary but seems to be the nature
          of things and the best we can hope for in this world.
           
          While it would be easy to overemphasize recent
          payments to the UN, serious efforts are still being
          made on many fronts to develop a standing international
          rapid reaction force and decent legal system. It's been
          a long, hard ride from the League of Nations but at
          least some progess has been made.
           
          I expressed some similar ideas in a TV interview
          last August, if anyone's interested in taking a look:
           
          Alas, odds are it's going to be another rough
          century.... Hold on to your hats....
           
          Best,
           
          Frederick Glaysher
          Earthrise Press
          EarthrisePress@...
          www.fglaysher.com  
           
           
           

           
           
           
        • Roan Carratu
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 12, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            <<I couldn't agree more with you. Your emphasis on
            federalism makes sense to me too and always has. Alas,
            it's slow and evolutionary but seems to be the nature
            of things and the best we can hope for in this world.>>
             
            You are assuming that unlike technological development, where new methods of doing things and accomplishing tasks are continuously evolving, that human social structure is fixed and unquestionably unchanging. You are saying that 'the best we can hope for' is some version of government as we know it, either on a larger centralized size or in smaller less centralized sizes.
             
            This leaves no room for a better, saner, world. Anyone can look at history and realize that 'governments' are in fact only large gangs of conquerors, who take what they want with force while hiding behind words and 'systems' which declare their slaves to be free and their whims to be 'Law above all'... Pure and complete propaganda.
             
            The division of the world into gang turfs and the use of money systems to control every aspect of people's lives are not the end all and be all of human interaction. We can do everything differently if we choose to on a large enough scale. As long as you accept without question that all the existing ways of doing things are fixed and immutable, then the two sentences before this one will make no sense to you at all.
             
            Not a single person or message on here seems to think outside the propaganda everyone is taught by this blighted and destructive global culture. There is more to the world, more to Humanity, more to Nature, than anyone here is allowing themselves to perceive.
             
            World Citizen elist?  Nothing here indicates such a title is warranted.
             
            Peace,
            -Roan Carratu
             
            "Since the advent of the Nuclear Age, everything has changed but the way people think, and thus we drift towards unparalleled catastrophe!" -Albert Einstein
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.