> The topic for today is one world government. The main group of people who claim to think this is a swell idea are intellectuals. That’s how you know intellectuals are not that intelligent.
They focus on one topic and study and intellectualize and can make it sound good on paper to other like minded people but the can’t see the forest for the trees. They are missing common sense and lack critical and objective thinking skills. Their intellect is a fabricated illusion.
The U.N. General Assembly voting record should convince anyone of that.
Unless you don't mind being under a totalitarian dictatorship and no freedom to speak of.
This is the goal of COMMON CORE. Making the US a third world nation. Dumbed down, easily controlled populace.
Yep. Separation of powers was, possibly, the greatest of the ideas of our nation’s founders. Unfortunately, many do not appreciate how important this is.
Libertarians, counter-intuitively, might be in favor of it. After all, wouldn't they want a free flow of goods and people regardless of artificial borders? Wouldn't they want corporations to work under the same taxes, laws, and regulations regardless of where their plants were located?
Neoconservatives might also like a one world government. They tend to be the nerdy math types that would be just the sort of people to run the global welfare system more efficiently and intelligently. And don't they want, nay demand, that everyone live under a democracy?
And what about Christians? Don't Christians believe that pretty much everyone should obey the same laws?
What conservatives/neocons/libertarians/Christians are against is the one world government that would be created if it were created now or in the near future. A one world government that would be a very left-leaning welfare state.
But I think that all ideologues (which excludes traditional conservatives) if they were forced to follow their beliefs to their logical conclusions would want to have a one world government ... so long as it all was governed the way they would have it run.
The Founders knew this. Since then the track record of statist approaches to government has proven them correct with respect to the declining level of individual liberty. The idea is discredited; unfortunately it's only discredited in the eyes of the population that last tried it. The rest turn out to be gullible as ever only one generation hence.
There is, at the other end of the continuum, the idea that freedom is maximized where there is no government to speak of at all - anarchist theory is at least as well-developed as statist theory and just as persuasive. It tends to have an equally sorry record of performance in practice, however.
Hamilton made the point for central government: yes, there are concomitant dangers, but nations that do not have them tend to be dominated and exploited by nations that do. That's as far as practice takes us: there is no answer other than managing a dynamic between these two poles. There does come a time when it is less manageable and swings roughly to one pole or the other: the chaos of the French revolution giving way to a Napoleonic authoritarian state, for example. The trick's in the managing. We're not as good at it as we used to be, IMHO.
Power corrupts. Absolute Power corrupts absolutely.
Government, ALL government, is Evil... but it is a necessary Evil (no shortage of evidence on how terrifying life is without it).
So, as our Forefathers taught us through the Federalist Papers, a strong Constitution that limits the power, and thus the corruption and its potential for large-scale horrors, is at least minimized. Anything else is folly.
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer. [The New World Order] cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it’s perceptions. “
Henry Kissinger
Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel,
April 19th 1994.
“This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept.”__Zbigniew Brzezinski
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller, p. 405
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.” — David Rockefeller - New World Order globalist
“Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a New World Order – can emerge. . . Now, we can see a New World Order coming into view. A world in which there is a very real prospect for a New World Order. . .A world where the United Nations, freed from a Cold War stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders.” — George H. W. Bush told the U.N. on September 11th 1990
Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched.” — George H.W. Bush to reporter Sarah McClendon in 1992
“We shall have one world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent.” — CFR member James Warburg before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee February 17, 1950