Greens support the concept of a One World Democratic Government.

Conservatives appear to have fears of this, yet do not say why.

Cat got your tongue?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1326734481;virboard=;quote=14;title=PostReply

It's not about fear, it's about the impracticality of it. How do you try and please 6 billion people who make up hundreds of different cultures?
The words "democratic government" get thrown around like it's the solution to all problems.
If a democratic one world government truly came to power then China and India will be dictating to the rest of the world because of their sheer numbers.
How can a rice paddy worker in outback China know the needs of a office worker in Melbourne, or a factory worker in Mexico?
Impractical.

____ wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 6:47am:

Greens support the concept of a One World Democratic Government. Conservatives appear to have fears of this, yet do not say why. Cat got your tongue? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1326734481;virboard=;quote=14;title=PostReply

On the one hand they bleat about 'diversity' being the greatest strength, and on the other, they want to eliminate diversity through one world government.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 10:03am:

It's not about fear, it's about the impracticality of it. How do you try and please 6 billion people who make up hundreds of different cultures? The words "democratic government" get thrown around like it's the solution to all problems. If a democratic one world government truly came to power then China and India will be dictating to the rest of the world because of their sheer numbers. How can a rice paddy worker in outback China know the needs of a office worker in Melbourne, or a factory worker in Mexico? Impractical.

Like a person from Australia's most populated state and a person in the Northern Territory, there are mechanisms to balance power more fairly. i.e a Senate.

As for how will different people relate ... it is already happening via the democracy of the internet.

Consider the situation now with the UN, the UK of around 62 million can dictate to the 7 billion via it's veto right. What makes Brits, French, Russians , Yanks or Chinese more powerful than any other nation. Nothing, so Veto Rights should belong to no nationality in this future One World Government. 

____ wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 10:35am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 17th, 2012 at 10:03am: It's not about fear, it's about the impracticality of it. How do you try and please 6 billion people who make up hundreds of different cultures? The words "democratic government" get thrown around like it's the solution to all problems. If a democratic one world government truly came to power then China and India will be dictating to the rest of the world because of their sheer numbers. How can a rice paddy worker in outback China know the needs of a office worker in Melbourne, or a factory worker in Mexico? Impractical. Like a person from Australia's most populated state and a person in the Northern Territory, there are mechanisms to balance power more fairly. i.e a Senate. As for how will different people relate ... it is already happening via the democracy of the internet. Consider the situation now with the UN, the UK of around 62 million can dictate to the 7 billion via it's veto right. What makes Brits, French, Russians , Yanks or Chinese more powerful than any other nation. Nothing, so Veto Rights should belong to no nationality in this future One World Government.

But how does the voting in of delegates and this Senate work??...is it 1 person one vote, or 1 country one vote??

You tell me ... it's at discussion stage.

____ wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 11:10am:

You tell me ... it's at discussion stage.

Then stop promoting it, until they've picked a model to use....Simple...

Quote:

Greens win wrote Like a person from Australia's most populated state and a person in the Northern Territory, there are mechanisms to balance power more fairly. i.e a Senate.

Sounds undemocratic.


Quote:

As for how will different people relate ... it is already happening via the democracy of the internet.

Yeah, Western conservatives and Muslims get along so well, as do the Liberals and Greens, as do Christians and Muslims, as do feminists and conservatives, as do North Korea and USA, as do Iran and Israel.

How is a one world government going to solve these problems?



Quote:

greens win wrote Consider the situation now with the UN, the UK of around 62 million can dictate to the 7 billion via it's veto right. What makes Brits, French, Russians , Yanks or Chinese more powerful than any other nation. Nothing, so Veto Rights should belong to no nationality in this future One World Government.

It was set up by the mentioned nations, but mainly by the USA, so it's no surprise that it's run by them. It is also mostly funded by the USA. Maybe the other 190 odd countries would like to add as much as the USA? Narh. Let's make the USA pay for most of it then have all the tiny nations that pay little dictate to the USA what it ought to do.
Plus, Britain, France, and the USA are morally, culturally, technically, and monetarily superior to all other nations (perhaps except their fellow Western countries). Before you start blowing a gasket about this fact consider why is it millions of people migrate to these countries and not to non-Western countries?

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 11:27am:

____ wrote on Jan 17th, 2012 at 11:10am: You tell me ... it's at discussion stage. Then stop promoting it, until they've picked a model to use....Simple...

Like the old parties when into Afghanistan without an exit strategy ... and still don't have one?


A one world democratic government requires the input of many, so to represent as wide a range of interests when it is formed. We are no longer in the dictator era and so must learn to negotiate like adults.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 11:28am:

Quote: Greens win wrote Like a person from Australia's most populated state and a person in the Northern Territory, there are mechanisms to balance power more fairly. i.e a Senate. Sounds undemocratic. Then get your hearing tested [quote]As for how will different people relate ... it is already happening via the democracy of the internet.

Yeah, Western conservatives and Muslims get along so well, as do the Liberals and Greens, as do Christians and Muslims, as do feminists and conservatives, as do North Korea and USA, as do Iran and Israel.

How is a one world government going to solve these problems?


As this website shows, the internet has the ability to bring people of different thinking together and expose each other to the thoughts of each person.

It is possible for humans to evolve ... it is possible for humans to govern ourselves in a mature and non violent way.


Quote:

greens win wrote Consider the situation now with the UN, the UK of around 62 million can dictate to the 7 billion via it's veto right. What makes Brits, French, Russians , Yanks or Chinese more powerful than any other nation. Nothing, so Veto Rights should belong to no nationality in this future One World Government.

It was set up by the mentioned nations, but mainly by the USA, so it's no surprise that it's run by them. It is also mostly funded by the USA. Maybe the other 190 odd countries would like to add as much as the USA? Narh. Let's make the USA pay for most of it then have all the tiny nations that pay little dictate to the USA what it ought to do.
Plus, Britain, France, and the USA are morally, culturally, technically, and monetarily superior to all other nations (perhaps except their fellow Western countries). Before you start blowing a gasket about this fact consider why is it millions of people migrate to these countries and not to non-Western countries?


Money does not dictate power. Also the US owes the UN over one and a quarter billion (2005 figures)
USA/France's economies are basket cases, UK's not far behind ...
Superior ... to whom, Fiji?

As for refugee flow ... Malaysia, Indonesia etc have huge refugee populations.

[/quote]

Quote:

It is possible for humans to evolve ... it is possible for humans to govern ourselves in a mature and non violent way.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA.  You idiot.  Evolution is a gradual process, imperceptible in a single lifetime...and it just got stupider from there.

http://www.holytaco.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/simpsons_nelson_haha2.gif

Incorrect, evolution is not at a constant speed.

i.e Look at the fast speed of technical advances in the last decade.

Let me guess - YOU are one of the 'highly evolved' ones?

____ wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 4:41pm:

Incorrect, evolution is not at a constant speed. i.e Look at the fast speed of technical advances in the last decade.

Technology is NOT the same as biological evolution...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 5:59pm:

____ wrote on Jan 17th, 2012 at 4:41pm: Incorrect, evolution is not at a constant speed. i.e Look at the fast speed of technical advances in the last decade. Technology is NOT the same as biological evolution...

You are the only one limiting evolution to biology.


Humanity is evolving and Greens are the tool for political evolution on a local and global scale.

... wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 5:33pm:

Let me guess - YOU are one of the 'highly evolved' ones?

Thank You ... nice to know you rate me so highly.

one kingdom the animal kingdom and those who doubt it go under.

____ wrote on Jan 17^th, 2012 at 4:16pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 17th, 2012 at 11:28am: Quote: Greens win wrote Like a person from Australia's most populated state and a person in the Northern Territory, there are mechanisms to balance power more fairly. i.e a Senate. Sounds undemocratic. Then get your hearing tested [quote]As for how will different people relate ... it is already happening via the democracy of the internet. Yeah, Western conservatives and Muslims get along so well, as do the Liberals and Greens, as do Christians and Muslims, as do feminists and conservatives, as do North Korea and USA, as do Iran and Israel. How is a one world government going to solve these problems? As this website shows, the internet has the ability to bring people of different thinking together and expose each other to the thoughts of each person. It is possible for humans to evolve ... it is possible for humans to govern ourselves in a mature and non violent way. [quote]greens win wrote Consider the situation now with the UN, the UK of around 62 million can dictate to the 7 billion via it's veto right. What makes Brits, French, Russians , Yanks or Chinese more powerful than any other nation. Nothing, so Veto Rights should belong to no nationality in this future One World Government.

It was set up by the mentioned nations, but mainly by the USA, so it's no surprise that it's run by them. It is also mostly funded by the USA. Maybe the other 190 odd countries would like to add as much as the USA? Narh. Let's make the USA pay for most of it then have all the tiny nations that pay little dictate to the USA what it ought to do.
Plus, Britain, France, and the USA are morally, culturally, technically, and monetarily superior to all other nations (perhaps except their fellow Western countries). Before you start blowing a gasket about this fact consider why is it millions of people migrate to these countries and not to non-Western countries?


Money does not dictate power. Also the US owes the UN over one and a quarter billion (2005 figures)
USA/France's economies are basket cases, UK's not far behind ...
Superior ... to whom, Fiji?

As for refugee flow ... Malaysia, Indonesia etc have huge refugee populations.

[/quote]
[/quote]


So because people speak over the internet world peace will be somehow possible? Have you noticed that there's as much conflict online as there is peaceful dialogue? Still, you're ignoring biological and cultural factors that destine man for conflict. Man strives after ideals, after power, after influence, this itself makes life ripe for conflict. Even you yourself are after power and command over others with your "one world government" by attempting to subdue hundreds of dissenting voices. Perhaps you don't see the irony in that.

To claim the moral equivalence of Fiji to France, USA, and Britain is preposterous. What high culture has Fiji exported to the world, what technology, what aid money?

On a side note, what made you turn against your own people and side with other cultures?

A one world government would give voices to groups unable to influence now. No minority group dictating via veto right, no group able to manipulate via economic blackmail. A one worlds government is a major tool to protect against homogenisation of humanity. A tool to lift all humans up.

As for conflict online, I suggest you look further than play politics sites. It is very easy to speak with people all over the word where language and cultural barriers don't exist.

Turning against my culture ?


My culture is human ... and I haven't turned against it.

Quote:

greens win wrote No minority group dictating via veto right

Then this goes back to a problem I highlighted earlier. A truly democratic "one world government" would see China and India dictating to all other nations (democracy is about numbers remember). Any tinkering with the system via senate numbers then becomes minority groups dictating to the majority.


Quote:

greens win wrote As for conflict online, I suggest you look further than play politics sites. It is very easy to speak with people all over the word where language and cultural barriers don't exist

You still haven't dealt with the problem of the inevitable clash between groups with different ideals.
Tell me your solution to the Israeli/Palestinian problem.


Quote:

greens win wrote Turning against my culture ? My culture is human ... and I haven't turned against it.

Except if they come from France, Britain or the USA, right?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 18^th, 2012 at 2:54pm:

Quote: greens win wrote No minority group dictating via veto right Then this goes back to a problem I highlighted earlier. A truly democratic "one world government" would see China and India dictating to all other nations (democracy is about numbers remember). Any tinkering with the system via senate numbers then becomes minority groups dictating to the majority. India is the largest democracy in the world ... and I believe China will be a democracy in the near future. I am happy for a robust world democracy where parties like the Greens will flourish and influence global decisions. [quote]greens win wrote As for conflict online, I suggest you look further than play politics sites. It is very easy to speak with people all over the word where language and cultural barriers don't exist

You still haven't dealt with the problem of the inevitable clash between groups with different ideals.
Tell me your solution to the Israeli/Palestinian problem.

To get them back to the negotiation table on level footing


Quote:

greens win wrote Turning against my culture ? My culture is human ... and I haven't turned against it.

Except if they come from France, Britain or the USA, right?

I am against veto rights ... not the countries that have them. Against veto rights because it is extremely undemocratic



[/quote]

Quote:

greens win wrote India is the largest democracy in the world ... and I believe China will be a democracy in the near future. I am happy for a robust world democracy where parties like the Greens will flourish and influence global decisions.

You would want to hope the Chinese change their ways because you Greens would be the first to be executed.


Quote:

greens win wrote To get them back to the negotiation table on level footing

And then what?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 19^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

Quote: greens win wrote India is the largest democracy in the world ... and I believe China will be a democracy in the near future. I am happy for a robust world democracy where parties like the Greens will flourish and influence global decisions. You would want to hope the Chinese change their ways because you Greens would be the first to be executed. [quote]greens win wrote To get them back to the negotiation table on level footing

And then what?

[/quote]


And then it would become apparent that, as with all negotiations, they are NOT on an equal footing, and the weaker party would have to make concessions to the strong....or have them made for them.  Not much of a solution really....

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 19^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

Quote: greens win wrote India is the largest democracy in the world ... and I believe China will be a democracy in the near future. I am happy for a robust world democracy where parties like the Greens will flourish and influence global decisions. You would want to hope the Chinese change their ways because you Greens would be the first to be executed. Current step ... The Chinese are opening their media ... all part of the process to democracy. [quote]greens win wrote To get them back to the negotiation table on level footing

And then what?

Let Israel and Palestine negotiate.

[/quote]

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2012 at 11:56am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 10:48am: Quote: greens win wrote India is the largest democracy in the world ... and I believe China will be a democracy in the near future. I am happy for a robust world democracy where parties like the Greens will flourish and influence global decisions. You would want to hope the Chinese change their ways because you Greens would be the first to be executed. Current step ... The Chinese are opening their media ... all part of the process to democracy. [quote]greens win wrote To get them back to the negotiation table on level footing And then what? Let Israel and Palestine negotiate.

[/quote]

If you've followed the history of this problem then you'd know that they've been to the negotiating table a number of times. Then some idiot from HAMAS or whatever other Palestinian group fires a rocket into Israel and then all negotiations are off again.

bolshevik destroyer

:)