The very thought will concern some.
In truth it concerns me.
Some will link it instantly to New World Order Conspiracy's.
Communist or Socialist rule.
Others to right wing theory's.
Maybe Dictatorship,Nazi,China, Russia American,some claim Germany is to lead us.
I think just maybe it is under way, we saw Bob Brown Australian Greens say just recently it would come.
I think it began some time ago and that todays UN United Nations is the skeleton of future one government rule.
Why.
History is full of well intended fools and would be dictators who tell us we can not be trusted to look after not just our selves but humanity as a whole.
They, clearly, are right, what do others think.

Belly the push for OWG does not come from the masses, it comes from the privileged, and not the privileged we know, it comes from the one percent that holds eighty percent of the globes wealth, and that is a matter for grave concern. Not for a minute do I believe that this cartel sees humanity as an asset, in fact they see 75% of it as a liability and the likes of the Club of Rome and the Bilderberg Group exhibit the thought processes of this ultimate global elitist group.

Bob Brown is a pawn of these men, they hijacked the Green movement in the 80’s and spun the focus away from industry cleaning up their act, at their cost, to user pays, quite a trick and the imbeciles of the first world such as Brown ate it up with a spoon.

What can I say Belly, in a world where communications, food supply and governments are controlled by this 1% there is little hope of fighting the technology that they could bring against dissenters. The fact is OWG wants less of us so any actions against OWG when it comes will bring genocide which fits right in line with their depopulation strategies.

The OWG earth will have drones buzzing first world suburbs and free speech will be eradicated. All communications saved and monitored, chip in new born’s hand and chains on its legs.

Belly,I've and others have been telling you this for the last 2 yrs.Bob Brown publicly announced he is for Global Governance.10% of the carbon tax goes to the UN.Who controls the UN? The US and Europe.

Who creates as debt all the money from nothing for the West to function? The Private Central Banksters Belly.They control both your Labor Party and the Coalition.The real reason they went after Gough Whitlam was the Kemlani Loans affair.Gough went outside the Central Western Banksters power influence for a cheaper loan from the Arabs.This is why Gough had to go.That is the reality.

Bob Browns Bible!

Georgia Guidestones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

So why doesn't he go first with the population reduction if he's that keen. Same with the red witch of the west, should all top themselves for the good of humanity!

Bob Brown's nominally of the left, but why is the left always the front runner when it comes to OWG conspiracies? Get real for Christ's sake! The left has absolutely no power and no following in this world, and it certainly isn't for one global oligarchy.
It's the fascist free-marketeers who are driving the world into globalism and open borders and one world economic order. Of course most of the silly naive buggers out there still think economics is about money!
Can anyone show me a scrap of evidence that OWG is leftist? Duh!

I'm actually for one world government, a unity of diversity, but free market homogeneity horrifies me!

Squeers
That's just ideology.

Kings and Governments come and go. The intellectual elite are arrogant enough to think that they are able to run things their way on earth. God laughs at such arrogance and will have His way in the end. It has all been foretold and smart people will put themselves under the Master who will rule forever.

Squeers,
I don't know about "Leftists", Zbigniew Brezezinski is a Communist, well actually he's THE Communist but he doesn't care about Leftists.
These people don't give a damn about anything but their NWO, Brezezinski wants NWO + communism, Kissinger just wants his NWO, he doesn't care about race or class.
If you look at it from one point of view Brezezinski would represent the European Elites and Kissinger the Anglo-Jewish side (which includes the U.S, Canada and Australia, they all report to London).
But these people don't care about us at all, Kissinger is of Jewish background but he's said couldn't care less if ordinary Jews were being killed, Brezezinski said it's easier to kill a million people than govern them.
What you have to realise is that we're looking at really ancient elites and power structures.
The commentators I read believe that all these guys are actually related, the European Elites, Royal Families etc, that all their ancient societies and orders have been passed down from Babylonian times, or possibly even from beyond that time.
There's a symbiosis between the so called "Jewish" elites and what I call the "Aryan" elites, the Germanic royalty (yeah they're all German, even the Greek and Spanish royal houses) and Anglo Saxon ruling class, that'd have to go way back, thousands of years to central Asia.
There's a theory that the Egyptians, Germans and Khazars all originated in central Asia or the Middle East.
It makes a certain amount of sense if you look at the 36 known MTDNA "Clans", the "Seven Daughters Of Eve" relates to the seven European clan mothers from which we are all descended, two of which are "eastern" in origin.
Fascinating stuff.
BTW on "Conspiracy Theorists", we don't come up with theories on conspiracies, we say there is a definitely a plan to install a global government but the players and the modus operandi are as old as civilisation itself, that the Elites and "Banksters" are a parasitic class that attached itself to us long, long ago and it's time we got rid of them altogether.

in an ideal world..there would be
one fair rule of law globally

any officials would NEED be sepperated from society
forbidden friends/loyalties..not in the excusion ruling class

and be under penalty of death for excersizing 'percunary intrest's

the eu..is run by beurocrats...so is the un..[who voted for them pigs sukking at the un cash cow?]..soon rudd will get nominated...not voted for..to represent us...

the thing is any fair world order
would charge our leaders to serve the intrests of its people
but any govts i see are there to serve the huge mulitnational corperations[that should be treason]

anyhow as said..any not serving the needs of their people
would get one of them smart bombs..or a visit from the seals

a one world govt would audit everything
all the other govts now do

then balance the criminal from the benificient ruler
and shoot the first off to some dark or cold place
and give honourum to those doing good works

people should elect a sovereign 'king/queen'
who goes to represent the people
at the sovereign united nation
[s.u.n'..for short]

its money unit would be the wikiseed/wikigeld
google it..its a [paper promise to pay..in hempseed..[by weight]
it is issued as credit to every citizen..and also used to bailout all govt debt..[ie its a peoples money supply..only used by living beings

its use is much like that of a carbon credit

[heck they stole much of my wikised ideas..to make they faux carbon credit..EXCEPT..the wikiseed pays to fed/heal/house/cloth..supply the basics of life for everyone..[any,living thing]

the current system is good at stealing and monopoly

thus..any global govt..who gets the exclusive monopoly
thus it must be able to..fully openly be held to account..and hold account over the many big fish that now control it all

naw its not going to be allowed to happen
and if it does..its only feather bedding for some beuro roc rat
for them to think..its them running things..while lol taking orders

Thanks for that, Jay Of Melbourne. Sounds like a Dan Brown novel. I would ask if you have any evidence but I'll content myself by observing that your elite, if it exists, is from the hard right rather than left, so I rest my case.
You say: "Zbigniew Brezezinski is a Communist, well actually he's THE Communist".
..wow, who'd have thought!

Squeers,
It's impossible to talk about this subject without looking like a "conspiracy nut", just like anyone who talks about race inevitably sounds to the untutored ear like a cranky old Racist.
If I could sit you down with myself and a couple of other "Subversives" we'd make you a believer in a few short hours.
Consider this, do ancient European dynasties exist?
Of course they do, they are all related by blood, they intermarry all the time.
Are they given to despotism, murder, war, and genocide?
Absolutely, their whole history is bathed in blood.
Finally, are they "just like us"?
No, they're not like us, they feed off us like leeches, they don't till the land or create the great works of society, they just take.

No Sqeers, that in fact is the truth.
SOG I actually found I agree with some of your comments.
But yes! like Sqeers said, Bob Brown could not win a chook raffle if he bought every ticket.
We are,already, being pushed, pulled, and used, by power and influence beyond normal understanding.
Arjay I for all my time in the forum and all my life, been warning we are living in a conspiracy.
The view, of those writing the script,for us to follow.
Is it will only take three maybe for lifetimes for humanity to forget what freedom was.
Look at North Korea,a people mindlessly living in the shadow of a fat evil family,they have been trained to love, while starving to death.
We are consumers,who sit idle by while country's starve to death and wars are forced on us, terrorist murder.
Financial doom can come overnight.
Like trained monkeys, after the crash, constructed and planned, we will applaud our saviors/slave masters.
Left right center,it will be the end of our driving force, competitive drive.

Jay Of Melbourne and Belly, I don't deny their are powerful forces at play in the world, only that they are left wing or "communist". That is patent nonsense. The world is enthrall to hard right, neoliberal manipulators and we're the cattle. The only concern of so-called libertarianism is its elite and the bottom line.
I'm just sick of the left getting the blame for everything. It's ludicrous! The left is a comparative pipsqueak in this world, and the welfare/socialist left are the most deluded of all, thinking they influence anything but lip-service.

Errr... yes, Jay of Melbourne.

>>It's impossible to talk about this subject without looking like a "conspiracy nut"<<

There's a very good reason for that, if you think about it...

Have a great day.

per ridicules is up to his idea of 'par'..[a-gain]

he never heard of the medicies
nor sees how the 'landed gentry' owns all them huge estates in uk
nor how the landed gentry got free convict labour to kill the natives here

he didnt notice the eurika stokade protests
that required imbisiles to give up pounds of gold for a 'licence'

he has never been to traffic court...
to take a day off with no pay..only to have to come back to court three more days[cause he dared to plea not guilty...[nor fold and realise the costs of fighting the system...is more expensive..that simply paying up the licence fee[sorry 'fine']

he has lawyer money
to let his lawyer waste lawyer time..not his own time

you gotta love how consistant he is
bet he dont have to delete his dodo wireless
then reinstall it EVERYtime he wants to go online

ity must be great to have his smugness
of course there are no master controlers..srgt shultze per ridicule

life is sweet when you live of the sweat of others

tell me ol man
could brit expats have a mabo type claim..on uk estates?

they still practice their trade cultures and beliefs..!

i rekon we should bring the landed gentry
back down to earth..via the european courts

[who gets govt to restore their estates..for free
while collecting eu grants..to NOT farm

life is sweet
when you drink others sweat
and turn it into scum

ok lets see if im allowed web acces to post

Pericles not this time.
Yes the water has been muddied by nuts right from the start of history but truth can be found if we look.
Alexander the great ruled all the world he knew of.
Rome did too.
Other country's can be added to that list, fate and luck stopped Hitler.
China may achieve it, who is to say power will not lead to one rule.
I see a history of deception from every great power, oh yes point out the good, but look to at current devisions the British Empire put in place, to help it keep power see America and communists actions based on self interests.
I think much like Sqeers, if we get it, and I think we will, it will be a dictatorship of the right or middle not already failed left.

Watching how the European Union is struggling with twenty some members, watching any group trying to run the entire world would be downright hilarious.
I rather suspect that with the rise of Nationalism in so many countries, we're more likely to see a further fragmentation than a consolidation.
Not that there probably aren't people who would love to see a one world government; I'm sure there are.
But if they're not smart enough to see how unworkable such an idea is then they're certainly not smart enough to bring it about.
Anthony
www.observationpoint.com.au

Dear Belly,

Trade, travel, and telecommunications have made the
nations of the modern world more interdependent
than ever before. Yet today's societies have entered
the new century with political insittutions inherited
from a previous era. The human population is spread
among a series of sovereign independent states - most
of them with their own armed forces. I feel that if
we anticipate that some benign and fair "World
Government" will take on the task of unification we
are likely to be disappointed. Look at the United Nations -
and the difficulties it has. It's major difficulty is that
compliance with the resolutions of the UN and the rulings
of its World Court are voluntary, as no country is willing
to surrender its sovereignty to an international body.
The UN is mot effective, in fact, when superpowers are
able to agree on a course of action and mobilize their
blocs to support it.

Perhaps one day something may be reached - but I don't
think it will happen any time soon.

Anyone for a super helping of conspiracy theory?

Think about it for 10 seconds. What chance has Bob Brown (or indeed anyone else) got of establishing one world government?

cont'd ...

United Europe is not working so well.
Financial problems, refugee problems,
some countries want to join but are not accepted.
Others don't want to be a part of it. So, multiply
this on a global scale and what have you got?
Disaster. Perhaps some time in some distant
century - humans will learn to live together
and may become united under one government or it may
happen sooner if
there is a major world catastrophe - which will force
governments to work as one.

Yes, this time Belly.

>>Pericles not this time<<

If you have ever watched a local council meeting, as it attempts to get a consensus on whether to install a traffic calming scheme on a single suburban street, you will quickly understand that there isn't a power on earth that would enable a single, world government to exist.

And if by any chance an organization was to create such a "government", it would disappear a nanosecond later, like a Higgs Boson particle in a Large Hadron Collider.

And for much the same reason.

Squeers
If only you could tell everyone else in the world what to do and have, *then* what a Paradise it would be, eh?

ahh perry
nothing like a council meeting
the developers versis the business society
seeing who can spend the penny into their quango first

but mate...bankers control govt
dont do what they want..they send you broke
no money..no quango

so lets call the banker grip over global governance
like holding the rope through ring..through the nose of a bull

much like the hold bankers have..on the balls of our leaders
much like the party backroom boys club [public service]..runs the party system.

to pretend..that bankers
arnt running the world...mate you cant be that dumb

here we got bankers cashing in a govt bond
so govt can give the cash subsidy..to the mate's..of the banker

if you dont do as we say
no more cash for your mates

and then once the bankers have stolen 90%
of the cake....[and has it all leveraged to the unseen hand]

then bankers go the GOVT bailout...
[ie accept and monetise more govt paper
to issue ever more paper]..ie the virtual/market economy..

as opposed to those who actually
create or market any REAL product..

[who get taken over according to bankers
financing..to be hidden amoung the other assets

held in private trusts..or corperations..
or other shelf companies

its the corperate 'person'..that has subverted and perverted
the rights and duties of governance

govt issuecs bonds..to bankers
to allow the babnkers..to bailout themselves
and the real living person...cops the austerity

and needs to ALLOW govt to privatise all govt 'owned' services..
the peoples assets..and double the prices of govt SERVICES

that extra income goes to the bankers
as a condition of 'bailout'...that was nessitated
by the banker bailout...

the new world order
will be frontmen..for the same old order
only then we will all be slaves...as the middle class falls into
the lower classes...and the peasents revolt..

when the same old families..run
the same old scam..again and again and again

and a new nevo rich emmerges
that in time shall fall...[after they accept the blame for the next one]

divide and con-queer..

mate your more one of us
your saying defence of the indefensable...is deliberated..[or colluded]..ignorance

Oi reckon there's buckley's chance of a one world government....just watch the break-up and disbandment when the sovereign debt problem in Europe finally reaches its peak.

The GFC didn't go away, it just got papered over. The closest we've come to a one world arrangement is the globalised neo-liberal economic model, and that is fast running out of puff.

A recent example of the tribal nature of humans was the break-up of Yugoslavia into its constituent ethnic tribes.

Nope, not gonna happen.

As usual, I agree with Pericles and Poirot. An utterly inane idea. What makes anyone think this is somehow a left-wing notion ?

Long live diversity, conflict, dispute, difference of opinion and bloody-mindedness.

Well that's OK Loudmouth, just as long as you recognise that it's that other lot, who are being bloody-minded.

Well then, and it quite possible, I AM A NUT.
All those reasons, our failure to agree on anything,is a reason others use to say it is needed.
What would the United Nations look like if the power of veto did not exist.
What was its true purpose when introduced.
It will not be the left,not Brown, but power.
And AFTER a war /financial crash or such.
And delivered as a promise.
I too loudmouth want nothing of it.
Lexi your possible future one is a dream,what a good one!
And unachievable.
If it was democratic China and India would ALWAYS HAVE THE NUMBERS
If after war the victors would have to fight everyday dissidents, like me.
The plans? nice and good folk truly, think it would save humanity.
One GOD, probably newly invented.
One bank one education one language in time.
Yes weird stuff but many want it.
How else they say,do we confront poverty/health education/food supplies name it some think one world will fix it.

Anthonyve:>> Watching how the European Union is struggling with twenty some members, watching any group trying to run the entire world would be downright hilarious.<<

They already run and own it and they have watered down nationalism to a great extent by social engineering, divide and conquer, have you seen the Muslim birth rate in Europe, and the projections. No France, no Germany, no England, multicultural melds with positive government discrimination on the new citizens.

You depend on nationalism as brake on OWG, I would counter that religion and one in particular is the biggest obstacle to servitude of the masses, Islam, they have as good as killed off Christianity in the first world, nationalism what a joke.

But Antonyve I will tell you a better joke.
If I said to an Aussie in the street in 1980 that in thirty years Australia would have:
only ten percent of the manufacturing capacity of today,
that the vast majority of food is imported,
that we no longer had a peoples bank,
that national household savings would be the lowest against GDP in the last fifty years,
that our national and personal debt had never been higher,
that our utilities would be owned fully or in part by foreign companies,
that there was no market place protection of local manufactured goods against cheap imports,
that a crap house in a capital city costs half a million dollars,

he would have said..."tell them there dreamin"

Anthony all this was engineered, if you do not see it, I am sorry for you.

Peter: <Squeers
If only you could tell everyone else in the world what to do and have, *then* what a Paradise it would be, eh?>
I'm just offering my opinion on the human problem, but I don't believe in paradise. Money is power, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Despite international accords, governments remain national and idiosyncratic, and there will never be one government to administer the world's culturally heterogenous masses--at least I hope not. Democratic governments are local, disputatious and even occasionally sincere in their administrative role-play--just as if they really had sovereign free will and self-determination beyond tokenism or domestic politics--such as banning visits of nuclear warships or allowing gay marriage. Just because countries have peculiar governments and institutions locally, it doesn't follow that they're independent or free to act even internally in any qualitative or radical way; that is independently of the economic mechanisms that do hold sway globally and govern how lives are lived. The popular idea of world "government" is naive, yet governed we are, effectively, by global economic forces and protocols, and these are presided over by a powerful cohort, no doubt including members of powerful governments. "Government" is messy, mundane and political; corporate governance is removed from that, it's the true "upper house". Our democracies are degenerate; merely a way to control the masses that's superior to oppression, rather than real democratic values "realised" by nations and institutionalised. We have semblances of democracies. A state based on the oppression of the majority is ultimately untenable and democratic capitalism creates the illusion of freedom. Our proto-world government holds effective control, but it's still geo-politically factional.
I would be in favour of effective world government if the economics was predicated on democracy, but it's democracy that's predicated on economics, and it always shall be so long as individuals can obtain massive wealth and power.

My goodness, none of you get it !
It is not going to be like either side of this argument say.
Everything is going to be local.
In the long run even national governments will either fade out or just
l0ok after defense and a few remaining infrastructures.
State government may only exist to operate such infrastructure as
railway systems. They will be needed to move food into what remains of
the larger cities, and connect the much larger country towns.
Local government will probably continue as people will need some sort
of local community organisation.
There will be 50 to 100 times as many farmers as there are now.
Even banks will have shrunken to local establishments handling local
currencies, eg the Totnes Pound.

The writing is already on the wall.
In the US California is virtually bankrupt.
Country roads in the US are being let go back to gravel. Town police
forces are being disbanded, but as the states get into further
financial trouble, local police will be restablished in the US.

However here in Aus where we only have state police they will become
ineffective and local, council run police forces, or voluntary police
will be established.
Are there country roads here that are not being repaired ?

In such a scenario as I have described here, how effective would your
world government be ?

Fortunately, in a way, I will not see it but my grandchildren way
well find all this new way of life in local communities quite a
pleasant way of life where the local community is everything and
community co-operation is the real thing.

Bazz,

Wow, Utopian dreaming takes many forms, doesn't it ? One world government on the one hand, a multitude of vibrant, local communities, from here to Timbuktu, on the other.

As usual, I agree with Squeers, that we already have one-world economy, power without responsiblity. Marx says somewhere something about capitalism recognising no sovereigns, that 'it' puts its money wherever it thinks it will get the best returns and passes any human costs back onto local societies.

Even now, it would be difficult to say that this company, BHP say, is an Australian company, or that one, BP let's say, is a British one. Fifty-odd years ago, Vance Packard noted that more returns were being generated by American companies overseas than in the US. The shareholders in our banks are as likely to be overseas banks as local shareholders. A huge proportion of the US Reserve is owned by China. And no doubt, many Europeans, or at least Germans, are cursing the day some bright spark dreamed up a European Union, let alone a world one.

But the idea of a single world-government is still good for a laugh.

Jo

Joe,
Yeah the idea is laughable because it totally runs against the grain of human nature but the fact is that these elite factions believe what they say even if you don't.
However, as risible as the concept seems,real people are dying in Africa and the Middle East in the name of the NWO, this whole mad rush for global hegemony is going to be a nightmare, an absolute shocker on the scale of WW2 or worse.
The elites simply can't control the planet anymore, there are too many people and for one thing the Russians and Asians are not going to go along with it.
Just watch what happens, we're rolling into endgame and things are going to get really ugly in the next few years, the elites are going to roll the dice one more time and it's going to be a massive disaster for them.
We can only hope that they don't survive to do it again.

To borrow from Shakespeare - A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

That is, it doesn't matter what you call it, just what it is.

I don't think we are in danger of a one-world government in the material sense and the UN is all but a toothless animal. However it is naive to believe that there are not some global influences at play with various interest groups already exploiting the imblance of power, particularly in relation to free trade agreement arrangements. That is who benefits the most?

It is also disingenuous to refer to any movement of a global government as a Left idea. If anything it has its roots in the opposite direction. Bob Brown has only ever discussed the idea of global governance - ie. don't destroy and pillage foreign environments or peoples for short term selfish financial interests. It used to be called manners and a recognition of the rights of other human beings outside our own borders.

Bazz,
....and that's why I'm an Anarchist.

You may be interested in this site:
http://attackthesystem.com/

Even conservatives like Pat Buchanan are saying the U.S is finished, the economy has been looted, White America, the backbone of the nation has been destroyed, the constitution is in tatters.

If people haven't been reading the likes of Dr Paul Craig Roberts then now might be a good time to start:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27045

I think it's a fair assessment that America is in the first stages of decline. Western hegemony in general is at a crossroads. China, for one, has beaten the West at its own game.
There's a whole raft of organisations that have acted on behalf of this failing neo-liberal hegemony. Some, like the World Bank and the IMF, have morphed from their original charters into doormen for Western corporations, giving access into developing countries, often with little or no benefit.

JOM,

It's not unusual for superpowers and empires to degenerate and crumble, and for other powers to usurp their position. Human history is one long baton-change in the race for power, glory and fortune.

The big difference between antiquity and the present is man's development of devastating weapons....and the worry that a failing power may use them.

Loudmouth suggested Utopia !
That is one thing it not be.
The transition will not be welcomed, very significant unemployment,
the cost and reduced supply of energy will require many people to
become farmers. Over time, some decades, those that started their life
as clerks, public servants, computer programmers etc will find
themselves learning to plough behind a draft horse.
The shortages will probably cause wars as countries try to obtain the
resources they need.
The world will not have the energy resources to support the present
population, so there will be a reduction in world population.
Malnutrition will reduce fertility.
That is just nature and she does not negotiate.

However all that is somewhat down the track, the early stages will be
easy to monitor. Just watch the unemployment, the government debt and
the struggle to maintain growth in the economy. The cost of food.

Ask a farmer about the cost of fertiliser. The disappearance of out
of season foodstuffs. The sudden government ruling that Chinese
companies cannot export food from their Australian farms.

These will be the signals to watch out for.
Some of them are here already on the wall right under your noses.

Eventually the smaller world population will settle in to a new energy
regime and live quite fulfilling and happy lives.
Remember Shakespear did not have a car or electricity or TV etc.
No different to as it is now, just in a different setting.

Squeers
Speaking of fascists, which of Hitler's economic policies do you *not* agree with?

You just gotta love life!
Our differences actually unite us.
Bazz with respect! mate, please do not start a thread by telling the rest of us we do not get it.
Our disconnect, is the very fuel that will/is being used against us.
More would be lost than gained by one world government.
Yet, within us all, the day it becomes an offer,a promise, a solution, we will buy it.
After massive deaths, a Pandemic? war? starvation, we will be told, for a short time.
In the interests of humanity,for our own good, SOME POWERS will be given to?
UN? who knows.
As more and more is taken from us.
A story will develop,we will be told that our pain/lost freedom, is short term our grand children they will tell us,will live in a better single world.

Well Belly, you don't get it, Should I lie ? Hi !

Wars will be very difficult to wage on the sort of style we are
accustomed to. Some people, not myself, believe that we have already
had the first oil war in Iraq. If it was just about oil they would
have taken the cheaper option and just bought it !
No, the changes are already knocking on the door but our politicians
just do not want to listen. It is not surprising really as most of the
population does not want to hear either.
However we pay politicians to be more proactive and have such
possibilities examined.
It is well known, and he has warned about depletion in parliament,
that Martin Ferguson does get it.
It is just that the parties have their collective heads deep in the sand and he is gagged.

The Guardian forced the British Government to acknowledge the report
they, the govt, had been given by their scientific Depts and oil
company executives. The report had to be forced into the open by a
court order.
So as it stands now only the UK and Sweden acknowledge that we have
a problem. The US Hirsch report was only revealed when some high
school kids hacked it out of its US Energy Dept hidyhole.

So as some would say there really is a conspiracy in place.
However I think it is an unspoken conspiracy not what is normally
meant by a conspiracy.

The implications are so great that politicians just don't know what to do about it.
So they worry about AGW instead.

Bazz I am an up front bloke and like you.
Feel however you are too fixed on oil.
Not wanting to divert the thread,am intensely interested in all views on the subject.
However sail, wind power took man, from many country's all over the world.
England gained an Empire by using it.
That Empire introduced this world to the Industrial revolution, using steam, generated by coal.
Even with no oil 3 maybe 4 century's will pass before we have no coal, modern sail boats, if we had to, would be fast very fast.
In fact, such an event as oil end could drive the very thing I talk of.
Lets turn this on its head.
Modern man has landed on the moon circled Mars, looks back at creation.
Yet we can not, or is it do not want to?
Stop wars, starvation, dictatorships,
Get a group, of history wisest best thinkers men and women , if it was possible.
Show them first our achievements.
The North Korea today, the starving refugees in those camps.
Last the pirates boarding ships,in this 21st century, and then we would see why some think it is a possibility.
Others a plan.

Well, Belly, it is not just oil, it is in fact almost everything.
Your thought that coal has hundreds of years is like many people's way
out of date. Various Uni and defense dept studies as well as some
university studies have found that peak coal will occur around 2025.
Unfortunately that was at the burning rate of about 2009.
Taking into account China's proposed burn rate peak coal could come as
soon as 2015 from what I have read.
Now all that probably sounds ridiculous to you but that is because
there is a different way of looking at coal.
Generally oil comes out of the ground quite cheaply but coal is different.
The best grades have mostly been burnt and what is meant
by peak coal is not measured in tons but in BTUs per ton.
As the grades get worse the cost escalate steeply.
It is complicated by the different types of coal.
Australia is a minor supplier in the world scale and we will not peak
for sometime after global peak. However that depends on how China
increases its export out of Australia.
A University in Texas even predicts peak coal this year, but no one
else has made the same prediction.

The German study found that many coal fields had not been studied for
more than forty years and that the reserve figure were simply unrealistic.

Yes, sailing ships could keep some semblence of international trade
going but nowhere near the level of todays 25knot container ships.
Take just one point; the roping for such an enormous fleet of sailing
ships would have to made from synthetics, made from oil.
However, at least twice as many ships would be needed, it all becomes
just too hard.

To get back to the thread, under the circumstances I describe a world
government becomes ridiculous, it simply could not communicate or
impose its orders.

Given recent developments I think the Oil argument is looking a bit thin, there's plenty of it so we're told, peak oil has been pushed way back into the future and we have Putin talking about reducing global consumption and increasing the use of renewables.
All that remains to be seen is the format by which the Oligarchs can monopolise renewable energy, don't worry, they're ALWAYS looking to build yet another monopoly.
As grim as things seem/are we all know that even within the structure of the Oligarchy itself there are altruists who will always act in the interests of humankind.
There are people on the inside of the NWO who would resort to sabotage or deliberately "fail" to do their job properly, it's human nature, most people have a conscience and are compassionate,those without human feeling are as C.S Lewis suggested, "Men without chests".

i love how belly puts it clearly

""All those reasons,.our failure to agree
on anything,..is a reason others use to say..."it is needed'.

i agree
and con-qerrr

how about we divide the powers..[of law making..of money...and govt expenditures/audit..[that sees all govt incone..accorded its true purpose...in a given soverieinity..[dutchy or walled city within a set geographical area...where local [city size].. locals..are affectively..ruled over voted*..for dictraiters/sovereign..

who only rules till a majority
of his trust;..[the people and THEIR estates]..
at a peoples pleasure[by democratic one vote opne value pfirst past the post..[king or queen]..

who speaks for us at the un..
*only the [SOVEREIGN un[sun]..of elected trustees over their 'demoncratic common weal/estates'

that has a population plus factor
that tops veto..[by it being a 'nessisity''
be it fixture or fungable..or person or personage

""What would the United Nations look like
if the power of veto did not exist.""'

the big point
a sovereign rules it over 1 million
or 10,000..or 2 billion...[thats their max votes]
for your will to be overruled..there would need be a huge majority locally..against the numbers 'outside'...[of course one or two billion is too large
so china and indea and afriks and south amercia's

would be served by a king of max accountability TO
125,000...[no king neds more that this

we are making mANY big fish..IN LITTLE PONDS
with little 'field of affect'...
not huge oppresssive 'kings'..looting and raping their wards
in huge estates and even whole countries/princcipalites etc

""What was its true purpose when introduced.""

to give everyone a voice
and a system..that can tell any religeous group..to get its numbers
and join in the sOVEREIGN united nation[as one under god]

of course there is a king of kings
in the most holy[my home/my castle]
spokes person..for each living being..!

that holds gods life giving spirit..[with in]
even you

the good of god within you all
who is a good sheppard..to let his flock grow fat and lazey
[and not atrtentive to the kings numbers...[who is going for de coup de graass[see wikiseed/wikigeld]

""If it was democratic China and India
would ALWAYS HAVE THE NUMBERS""

AS well as the wikicredit
see links...[a wioki credit is the weight of hempseed]
last time i looked..'china is due fourty trillion pounds of the stuff

[ask john howard]
he will verify..or kevin
[its in the court record..deliverd to hrh the queen
at chogum 2002..[i was the only one arrested]google chogumpeace bus

""If after war the victors would have to fight
everyday dissidents, like me.""

just get the numbers ol boy
get a seat at sun...[heck how many unionists..could elect their king..[mr con bet..hrh of the dutchy founded and formed under the dreaming of a gum tree in balcauden

if you got the numbers elect your king
send him to the un..[sorry sovereign un]

""think it would save humanity?''

""
no each 'king'..HAS HIS OWN BANK..!
his own licence to issue money[wikiseed promise..in seed/pound units]..but not this time gold..but hemp seed

that you can trade or you can eat..[a hole pound of it
each with unique local application
[a great ciollectable as im told]

the SOVEREIGN un ..is restricted to 144,444

if you amalgumate..or increase..
[or naturally decrease]..your vote number totals remain proprotuinate..for you dutchies 'area'..population happyness mindex and preservation of wholsum inherant traditions and cultures

many kings ill be rebuilding the past
uning tommorrrows promes[that the un honours
and the nimbin hemp embassy and the ate elder's
[and mr [im the exchequer...govt took my seeds long ago

but under the same terms as applies to the legitimate 'wikiseed/wikigeld...

promise*..to pay every time
by the united union of sovereigns..[sovereigns united nation]
assurance guarentee..to buy the future..with future promise[as assured as by royal decree..

OR ..the licence*..to grow
your own pound[of seed]..locally or individually
by assurance of right of savage to by fear of default desires to plant the seed [attatched to the note]..to grow your own pound of hemp seed guraented

""One bank
one education
one language in time.""

no many cultures under tghe one good god
served by 144,444 kings and queens..charged to serve respect homour the creation of the one god..[empowerd to fix anything..using their own cash][credit..ie the combined credit we pledged to our rep[soprry king con bet

""Yes weird stuff
but many want it.""

heck who do you appoint your god incarnate[wally lewis?]king lockie?

""How else they say,do we confront poverty/health education/food supplies name it...some think one world will fix it..""

it can..one vote one value
get enough points and you spend a share of all your 'voters'..who's vote gave you acces to wiki credit[your first command is people explain how they each got their own wik money

earning intrest since 2002
now valued near 1,000,000 pound of hemp seeds
each of ya..!

who you going to give half to
to represent your claim..
to the Sovereign-un..VIA the un

ask hrh
who has been trustee over quater the world
under the commonwealth..!..that makes the order to the un

next few weeks could set the world free

EVERYONE GETS THEIRS...!
equally as enjoined heirs under god
the mortal seen of the unseen all good[god]

Belly, here is a link to an article that puts it quite well.
It had a foot long url so here is a Tinyurl.

http://tinyurl.com/3rdjvce

No Jay, the only developments that have occurred are shale and coal
seam gas wells. They will help out but will not keep up with
depletion. As the OECD's International Energy Authority stated peak
crude oil occurred in 2006 and it will require one Saudi Arabia to be
found every two years for the next decade to keep up with depletion.
The projections that some sources show include "Yet to be Found" fields.

When ever you see a report of a huge oil field being found holding
so many billions of barrels, just divide it by 85,000,000 and see
how many days it would feed the world. Also fields at sea take about
ten years to reach full production and that is where they are drilling.

I believe that the statements by oil field geologists that all the
elephants have been found is probably true.

We are off on a tangent I do not mind, but say again.
If this event, Bazzs one, it could be the very reason we find my fear come true.
If today, we heard no more coal or oil existed.
Every ton and drop would become government owned instantly.
And,within a week Ethanol production would double, forget concerns about starvation and food prices, few care now.
In truth who runs the world now? who truly gets most of its benefit.
Is it not one percent.
Forget OUG elections, no election will say who rules,we may be conned in to thinking we had a say.
Goggle New World Order.
Be prepared to wade in muddy waters but ask again, why are we failing?
Say north Korea, tell me why have we not fixed it, children are dieing.

Belly,
Who's we?
"We" don't have any resources to help anyone, take away the state, which as we all agree is a proxy of the Oligarchs and we have precisely diddly squat.
My wife and I own three acres of scrubby bushland in Central Victoria ,two cars and our household goods, that's it, the house is still being paid off. Being self employed we have no savings, no super,no insurance,no private health cover and no other investments.

In relative terms an African couple who are sole traders would have access to more or less the same level of resources as we do, an acre or two of land, a house to live in, personal transport and a few small material comforts.
In fact as I've pointed out repeatedly a person from the Third world who finds that they can't maintain their normal standard of living may have the option of a better life in the West.
If a Westerner cannot support himself at the most basic level of Western society he has nowhere else to go.
In one sense the Third worlder is at greater liberty than the Westerner, but if the West is destroyed or we go into some sort of ethnic consolidation mode, cut off the transfer of technology and creativity to the Third world and kick out all the non Whites that's it for everyone, no possibility of a better life for North Koreans, that's for sure.

My point is that for everyone on the world to have a decent standard of living we have to get rid of these Parasites clustered at the top of Western societies, no healthy, productive, creative White countries means no hope for anyone else.
Who's going to give the Africans free access to clean energy?
China?
It is to laugh.

Squeers
Come on, obviously you agree with government control of business; right? And obviously profits are to be taxed heavily, right? That doesn't misrepresent your opinion, does it?

Also a business's functioning must agree with the government's national production requirements, right? How could it be otherwise since you oppose international free trade? Therefore production is to be on a national basis, and government is to direct what is required, what is permitted, and what is verboten. Right?

Of course capitalist financing is evil too, so that means government financing? Or is there to be no financing - people will just starve to death? No? So you prefer capitalist financing? No? Looks like you might have a real political soul mate in you-know-who.

Let's see what else. Fixing wages - you don't disagree with that, do you?

How about restricting stock dividends? Will you stand up for liberty there? No-o-o, you won't, will you?

Do you oppose a capital tax? Not on your life!

Of course it's not trendy for modern-day leftists to be in favour of forced labour - except taxation of course, you still think there's not enough obtaining people's work by coercion, don't you?

You're in favour of a policy of "husbandry". Since capitalist agribiz is obviously anathema, that means government control of farms, right?

Come on Squeers. What economic policies of Hitler's Nazis do you *not* agree with?

Well Jay, your two acres of scrubby land might not have much advantage
to you but if you have children or especially grandchildren they will
think of you as a rich man.
Hang onto that land for their sake, especially if it is within a
reasonable distance to a town.

Land will be the ultimate bank balance.

Sorry, no way I would want to be near a big town or city.
And while against the power the one percent have, think about it.
It may well be them who introduce OWG.
Who controls us now.
We flip around here, but the very unhappiness most talk of will be used to force this on us.
Someone introduced Jesus!
OK fair enough.
Is it a problem, that MOST of the WORLDS POPULATION is not Christian.
We must not be too sure, world government or not, that the west will always be in control, America is now but for how long.
Are we humans even close to controlling population.
Are we getting closer to Mass starvation or an end to hunger.
If we fall at hurdle one we sure do at two.
Can we see an end, or do we want to? to dictatorships.
While most of us fear it, rightfully, others look to one day seeing one humanity ruled as one in every case, that dream is in truth a nightmare.

Peter,
of all things I think it's nationalism that I despise the most. As I've said to you elsewhere, Hitler was part of a wave of ultra nationalism that threatened to engulf the world between the wars and was mostly the product of laissez faire and its great slump, and as a result the human proclivity to resentment, insularity and exclusion (no doubt primal drives). National socialism was the epicentre of this due also to international exactions after WW1. An aggressively paranoid and uncompromising regime was thus invoked, bent on reasserting itself both internationally and nationally; tragically, for Jews (and even the legitimacy of the human race and its posterity), bent on "cleansing" itself within, both of "Impure" blood and of those it saw as the domestic complement, leeches, to the crippling exactions imposed from without--the traditional money-lenders. After the war, the Keynesian revolution and a golden economic period put paid to global nationalist uprisings. But now, as the world again becomes increasingly straitened, and nations cast around for of a scapegoat, this kind of paranoid nationalism is on the rise again--often led by left-wing unionism--the socialism of vicious fools.
As I've often said here, if we must have capitalism, I'm in favour of free trade over protectionism and international cronyism. But capitalism in any form is for me irredeemable, rapacious and unsustainable. Thus I'm against Hitler's economics even more fundamentally than free markets, which though destructive is the lesser of two evils.
I'll just add that I find rhetorical use of fascism, and by inevitable association the holocaust, to bait people, disgusting and offensive, except perhaps when used against those who would revive it. So I'd appreciate it if you got my attention via some other aspersion.

Squeers, on no subject, no single person is all right or all wrong.
I too shudder at the crime of NATIONALISM, but do not want OWG.
I grin at your Sharpe knife in to my very GUTS left wing Socialism UNIONS!
Sorry, give you a clue, put those GOOSES in this country, the true left unions.
In one heap, look at their total membership, divide that by the magic formula truth, say by 4 and you have the true total, now do the true left test, divide buy 10 you now have the left.
No matter you disagree, call me names,spit on me if you must, but true left unions and members, would not match the country womens association.
Yet, for every reason you give, not sure what would replace Capitalism, or if we could ever find something that works better.
I have no doubt, one day for every reason you put on the table, will be ruled by one government.
My fear/belief is it will be a controlling harsh one ruling totally even in matters if birth death and work, more likely right than left.

Squeers

You said this:
“It's the fascist free-marketeers who are…”

which abusive insult of which originally prompted me to demonstrate that fascism is classically opposed to laissez-faire and free markets. As you have already shown by your proposals, you support very many of the economic policies of Hitler, despite your now lying to try to squirm out of it.

You describe thorough-going state control, restriction and confiscation of private production as “laissez faire” or “free market”. But nobody can be as stupid as you are pretending to be. That can only be a tactic of deliberate dishonesty.

And then you say “I'll just add that I find rhetorical use of fascism, and by inevitable association the holocaust, to bait people, disgusting and offensive…”

So you find yourself your own use of fascism disgusting and offensive, do you? I only took you at your word!

Your position that you hate national socialism more than you hate capitalism is false because being opposed to free trade, you can’t hate national socialism more, because that’s the only alternative to free trade – the government will tell people what they may produce or trade. If production is not to happen by way of private ownership – the dreaded capitalism – then what is your alternative? If it’s not OWG, and not mass starvation, how can it be anything other than national socialism?

Thus when you call “fascists” those, such as I, who defend personal and economic freedom against arbitrary government interference, it is a term of abuse, and dishonest to boot.

But when I call you a fascist, as I have just shown, it is a historically and economically accurate term of description.

The fact you squirm under it is for you to correct, not me. Perhaps, from the anti-capitalist company you keep, it’s time you re-thought your economic and political ideology? Full socialism is literally impossible, because of the economic calculation problem. The only possible alternative to freedom of private ownership, is fascism and corporate cronyism. Think about it.

Peter,

There are some people who hate dogs AND cats. It's not either/or.

Squeers,

You are right as usual when you write "capitalism in any form is for me irredeemable, rapacious and unsustainable." But the same principle of logic applies, as Belly so astutely points out: what do we put in its place, supposing - as Belly also witheringly exposes - we had the numbers ? Maybe it's not EITHER capitalism OR socialism either.

Yes, there has to be something vaguely, slightly, distantly, like socialism, perhaps a post-democratic, better-than-democratic, form of social organisation. And maybe, once that has been achieved, all over the world, countries might cautiously move towards association, and co-operation, and bilateral, then multilateral, confederations.

But what might the time-line for this better form of society be like ? After all, we are approaching Marx's bicentenary. At current rates, even if we assumed that there was already, let's say, one genuine post-democratic/socialist state right now, what are the chances that it will survive ? If it does, what are the chances that its ruling party will not be corrupted by power which might inevitably accrue to its Great and Beloved Leader ?

And we're back in the gulags.

And if a collection of states could somehow get over those hurdles, say after another two hundred years, while capitalism evolves new and more insidious forms of economic dominance - well, one thing I've learnt is that when one has to posit more than a couple of 'ifs', then give it away, particularly if not one 'if' has truly come to pass.

You would probably agree that Karl Popper's notions of incremental change, painfully improving the lives of ordinary people, innovating better forms of democracy in the face of the rapacity of capitalism, bit by bit, might have a better chance of solid success.

Sorry, gotta watch the Semi-final :)

Joe

Belly,
I wasn't directing anything at you, though you are clearly a union man and I hadn't thought of that. But then when has Squeers ever sung a popular tune?. Don't forget I spent decades under industrial unions too, and while I don't wish to give offence, I stand by my condemnation above. In recent decades unionism hasn't been politically ideological at all, just ever obsequiously clambering for better wages and conditions--for the sake of better wages and conditions! regardless of whether they were warranted and certainly not in accordance with a progressive socialist agenda. And you can't deny that those same unionists, by and large who have betrayed their ostensible cause in droves, in favour of contracts (lucrative in the short term), are the same people among the working classes, indeed largely representative, who are now xenophobic and calling for protection. There is indeed common ground between the popular left and right. And that's not what Labor is supposed to stand for!

Loudmouth

Firstly, the charge that capitalism is “rapacious” and “unsustainable” is, in other words, an accusation that capitalism is keeping too many people alive at too high a standard. Certainly socialism is a cure for that problem!

Secondly, either you’re right, or you’re wrong, in thinking that there are more than two alternatives: capitalism and socialism.

The argument that you’re wrong is this.
EITHER 1. you can decide how to use your labour or other means of production, based on private property, voluntary exchange and personal freedom,
OR 2. it can be decided by the state, based on political decision-making, compulsory monopoly, and bureaucratic central planning.
There is no other possibility. And the second option, and all other options, would involve mass starvation.

The argument that you’re *right* is that there are the above two options, and … what? I say there isn’t one. You say there is, or might be. Okay. What is it?

Note that, to be a third option, it cannot entail decisions by the state on how the means of production are to be used, because *that proves you wrong*.

Okay. So please either say what the third option is, or concede that you’re wrong in supposing there is one.

Watching you guys discuss socialism is like watching 19th century surgeons going from patient to patient with contaminated hands. But it’s worse than that, because *even after the germ theory of disease is explained*, and *even after you are shown how to wash your hands* YOU STILL DON’T GET IT.

“They obstinately cling to their previous opinions.”
Mises

But it’s already been proved why it’s not *possible*, let alone desirable – NINETY YEARS AGO!

Squeers is caught out in an act of blatant intellectual dishonesty and bankruptcy, and you rush to defend him and assure him that socialism is possible.

As I have shown, historically and economically, “fascist” describes Squeers own policy preferences which he has stated repeatedly – opposed to free trade, and in favour of controls over profit, wages, prices, trade, money, credit, and all production. In denying this, he’s LYING.

Unless you are able to
a) understand
b) correctly represent, and
c) refute
the argument from economic calculation: http://mises.org/pdf/econcalc.pdf
you are not qualified to have an opinion on whether socialism might be possible; because that irrefutably proves that it's not.

Okay. Can you tell me what is the argument from economic calculation, which proves socialism is not possible in theory, let alone in practice?

Furthermore, because it’s not possible, the only other possibility is an ongoing move into fascism, which is what we’re seeing all over the western world. For example, government control of the money supply, a la USA and Europe, is NOT “free market”, is not “laissez faire”. It’s money socialism! Since you and Squeers are not in favour of capitalism, therefore you are in favour of socialist fascism, because there is no other alternative.

Democracy is just socialism by instalments. If you actually READ the economic policies of Hitler, you will find many that any anti-capitalist agrees with: government control of business, government restriction of profits, government taxing of capital gain, and so on. Do you?

Right now the UN is planning all sorts of central planning of food and other production that will definitely – not maybe – cause many people to die. Yet you socialist conceited fools just can’t get it – maybe if you kill enough people some form of socialism will work eventually?

WAKE UP!

Squeers
So you’re opposed to free trade, opposed to world government, and opposed to national socialism.

So who is going to make decisions on how to use the means of production, and on what basis?

No, Peter, neither capitalism nor socialism, as I tried to point out in my clumsy way. Neither path has the answers.

What else then ?

I haven't got a clue. But there must be something that builds on them. What that is, I don't know. That's the task of the next Marx, or Mises, or Popper. One of us.

It's not an open-and-shut world, Peter. It's a bit more complicated than that.

Best wishes,

Joe

Squeers I take no offense.
Lets make this clear, very clear, I regard you , and many more as a good poster and enjoy your posts.
Differ some times but that is life.
Some will see a very pig headed bloke in me, he exists, without shame.
I hold in contempt any one who has no imagination, no room to digest others views.
And who, fixed and often uninformed in their views, claim that of me.
You I Joe , we stand on different hills different history's and experience, that makes us what we are, gives us our opinions.
You do unions an injustice,yet not all of them.
Unions represent, not lefty extremists, please know, one in a hundred trade unionist are that.
And about 50 in every hundred! TRULY! are more likely conservative voters.
I once, uninformed as I was thought Communism, or Socialism , One World Government, was coming.
That it would be wonderful.
I grew up, fast!
I go back first to that dream, one Lexi shares and one I would like to but can not.
No workers Paradise ever existed,no peoples one.
OWG would be a Bee hive,once in power most of humanity would be the worker Bees in a black nest without hope.

I have a few thoughts,and questions.
The answers, even the thoughts,should tell why I think humanity is headed for one world.
Can any one tell me of a time humanity worked as one to fix a problem.
Will someone put in to words why we fail to work together to end wars?
Why is China/Russia/America not sitting down today to fix and free North Korea.
If humanity came first,just after morning coffee they could fix and enforce settlement in the middle east.
Post lunch?
Resolve the terrorism problems of the world.
Self interest, use of country's and people as pawns there is my answer.
Communism, trying for a rebirth under another name, fell after a crack in the wall.
One day, maybe after a war so bad we could not think of it, a lifeguard.
One that enslaves us all,will be excepted and in a few hundred years? one big North Korea.
Think with me here.
If those leading nations fought short harsh wars,many deaths, to fix forever these problems,how many of us would not agree?
See I too would say ok peace is worth the pain.

Sqeers, Loudmouth, Peter & Belly are all engaged in arguing where
society will head in the future and how it can escape the clutches of
those Grey Eminences who they so fear.

There is actually a different style of society called the Gift Society.
It was an early form of society after the hunter gatherer and before
it morphed into the agricultural period.
If you have more tomatoes than you need you give them away and someone
may give you some grain. It was not a formal barter system but
something like this may come into being, perhaps more formalised.

Imagine every town or village had its weekly market and the town has
a row of trades and repair shops.
Does this not sound a bit like the traditional UK market town ?
If to smooth out the barter system they may generate their own money.
There are already quite a number of town moneies such as the Totnes
Pound already in circulation.
The purpose of these town monies is to keep the town wealth in the
town. They only use the national currency when they buy in something
from outside.

Have a look at
http://totnesedap.org.uk/
or
http://transitionculture.org/

There are people looking for a better way that will be possible under
future conditions.

Bazz
I agree with much of what you say including the growing need and increasing trend for local production and 'market towns'. The barter system is growing in Australia under systems like LETS including bartering labour as well as produce but of course it is happening at the individual and community level which is where it works best.

Belly,

Humans are tribal....and not only do they instinctively form cliques, they also form hierarchies. I think a one world government is a most unlikely possibility (in the true sense of our idea of "government")

Bazz,

Look out for a book titled "The Gift" by Lewis Hyde. It examines the mechanisms involved in gift societies throughout history and looks at the psychological aspects inherent in such a system. It might be said that our current system of usury is the antithesis of gift society.

Sorry for the delay all, I've had a child in hospital (and please don't lecture me, Yabby, about how I take that for granted etc. I promise not to cause any more babies!)

Joe,
thanks for clarifying my position to Peter (though I do like cats and dogs :).
What do we put in its place?
I agree it doesn't have to be either or. The real difficulty inherent in any alternative is capitalism itself; it's never going to be a walk in walk transition. All the world's billions and commodities and infrastructure are not merely the product of, but are dependent upon, capitalism, and a radical end to capitalism would surely mean collapse. Moreover, it's impossible for anyone to contemplate a viable alternative to the life of convenience and diversion that the wealthy at least enjoy. But that doesn't alter the fact that the planet can't support an advanced global bourgeoisie, or that it's based on exploitation. Maybe we should have a thread on alternatives to capitalism sometime.
cont..

..cont.
Peter,
I don't need to squirm, I have semantics (you're a dab hand yourself) and the epithet "fascist" has been so abused that it means virtually nothing beyond a manifold of pejorative connotations. However, I concede that it was inappropriate to speak of "fascist free marketeers", even though free marketeers do often in my experience exhibit incongruously conservative, religious, chauvinistic and authoritarian sensibilities.

I've said I think the logistics of world government make the idea problematic at best. What we do need I think is a way to regulate peaceful relations between countries and to encourage democratic institutions within them that address questions of self-sufficiency and sustainability. By democratic institutions I mean that every individual should be educated in and concerned about propagating the health and longevity of the society (and not just his own interests), whose ambitions should be consciously tailored to the limitations imposed by natural systems. I do think international trade should virtually cease, or gradually decline while nations develop their own fulsome capacities. I realise of course that there are a thousand objections, the main thing I'm advocating is that humanity can no longer resign itself to the hopeful benevolence of any systematised economics. On a fragile planet we have to learn to be "socially" spontaneous, the way we are individually. We have to learn to adapt to the conditions, rather than thinking we can endlessly alter the conditions, rather than altering them to suit us. Libertarian egoism puts the emphasis on individual fulfilment and (selective) human "rights", but the first ethical consideration should be human "responsibility"!

But it's all academic as it's not going to happen, or at least it might take a generational collapse to make us change our ways.

Peak oil would do it, Bazz, but isn't shale gas etc. buying lots more time?

Belly, what do you say to my criticism of unionisism?

Just musing on Squeers' thoughts about the epithet "fascist" as meaning virtually nothing (or anything) these days.

When my daughter was teenager, occasionally we'd find ourselves in an argument. If things got a little heated and we seemed to be going around in circles, one of us would simply call the other a "fascist" which immediately rendered the argument superfluous and we'd fall on the floor laughing. It was a good circuit breaker for inflamed emotions.

Slightly off topic, but OLOers do have a penchant for epithets, which are used more to compartmentalise posters and shut down conversation than to provide clarity or fodder for further discussion.

Bazz,

With respect, you may not know what you are talking about. Hunter-gatherer societies were not some sort of generalised sharing-and-caring utopias. The hierarchical (an apt word) distribution system went something like this:

* self

* within one's nuclear family (i.e. father, mother, older brother, younger brother, older sister, younger sister);

* within one's extended family (father's and his brothers' families in patriarchal societies, within both father's and mothers's brothers' and sisters' families in more bilineal societies;

* within one's clan group, descent group, skin-group, etc.

* within one's related clans, mother's, and father's mother's.

End.

Perhaps, to paraphrase Tolstoy, almost all societies are equally imperfect (certainly all 'cultures' are), but hopefully, less imperfect future societies will have aspects of near-perfection, each in its own way.

We crave perfection, finished products, no more worries. As Popper pointed out, it's never going to happen. Perfection and completeness, no need for any more development or growth or improvement, are medieval, pre- and anti-Enlightenment (and fascist-Utopian) concepts.

I'm in a group with Sing Australia (100 groups, 5000 singers around the country, one is probably near you) and every few weeks we sing John Lennon's 'Imagine', which drives me nuts: to summarise his infantile brainlessness, he proposes: (a) no more religion, countries, or possessions, and suggests we (b) 'live for today, live life in peace, share all the world', as if (b) would all follow from (a).

No more religion: Stalin's Russia ? Nazi Germany ?

No countries, and therefore no wars ? So no civil wars ? Libya ? Syria ? Burma ?

Sorry, mate, the hard fact is that there will never be completedness, perfection, either in the distant future or in the mythical past.

Cheers,

Joe

congrats squeers on breeding
you mention what alternative to capitalism
why dear parent capitalisation...[monetising asset or skill]

or position or location
if you have a skill..thats credit worthy
if tyiou got higher educationn [that might be credit worthy
or it might not..much depends on the skill and its application]

say we need plumbers..their skil capitalisation raises
doubles if they take on apprentices

thing is we got plenty of assets
like even a home in israel..has value
in holding value it earns free capitalisation[intrest free]
the assset is the security..for the credit limit..

that in case of default simply transpheres direct to the capitalisation managment..[to wit the king][or queen...in power at the specific time/place]..

as elect-ed by vote and on going quality of service to its people..via the enjoined SOVEREIGN authority of the new un...[ie the sovereigns united nation]..formely called the un[united nations]

[see wikised/wikigeld]
suntreaty and oither written notifications presented
to your leaders way back in 1996...till 2002

further expanded opon here
right here on olo...world freeman society and other sites

Every post from my last is very interesting hope all is well Squeers read one of my two posts above.
Now let us all dream of better, and yes we dream , look at our favorite books plays movies.
NEVER will such a world exist Bazz, or was it Banjo? sorry but one fuel we will never run short of.
The one that drives us, self interest.
My dotage, past work life, is fueled by my new life garden and its reward MARKET DAYS.
I just love those markets we buyers and sellers are, no matter the fair ground mates, like old loved socks we like each other.
But watch, smile no other action will do, as the upwardly mobile, or those pretending to be, shove and push.
Talking on the mobile, about mixing with us country bumpkins, little can be done, get out of the way let them spend big on plants doomed to die but spend.
I under stand, very few want one world government.
But ten thousand or ten billion we have little say little power.
I was not offering hope, but fear and a certainty no other path exists.
A thousand in power total power,once established,could breed the differences out of us in a few generations,with that nationalism, freedom, maybe even the right of some to have children.
Or what? war, mass starvation,rule out humanity caring enough to act on all the above we fail at such human rights, we say stops us, being human.

Belly,

I think we sometimes invest humanity with more smarts than is regularly demonstrated by its behaviour. All our achievements in manipulating our environment, our creations of art science, literature, religion, great metropolises, the obverse is always simultaneously displayed in equal measure.

Of the human qualities most often on display, deception and self-interest, are perhaps the most defining of our prerogatives.

the problem is over simplification results in errant generalisations

joe quote...""With respect,..you may not know what you are talking about.""

mate few of us could disagree
thats why you went wrong a bit later

""Hunter-gatherer societies
were not some sort of generalised sharing-and-caring utopias.""

of course not
but elders got respect whjere respect was due
[will explain later]

""The hierarchical distribution system went something like this:""'

now your missing the meanibng of the HIGHER archy
first comes the old ones...and their trust[the young ones]

""*self""..the hunter
gets the spoil easy..[the guts blood
and the other bits that can go rotten]

the old toothless ones got the brain..
and other soft bits like bone marrow

in my own case i hold the head of the deer
because when we got that gift there was no old ones..!
needing the brain/eyes..[my other totum is the single golden horn[of plenty]..the rest being scarificed on the pire..and all being so hungry they ate even the hooves and one of the horns

this was in early times when we learnt to render jelly
from the hard bits

sinue was highly valuedas a binding
but also could be renderd into a feed

abnyhow a hunter society isnt a gather society
so dont try to join dots that cant join

the rlue is the elders first[for their wisdom
next the young...for when your old..next the woman..who holds the future..

and with the gather's..the rule was never keep/ttake more than half
give at least half the harvest on the tree to the next finder to find

and return..seed to its mother soil
to grow the next crop

and then we got kings and priests
who thought of a better higher archy
and they created money changers/lawers..rules of law

and the dreaming time of plenty
was heard no more..

till one day
the owner of creation
sent a messanger
who was ignored

who got bored
and wished only to die
so he did

Thanks OUG, my reference to hierarchy was a bit ironic, suggesting that the young and the women hunted and gathered food for the old and the men, on the basis that the old men had secret knowledge that they could dole out, and were a sort of priesthood (cf. 'ieros') with power ('archon'). The young fed the old, the old passed on their understandings of the world to the young, a rare case, perhaps the only case, in such societies of reciprocity.

I also did not mean for a minute that there was some sort of infinite amount of food, a never-ending Magic Diprotodon, and that it was distributed routinely to all within coo-ee on the basis of this hierarchy. What I meant, but obviously wasn't clear about, was that, when food was scarce, that's the order in which whoever got some, in that order, and that's who didn't.

The distribution sort of expanded out from the basic unit, the self and the tight, nuclear, family - even to the point that, if an older man had, say, two wives, the kids would share the food that they had gathered with their own mother before sharing with their half-siblings or their step-mother.

Probably that's how we all did it in our hunter-gatherer days, OUG :)

Joe

Sqeers;
Natural gas will stretch our our energy depletion.
However, the production that is planned now is almost entirely for
export to Japan and China.
Australian oil production peaked in 1999, and is depleting at about 3%
a year. We will need to start converting considerable numbers of trucks
for natural gas. Cars also will have to start being converted.
Price no doubt will set off the rush for gas.

The main problem with the conversion will be to retrofit all the
service stations. There is however a way around that.
In the US you can buy compressors to connect to the gas mains and fill
your vehicles tank at home.
It is not generally realised that Australia has gone from almost 100%
of our own oil to close to 50% in about 10 years.
Now we are importing almost all of our petrol because two of our three
refineries are being closed.

Loudmouth;
I never said that hunter gathers were utopian.
The Gift societies came as people settled into little villages and
about the time agriculture started.
When agriculture got started it made time available for people to
specialise in what they did for a living.

Belly;
Our not very distant ancestors lived in market towns or nearby villages.
Last year I was in Toronto and I saw a very large market town in operation.
Even Hornsby in Sydney has the nucleus of a farmers market starting.
There used to be a vegi & fruit stall, but now there are about 20
stalls selling all sorts of food stuffs.
The price of fuel will expand the whole scene.

joe...""i also did not mean for a minute
that there was some sort of infinite amount of food,
a never-ending Magic Diprotodon, and that it was distributed routinely to all within coo-ee on the basis of this hierarchy.""

im saying there is plenty of food
as the bible says who feeds a sparrow?
see the poor have allways been poor..but poor dont hurt the poor

its the fate of the rich and middle claases
they trusted with their riches

see how i buy a pumpking..planting 99 seeds
that grows into a minimum of 200 pumpkins
now many seeds in one pumpin

or a chicken lays 200 eggs
that can make 100 extra hens...and a few spoiled roosters
plus 89 young cokerals to eat...they live off lawn clippings and sprouted wheat..or scraps or insects grown in cardboard

see in the old days i knew that if i had just one hen
i had a feed everyday..if i grew my chickens
i had half the harvest to eat for free

thats why i invented the wikseed
that reaps its 'harvest'...[modestly set at a 5 fold increase ever 1 january..so that one wikised grew to 5 grew to 25 grew to 125]

except each of ya got a pound
so in the 9 years that 'pound' has grown
except i gifted [i think]..5 pounds..anyhow we each got that gift from god[even the chickens can buy their own independance and food/shelter]...once they elect a king to represent them in the un[S>U>N]..sovereigns united nation..that takes over the UN

by sovereign decree
as hrh..i tried to tell her
tell her to ask questions..then at chogm..present the cure

then with her commonweal takle over the un..till the people elect their specific 'king'..queen..to represent THEM

its time to reap the harvest
we need all hands on deck

the offer is on the table
there is plenty for all

we are the mortal heirs of the eternal imortal
much like a corperation that cant 'die'..

but god still wants us
to claim our birth right...RIGHT?

equally
no life can be left behind

joe...""also did not mean for a minute
that there was some sort of infinite amount of food,""

i did

""that it was distributed routinely
to all within coo-ee on the basis of this hierarchy.""'

i did

""What I meant..was that, when food was scarce,
that's the order in which whoever got some,""

well mate each pound promise
ALLOWS US EACH TO GROW our own harvest pound

im giving each permission to grow their own money tree

im hoping that the absurd values of one pound of hemp sed falls to its true 'market value'...[in the courts seed has a value MORE than gold...[i want its price to drop to one tenth

but the 'market forces .have subverted and perverted the harvest
by banning anyone from growing the tree of life along the rivers of life[the main roads]

""in that order,
and that's who didn't.""

no time for blame
get the notes with their seed out to the people
tell them to just/..'let it grow'..and we will issue the WIKISEED/wikigeld money..for the harvest..on trust

ps the wiki can only repay govt debt
or criminal or grey debt..ie thatwe got entraped into
by unilateral contract..and unfair ursurous terms

and of course for food and shelter and survival clothing or other life restoring body need like education or law

""The distribution sort of expanded out from the basic unit,"'

yeah the same with the wikiseed/geld

""the self and the tight, nuclear, family -""

became a fair cure for the crimalised by statute[druggies]
they refused it..so it went to the elders of the aborigonal nations[who rejected][..it

so THEn..it went..to ""the whole human family""

and the abnimal family
flora too not just fauns

ALL LIFE LIVES BY GODS WILL..!

""even to the point that""

has become subverted and perverted beyond reasoning
they still hold within them too[the life/living..god spirit],

that we do to the least
or the most..do to the best or the least

WE DO/did unto him

welcome to the family
here is your trible check book
just nominate which origonal tribe your birth mum came from
he is your king/qqueen ..[in trust]..

til you chose
your own default king/queen..trustee..
to claim fair share of your inheritances
home/food/family/love

Again all posts interest me, make me glad I started this thread.
Poirot best describes my understanding.
Some know, I was once a Christian,while stable in my work life I have moved around many different lifestyles and people.
Even in the midst of community's set up to be perfect Islands with a perfect world harsh wars broke out and destroyed them.
A system that rewards as ours does, and leaves others behind is bound to do this.
Justin one lifetime, mine, we have gone from knowing every one in our street town,village.
To not being able to say Gday to neighbors,and not wanting to.
We are not Bazz threatened by end of oil or any fuel, we have the ability to go into space.
We can and will develop new fuels.
Remember, never forget, GOVERNMENTS TAX FUEL that is the reason for costs.
If they increase GST tax breaks for the rich die, we could use our cars, maybe return to the Sunday drive.
Stupid, thats what it is for me to say, but if we had as we did, when we mostly thought God watched us,a reason to unite be better to others, a rule to live by.
Well in the end we may just get it a new God for every one,the same one an invention that may hurt but long term who will know.
Move over North Korea.

If the power of veto did not exist in the UN.
if America. China. England/Russia could not act in their own self/political interests.
Syria would not be murdering its own people.
Maybe North Korea would not be private property of a single family, and starving to death.
I think we fail humanity in letting this happen.
But too see a day people will look at the promise of settling such issues as good.
And not see,the dangers of total control.
While nice to be nice,we just can not put our self interests aside and work together to fix our troubles.

Belly,

Now that you have started something, here is a brilliant article, well worth reading carefully:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/david-held/from-american-century-to-cosmopolitan-order?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=201210&utm_campaign=Nightly_%272011-10-18%2005%3a30%3a00%27

Happy and thoughtful reading !

Cheers,

Joe

Brilliant! thanks loudmouth, the JM Keynes quote left had corner top last paragraph told it all.
I recommend your link to anyone interested in this subject.
Look in truth the verbiage tested me a few times but understood it all.
And it challenged me!
See I have always wanted a better world.
A more caring one, and always been let down, Communism, only for a very short time, Socialism, both let me down.
So I put my understanding of human nature,self interest first .
In the way of a possibility, somethings would be better if controlled in the interests of all the world.
I know humanity is not dealing with its own mass produced problems.
We make starvation happen/refugees happen, and we fail to be concerned, more every day, about others death and pain.

There is one problem that is ignored so far. Many scientists in many countries are aware of the common threat to the world and effective world government.

There are large, near- earth asteroids - which could destroy the human race. Not like the one that Bruce Willis saved earthlings from in a movie. NASA has counted 880 planet buster asteroids. NASA used their WISE satellite using infrared radiation to find out for the first time their size and No.

All near-Earth asteroids 10 Km across, (one wiped out the dinosaurs), have been found. The risk of armagedon is substantially reduced according to the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass. This scientific evidence, is what the US Congress in 1998 asked NASA to produce (arxiv.org/abs/1109.6400)

Even, so here are also 19.500 Near-earth asteroids between 100 and 1,000 metres across. Half as many as previously estimated using reflected light in optical telescopes. 70 million years ago a km sized asteroid wiped out most animals on land and , sea life and the next king hit could be the next ten years or 70 million years in the future .
Consider also that NASA identified around 7,800 asteroids more than 100 metres across. If we assume that 400 metre wide asteroid could impact the earth at around 25,000 km per hour . This could destroy a nation with fire storms , trigger ing shock waves in the earths crust that trigger of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and sunamies . Perhaps, stratospheric dust produced by the impact and volcanic eruptons this could trigger off a mini ice age In the temperate regions . Crops and food production would fail and a billion or more would die.

Perhaps, years later when the sun shine through, the long lived CO2 released by the fiery impact , volcanoes, forest fires, urban fire storms would over heat the atmosphere .
The technology exists to identify "snooker games" taking place in the asteroid belt and calculate any post collision course with the earth

Pest ok true, it has happened before.
We too could press that button and start the war we fear most.
But in the end this debate is now in two parts.
Is it likely to happen one world rule.
If so,given our inability to fix things, or even act as one, could it be beneficial or slavery.
I would like the UN to be a universal peace keeper, maybe some other duty's, but not rule.
And in the end we will have no say.

Obviously, a world government would never be able to happen, for the simple fact that the people of the world are far too different, and there is simply no consistent standard to govern everyone by;

Even ideas such as capitalism and socialism drastically fall into obscurity when you leave the first world and into a country that idolizes the caste system instead.

We in truth don't actually have any universal morals at all- the UN insists we do, but if you were to make a list of countries or peoples that truly adhered to these standards, you might notice that the 'universality' becomes an empty claim.

Furthermore, the division of the world is what allows alternate systems to function independent of the other- as such, people are free to insist upon themselves a socialist, capitalist, libertarian, caste-system, secular, kemalist or theocratic society.

King Hazza good morning.
How then did North Korea become as it is this morning.
Lybia is free, a man who named him self King of Africa died in a drain.
Only thing wrong there it took 40 years too long.
How did he rule for all those years.
Soviet Union,how many slave nations stood at the feet of Joe Starlin.
Once the ancestor of old Lizzy currently wobbling around our country,was head of half the world.
How?
Obviously?

Actually even the English Empire wasn't running half the world by a long shot- and simply put, most of these 'half the worlds' were colonies (dependent on Britain's protection) over people with greatly impaired technology in order to fend off the invaders.
Subtract the colonies and nations with impaired technology, you are left with the UK, Hong Kong and Singapore- and maybe India.
-and it collapsed.

The USSR was only Russia, the Caucus, Ukraine and China- the latter of which separated early.
Afterwards, the USSR collapsed also.
All of the other Communist nations were merely allied to, or answered to, the USSR- but were actually self-governing.

And North Korea and Libya are not empires by a long shot- Libya is only one country that is large simply because it's empty unusable desert- North Korea is only half of one country and is little larger than Tasmania in geographic size.

In the world today more people are technologically equal, and more are becoming capable of gaining independence, and there are more countries made every decade.

Sorry bloke but rubbish!
Tell Gandhi, the Zulu Kings of Africa, the Bores, England did not have an Empire.Or that they only fell in to her arms for protection.
Most, needed protection from her.
SOVIET UNION ,goggle it look at its members.
Just look at 1956 Hungry, solidarity Poland.
Nothing nice about it, EXCEPT largely used by America and England they won the second world war for us.
Alexander the great,did not win his Empire over a card table, Rome,Egypt did not either.
Great control/pain /damage/took place before the Soviet union finally fell.
It, not dead, rises even now under a name it and we do not yet know but niceness is not my outlook on it.

Not really Belly- again, those Empires struggled to continue existing and ultimately collapsed.

They all gained their territories through bloody conquest- but today, with the proliferation of simple portable weapons that anyone can build and use- and of course WMDs to threaten any country that becomes to expansionist, the age of large countries reasonably expecting to conquer and keep an annexed country by force is no longer here.

America, the most technologically advanced and militarily sophisticated country on the planet, could not keep either Vietnam, or Iraq- simply because rebels kept planting traps for their soldiers and vehicles, and laid low when a bombing run occurred.

Most large empires became a management nightmare and quickly fell apart because the rulers couldn't keep up- and these days it is only more troublesome, to the point that most countries don't even bother trying anymore.

In short, a NWO is impossible- from both a conquest standpoint, and moreso from a dreamy human unity standpoint.
It will simply never happen.

I am not trying to be provocative King Hazza.
But the thread did not set out to predict the out comes of OWG.
If it did I would have predicted at some future time after it was established humanity would take back their freedom.
You have conveniently over looked the simple truths.
How does one family control north Korea.
Why 42 years to kill the grub in Libya?
A Holocaust/Pandemic, Nuclear war, natural disaster, could help this come true.
Humanity, after such, may run to wards it not away, never say never about anything.
Right now, millions believe it is nearly here or maybe is, while not one of those I trust no power.

One family controls North Korea because they promoted themselves as head of the communist party in north korea when a schism occured, and have since retained in power.
A Bolschevik/Marxist/Communist movement in a first-world Western country is simply non-existent- as these movements only launch in areas where people were subject to a worse system- like a feudal system.

It took that long to kill Gaddafi likely due to some convenient (and likely scandalous) deals struck between him and some countries in NATO- who knows?
The fact is, random citizens managed to match firepower with their own government and oust him with minimal outside assistance- a new symptom of today's age.

With nuclear weapons, MAD holds true- nobody would want to use them, with any 'opportunity' (unlikely to work as planned) put at risk of nuclear retaliation with results too devastating even for the winning side.

With that remains the idea that a threat would motivate large portions of people to huddle under some authority- not true either. Perhaps in America/Australia (strictly one-party-per-term system means we effectively DO have to throw our lot in with someone to get our desired protection); in Switzerland, they vote once in a referendum, and the party that pushed for it remains only the fourth largest.
There has been little evidence that even in the threat of terrorism, that most of Europe has done little to support any amalgamation or subservience to a higher power. The EU itself- the closest to a 'global government' is struggling to grow, even retain its own structure.

Sorry bloke,you are way too self confident.
North Korea, is a whole country as you agree ruled by one family.
How, Why,
If Hitler, had not marched on Russia, not declared war on America.
Would he have still ruled most of the world.
Life is not a novel, not scripted.
Winners write history.
Who, tell me, would have ever thought,Italy/Spain/Greece/Portugal/England would have,for years, spent so much more than they earned?
If you look back 100 years the very idea of the EU would have you giggling.
What if tomorrow morning the World Financial Crisis kills the value of all money?

Alternatively Belly you give far too much credit to risks that have little chance of gaining the extents of power you are implying- again, especially in today's age where more commerce is becoming more independent and organized, and powerful weapons are easier than ever for civilians to buy or build.
Winners do write history- Switzerland being one such example.
Had Hitler not invaded Russia or brought America into the war, he may well have taken over most of Europe- and likely lost it from continuous uprisings.
And how would a world financial crisis kill all value of all money? Even if it did, the money would be equally useless, and thus equally viable to re-assign; or nations would invoke a reserve currency, or a commodity-based exchance until a replacement currency could be properly implemented.
Besides, even if the stock market imposes a dead value on a currency, domestically people are still going to use it for their transactions and set their own prices- it happens already.
Internationally the same would happen- countries who value the trade with a country with a dead currency will quickly determine an alternate trading currency.

King Hazza we will not agree on this one, so be it.
I ask you this, who controls the wealth of the world.
And what is trade? born from exchanging food and needs like clothing weapons and every day needs what is it now.
It is a force for peace, but too a force for war.
I do not always agree, but many think the UN got involved in Lybia Iraq for oil.
I am forced to ask why no involvement in North Korea, is conflict with China the reason?
Why then do we not let China fix it?
I think you put too much value on as things are and neglect the twists and turns history has shown us can take place.

Who controls trade? Nobody. Countries can regulate it and facilitate it and try to impose sanctions, and corporations big and small have a large say in it and contribute to it- but none of these actually control trade as a plural. At best, richer countries and businesses may have a disproportionate degree of influence and benefit.

There was no involvement in North Korea exactly because North Korea is a bit too dangerous for America to handle (even though China is now considering becoming neutral to reunification of this country).
Meanwhile, Iraq was enemies with America and most of its regional Allies (especially Saudi Arabia)- and had oil.
Libya had barely any intervention until the rebels started to get the upper hand (as NATO didn't want to offend the Arab states- who are also dictatorships).
These states are influential because they have oil- but their clear attempts to counterlobby alternate fuels hasn't been entirely successful.

And even many of these countries could never be able to force the amalgamation of any super-nations or OWGs.
Even in WW2, the Allies were never a uniform government- but always separate nations simply assisting each other.
These days Russia is clearly following a policy of arming proxy-nations to win in civil wars, China is passively working to economic success (their capacity to buy out land only occurs because we elect greedy governments who let them because selling off things they shouldn't is what they're trying to promote for personal gain).
In short, nobody is in a position- or even trying to get in position- to force the need for a federalization.
Even the EU is starting to stall in both its expansion AND its integration- at no less than the nagging of its own individual members.

King Hazza I can not rebut your post.
I can remind you however you seem convinced things will remain much as they are.
History shows this is not true.
Trade is always in flux, it as you say controls its self.
But self interest also plays a role.
We tend to think helping developing country's develop is a good thing.
That is today, but what of tomorrow?
And loss of trade fall in our money system, becomes an opportunity for OWG.
In matters of diplomacy trade defense no country today, is in control total control of its actions.
We act as others requires to.

juliar guilelard...has made her next insane promise[at chogm]
promising that developing countries..will face no punituive taxes..on their trade into au

well i recomend the smokers booze and polution guys
go to the developing areas...to remove all taxes on their vile imports

free trade is a one world govt adgenda
when import levies are the way to level the field
the rich..love not paying duties..on their slave wage imports

who should a roller royce..not have import taxes
or them energy consuming big screen tv's..and phones

we should have import taxes
between non wage comparable states

we should have death duties
on those with great wealth..or family trust's..

and corperations must all have human life time framess..
human acountability..human responsability..to get person rights

we should have a transaction tax

when we see the rich
picking up a fair share of the costs
of providing them with educated..workforces..
and assosiated social/health/environmental repair costs

only then will we accept one govt
one law making body

policing quality of life..
and a fairgo for all

i dont care who runs it
as long as its there to make life better for the least of us

not just there to serve a public dis-service
or the rich

But Belly- how would OWG actually take advantage of any of that?
What would they actually do in response to all of this in order to actually annex us into a OWG.

One Under God!
I dislike Gillard, nearly as much as you do.
But you charge and convict her for crimes that do not exist.
Her stating no barriers/costs around imports from poor country's is, to help those unable to help them selves.
Free Trade, you see as a threat.
I see it as a promise, King Hazza, do not think I support New World Order, One World Government, what ever name we give it.
But I fear it.
I fear we, you I OUG have never had a say, never will.
And that forces, some we are unaware of rule already in some cases.
Power like money is a drug that needs no reason.
This issue however, both of us King Hazza took it to trade, is about the self interest of power brokers.
It too, we must except, the Bob Brown types, is for those a dream that it would be Utopia! every one equal and free enough food and housing we could sit in a circle singing together Come by ar is it.
Goggle New World order, ten thousand conspiracy theory's.
Ten thousand types of government.
Never say never.

I thought we would continue was it the 100 posts that stopped us.
A Library full of books about this subject.
Another one about failures in government.
Ten full of books telling of trillions of dollars stolen or wasted.
Yet we, it seems , are confident it will be ok in the long run?
Well maybe it will, but not based on things staying the same.
Change is coming we wait to see just what directions.

belly the 'new' world order isnt new
its been arround for a long time

any new order will include minions
of those running things now...

their adgenda will be to totally indebit us [living persons]
to the banks..via govt baiiling out bankers by lending the 'bailout[at intrst]..from the same bankers

public assdumes the debt..to bailout the bankers..

who run multinational corperations..[dead
non living..legal 'persons'..run by the same lot of minions that sit on the same boardseats...while the real wealth is held in corperate and private and family trusts][yet other legal'persons']

but these legal personhoods
have subsumed the rights of the living person
but unlike us can never die..[thus never payed 'death duties']

indeed dont do a real lot except make debt
by putting private gains into private trusts
while the public trusts and corperations carry the debt

heck mate..queensland has more debt that greece
every 5 weeks the intrst ALONE..=..1 billion

it currently stands at over 80 bilion
[and growing fast]

then we got the local council debts[and intrest on their loans
and their investment funds holding yet other assets that will get a haircut[thus arnt investment..but yet further ODIOUS DEBT

[odious debt is criminal debt
as a proceed of crime..govt police
should seize back the assets and instruments of state
[on its peoples behalf]

if this 'one world govt does this
it has my blessing

nationalise the asset
or privatise..the debt
not the asset

hold boards acountable..be they govt board or private
seize back the proceeds of crime

OUG all ok but if 100 years ago I told you about today you would rightly think me insane.
Who would believe the rise of America to world power, leadership.
Britain not haveing its Empire.
China the new money leader,or on the way to it.
And a free India set to over take them in 50 more years.
The rise then fall, and rise again of Russia.
We had hardly begun to use oil, and had not even found most of it.
Would we not look silly talking of the Arab spring, and the half Century of freedom from Colonialism they have had.
I need to be assured any of this was planned.
That we can with certainty forecast our next 100 years.