We live in a restricted yet shrinking world. Borders, kingdoms, countries, and the like made sense when it took months to cross a single continent. We now live in an age where physical transportation can take us to the other side of the world in less than a day and the transportation of ideas can occur, for all intents and purposes, instantaneously. Like it or not, we're a single species inhabiting a single, shrinking planet. It's time we readjust the rules.
This idea, while not exactly new, was born as a result of a blog by locke (http://www.progressiveu.org/002154-how-can-we-unite-world). A call was made for a united humanity--a single species united behind the cause of furthering life, exploration, and understanding. This is the push to achieving that vision.
Never before has the time been better or more pressing. Instantaneous global communication. Rapid global transportation. Weapons capable of destroying life as we know it. Our science has far outpaced our social order. It's imperative that we catch up and reconcile this difference. It's time to put away petty nationalism. It's time to forgive the transgressions of the past. It's time to find a human faith. It's time to dissolve our artificial boundaries and prejudices. We are the youth. We are the future.
Certainly there will be difficulties. Not everyone will be immediately convinced. How can we proceed? What is our new model? How will we prevail? This blog is the starting point. Awareness will flow from here. Ideas will be generated, a new system will be drafted. Give your input. We need the positive and the negative. The specific and the general. Tell us why it won't work so that we can devise a work-around.
Who here is unhappy with how things are going? Who here doesn't like what they see? Who holds the pieces of the puzzle?
Let me first say that your vision of the future is inspiring. I wish I could be more optimistic.
Most will be unwilling to change. I can think of 1.3 billion people off the top of my head. Not all countries would go for such a truthful endeavor. I think you would have to work within the system of nationalism in order to change it and you wouldn't get very far. Maybe you could start some sort of coalition between America and Europe and try to convince other nations to join and renounce their borders.
Sounds like a recipe for anarchy and the end of the World to me. Sorry. I don't mean to burst your bubble.
www.progressiveu.org/blog/americangirlinchina
Anarchy is the world as it currently exists. Think about it. There are around 200 countries competing with each other. Some work with others, but even then they just unite to work against others. Within these countries there are even competing interests. Wouldn't that be considered anarchy? We live in anarchy.
I believe the reason people would resist unification is that it would be viewed with suspicion. It's hard to believe that there could be an independent group of people who want unification. It's more likely that it's just some attempt at one country to take over the world. It's important to set it up so that this isn't the case. That this isn't an American push. This transcends countries.
I understand what you're getting at with the US-EU coalition, but this may be more divisive than helpful. Each leader should be approached equally. The most basic problem is that nobody will want to relinquish their power. There needs to be a way to guarantee these people continued relevance and usefulness. There would still be a place for these leaders. If the people like them, they'll be able to be representatives for their region.
I believe that it is in the best and most direct interest of all countries to unify. All countries will see this. The case is obvious. There is no possible objection. The only objection comes from a lack of understanding. Deficits in understanding are ameliorated by communication. And, no worries, the bubble was placed in no danger. Actually, fortified rather than burst.
It's important that people realize that unification doesn't mean being stripped of their identity. China will be China. Russia will be Russia. Uganda will be Uganda. Their histories, their cultures, and even their languages will be held in the highest regard. We're making a patchwork quilt out of the different members of humanity. We're forming a cohesive whole made of unique individuals: both at the individual level and the 'tribe' level.
Let all keep their cultures, but find how their cultures integrate with and complement all others.
Touche. I'd go for this full steam ahead if I were you. Let me if you think I can help from China. I'll be here for a while.
www.progressiveu.org/blog/americangirlinchina
Sure thing! When we're ready to roll you just need to find a way to spread the word so it reaches the 1.3 billion or so inhabitants. That's a pretty good chunk of the world, so you'll be responsible for about 15% of the success ;-)
Joking aside: will do. Thanks for the vote of confidence :-)
No pressure. : )
www.progressiveu.org/blog/americangirlinchina
It's hard to believe you've only been a Proguser for a week and four days. Your blog writing is impressive. Keep up the good work so I have something to read when the Recent Post List is drowned in crap by repeat-posters.
~ *~
This is a signature, an automated thingy that pops up when I comment, not a demand to see my blog!
Mind Control is Easier Than You Think
Thanks, thanks. I guess I hit the ground running... were we supposed to check in somewhere and gradually build up? Oops :-)
Local government is the best government because it is best positioned to understand and meet the needs of local people which are almost always different from the needs of people elsewhere.
The farther removed government becomes from the people the worse and more tyranical and the harder to replace it gets.
I have serious problems with the amount of power that has been usurped away from the States by the Federal Government. I have no interest in seeing any of the power of the Federal Government being delegated to some world body that is going to tax me to provide for somebody elses' needs. There are problems enough in my own community where I don't want to see any wealth leaving it.
I have no interest in being unified and might consider shooting someone in a blue helmet if they try to impose world rule on my community.
You're absolutely right! And this is something to keep in very great consideration: localized government will always be the most effective. As it gets larger in scale, it gets more and more removed from the needs of those it's claiming to serve. What's good for Washington may not be good for Nevada. What's needed in Nevada may not be right for Maryland. That's a very valid observation.
The point is not creating a World Government, but a unified world. This isn't simply a matter of semantic. I don't agree with government. I don't agree with the restriction of people, with taxation, or with many things that currently define government. The proposal isn't to scale up our currently inefficient systems. The proposal is to learn from the mistakes and do it right.
This is absolutely not about 'world rule' as you fearfully put it. This is about world cooperation. There's no rule. You can't make someone act out of their self interest. You can't change human nature. You can, however, understand human nature and find ways to align self interest.
There would be no blue helmets. This isn't a 'Democrat' thing :-) It may involve *democracy*, but that's entirely different and in no way affiliated with the Democratic party. It's an unfortunate similarity in naming. Democracy would allow independent communities to interact with one another without having rules shoved down their throats.
There would not be a world tax, either. Taxation would be supplanted by charity. There are many out there that realize the impossibility of removing oneself from the greater context of the world. One person's suffering is everyone's suffering. This is simple to illustrate. Someone has a bad day, doesn't pay attention while driving, hits someone else, causes their day to go down hill, etc. There's a possible connection between every person and thing here. Taxation makes no sense. Let all keep the fruits of their labor. This isn't socialism. This isn't forced control. This is us taking a step back and considering ourselves in the context of the world. Of being enlightened and switching from the antiquated modality of pure survivalism. Our chances of survival are increased together, not separate.
So taxation wouldn't be necessary. If everyone in the world were connected, cooperating, and in communication, then all needs could be filled without force. People are more likely to be charitable when their needs are satisfied. It's hard for the starving to be generous, although some are. It's hard for the poor to donate, although some do. The more these 'unnatural' states are mitigated, the more we're able to function.
So no need to start making your own red helmets. There is no conspiracy... except a conspiracy to end the old ways and have a Golden Age of humanity. Please don't be so reactionary for no reason. Do you have a better idea now of what is being proposed?
But in your other blog on much the same subject you were singing the virtues of a Hitler type person uniting the world by force, I don't detect any great desire by most people to be united with people elsewhere in the world and I think the only way such a thing would be accomplished is with force.
I have no problem with you giving to whatever charity you please.
But my charitable dollars will be spent close to home.
That wasn't my blog :-)
The force of will and necessity would be sufficient. There's no requirement that 'force' be physical violence.
And charitable dollars are best spent close to home. If everyone spent their charitable dollars close to home, each location would be completely taken care of. The exceptional cases would be handled as they occurred.