One World Government

I won't waste any more time with with either of you two.

You're too fond of making me the subject matter instead of sticking to the title.

You will be cheerfully ignored.


x

 

It isn’t Xexon per se, more the phenomenon, it’s the people that come to a political forum but want to keep there true political ideas hidden and refuse to discuss them rationally but instead try to spread them obliquely.

Like Rat who doesn’t openly promote his right wing views but instead attacks everything that isn’t those right wing views, so the only thing left is the views he will not promote openly, but is obliquely still promoting.

Xexon is spreading racial hatred but all the time claiming he isn’t and refuses to say anything about his politics.

There have been many more coming and going over the years.

It seems very strange to me that someone has viewpoints they believe in but is unwilling to discuss them openly (well those that come to a debating forum anyway).

What is it about the ideas that they are afraid to share?

Are they ashamed of them?

If they are why to they hold them?

Do they know they can’t defend them?

If so why haven’t they asked themselves why they seem indefensible?

To take Rat as an example again, many people (independent of me) have worked out his views are right wing, but will he discuss them openly, no, he would rather try and pull the wool over the unwary (and face the scorn of those in the know) than speak openly and honestly about his political ideas.

Why?

 

Xexon

The subject is one world government – you view seems to be that you believe the Zionists are trying to take over the world (or is it already have) and you believe they should be stopped.

All I’ve been asking is what political policies, programmes or actions would you want done to stop it?

It seems a perfectly valid thing to ask but why is it that when I ask it you evade or run away?

What are you trying to hide?

 

Balbus, I'm very sure that conspiracy theorists are more concerned with other people hearing their stories than solutions. Solutions are a different part of political thought than what is responsible for looking for alternative theories.

Why ask again and again? You're not going to get new answers.

 

So you cannot answer my questions? I didn't think so, either. Once again, you just repeat the same one liners as if you're some sort of robot. It's almost like you have a bunch of one liners saved on WordPerfect that you simply cut and paste whenever you don't have the facts to discuss something intelligently. Typical Balbus -- all bark and no bite... and no real facts.

You refuse to say how and what I am "promoting", when I am not promoting anything in terms of standard Left vs. Right politics. You also won't say what makes me a "social darwinist", as that does not even make sense because I staunchly reject any and all forms of Darwinism.

No, the real social darwinists are the people you rely on to "take care" of you, who want it all to themselves as they dish the remaining scraps out to the people. The social darwinist mentality sums up the elite mindset perfectly.

 

I think what he means (I could be wrong) is that a smaller government doesn't help out the poor, nor the rich, nor does regulate corporations in a totally free market to prevent some of them from creating monopolies or cartels.
Therefore, it's up to the individual to take care of themselves, those who live in a miserable financial condition may not have access to public school or free healthcare, etc. I guess that is what he calls it social Darwinism, because only those who are the fittest at making money live in decent conditions.

Now he wants you to explain how do you think we can fix social problems without the help of a global social organization (goverment).

I don't wanna put words in the mouth of anybody, that's just how I understand it.

 

The thing is, the government (which is controlled by the central banks and transnationals) always creates the problems to then offer the solutions, which always entails more centralized control to benefit themselves.

We were told the "War on Drugs" was to stop drugs, yet since that time the drug epidemic has raged out of control while the government is the biggest supplier.

We were told the "War on Poverty" was to help the poor, yet people are worse off than ever. While governments continue to get bigger and bigger, the Middle and Working class become pooer and pooer.

The fact is that governments do not exist to serve the people, nor have they ever. Governments have always served to protect the wealthy few, who have never worked a day in their lives, against those who must slave for their system to earn a relatively decent living, keeping the people in line and paying their taxes like good slaves.

These people always champion what appears to be in favor of the people, yet it always results in more control for themselves. They know they must get the people on board and supporting their agenda (which is very different from what the people are lead to believe), so they sell them a cover story to be swallowed at face value. They will say something like "drugs are a problem," so they use this as an excuse to double and triple the size of law enforcement under the guise of "protecting the children," while in the meantime the CIA is one of the biggest traffickers of illegal drugs in the world.

What people like Balbus do not understand is that the corporations run the government and have bought off all the major politicians. Yet Balbus will tell you that more government will solve all the world's problems. He thinks that politicians actually care about the average person, when they are in the pockets of the corporations that grant them their lavish lifestyles. Today, governments are nothing more than the military arm of the corporations. This is called corporate fascism.

So I don't depend on government to solve anything, because 9 out of 10 times they are the ones who created the problem in the first place. The reason so many people have to turn to the government for help is because the government has created the situation that requires this. The bigger government becomes, the more unaccountable to the people it becomes, and the worse off people are.

 

Hell, If I was smart enough I would probably join the orgy at the top of the pyramid.

 

The government might create some problems yes, it does without doubt.

But even if there were no governement. Would all problems disapear?

Some people would still fail at school. What if they don't get enought money for their job to sustain a family?

Some people would still get whatever illness and yes there would still be people overdosing on drugs. Some of them will happen to be poor and can't pay the hospital. How will society help them?

How would you call a national social organization that shares the people's money in order to help the less fortunate? A government. USA governement might be croocked, but saying that every government are is like saying every father beat their kids.

Still I agree with the fact that we live in a fake democracy and all that stuff. But what if people voted more often, for every law they pass? It's direct democracy I think. I heard in Swizterland the people actually vote for laws and such once a week or so.

But the point was, after you eliminate governement, how would the problems fix themselves?

 

I never claimed to advocate no government. What I do know is that the current system is corrupt from the top-down, and it needs to be abolished completely. When I refer to "this system," I am not only talking about the government, but the interlocking economic and corporate interests that control governments from behind the scenes. This is why I tell people it's important for them to understand how the power structure works, and that trying to change things from within the system is an utter waste of time. Many people cannot let go of the illusion that their voice counts by going to the polls and voting on their voting machines, for their hand-picked candidates.

People are so entrapped within the matrix that they don't even see things for what they are. They think the government is there to serve them. But when have governments throughout history ever served to benefit the people? Governments serve only to control the people, and the bigger these governments become (under the guise of "helping" people and solving problems -- .ie crime, poverty, drugs), the less accountable they become, until people are eventually living in a totalitarian state.

Yes, I believe the overwhelming majority of problems are created by government and its interlocking corporate interests. Like I said, as the government becomes bigger and more socialized, the worse off things become for everyone but the very rich. This is what is happening today. Socialism has always existed to benefit only the very rich while enslaving everyone else.

Today what we really have is corporatism, or corporate fascism. But it's still administered under a scientifically socialistic form of government. Under communism, the state would take over the corporations. Today, the corporations have taken over the state, but the outcome is exactly the same.

Do you really believe that governments are these benevolent institutions that exist to help people? Most of the money paid in taxes goes to the private banks and to prop of failing transnational corporations. Most of the money that goes to "helping" people is printed out of nothing, which creates even more debt, which is what the controllers of government want because it equals more control.

I personally think all Western governments (and most non-Western governments) are corrupt, as they all are subservient to the same international banking cartels. It's simply much more realized in the US because of its size and power, and the fact that the US was set up to become the trojan horse to usher in this new global dictatorship.

The European countries are becoming every bit as fascistic, though it is more veiled and less reported on. With the rise of the European Union, 70-80% of the laws are written by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and Luxembourg and passed into law by rubber stamp. Countries that once had their own laws and their own high courts have had their national sovereignty stripped by this superstate -- which I should add had long been a dream of many people, including Adolph Hitler, who wrote about it himself in his book, aptly titled The New World Order.

 

What do you think our solution should be?

 

I think getting involved in local government affairs is a pretty good start to any solution. And I personally think that voting counts. We recently had an electoral reform referendum the same day as voting day in Ontario where people could vote in favour to change the FPTP system of electing Members into office in favour of Mixed Member Proportional representation.

When it comes to the big world issues, it comes to down to being knowledgeable and making good consumer choices first and foremost. Leading a sustainable lifestyle that does not perpetuate a corrupted global conquer or be conquered system can minimize some of the injustices that take place all around the world for sure.

 

The beauty of the NWO conspiracy is in it's inescapable nature. There are few things that won't dribble profit to corporations through their purchase. And even if you want to grow your own food, you still have to throw taxes to big brother. Buying organic is expensive, and all the organic growers are supposed to have licensing, which I'm pretty sure entails sending money the governments way as well. It's hard to live life in modern society without your money going to the government or a corporation.

Voting doesn't make much difference when one has to shoot for the lesser of evils, rather than for what they really want. What's also funny is that only the 'majority' has their views representated in government (at least in the U.S.), and that's only assuming the system works.

 

i dont know if you guys believe this stuff but i got it from ALEX JONES an activist who tryed to warn us about 9/11/2001,the last step of one world government in eliminating about 80% of the world population

google videos:
endgame
terrorstorm
america to fascism

 

If we go to a one world goverment where will we go when it gets really shitty?

 

*yawns*

Electoral reform is possible. It happens every day.

 

How on earth were you able to post here with only 10 posts???

*smells something fishy*

 

It's Alex Jones Himself

Oh Shi*

 

Well he gets cited so often in this damned forum, it wouldn't surprise me.

 

A one world government could work man. But it would take a leader who isn't greedy, lupiie, or overtly agressive. If someone like John Lennon were to head it I'd sign right the fuck up