|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Olivencia
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:49 am Post subject: The demise of the nation state? |
 |
|
Do you think it's just a matter of time when "nations" no longer exist and that they simply form larger conglomerates such as the European Union? Will a North American Union (Canada, USA and Mexico) be next as well as some kind of Asian Union? Yes there are roadblocks. Some seem pretty high and impenetrable. I'm not sure if a nation will cease to exist in its entirety but perhaps they will exist in the sense some nations have kings and queens which are simply figureheads.
Would the demise of the nation state be necessarily a "good" or "bad" thing?
Your thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is already happening. Nations and their currencies will still appear to exist, sort of like brand names, but if the banking establishment has its way, nation states will be conglomerated into superstates, administered by undemocratic bureaucracies, and controlled by central banks.
The template for world government is the EU. It already has its own European central bank, and is run by unelected officials. The North American Union is now basically a reality. The next step is a world government (which is what the UN was set up to become) with its own world central bank (basically what the IMF is). All currencies will be pegged to a fiat issued by the world bank, which will be controlled by exact same elites who control the Fed and central banks around the world today. The funding mechanism will be carbon taxes (which is why the AGW hoax was perpetrated), performing a similar function to income tax in the US, which goes straight to paying off interest to the private Fed. This is what will be discussed at the upcoming Copenhagen climate conference.
If a world government is allowed to form, it will be an altogether tyrannical and authoritarian government. This is clear from the documents people in control have written over many years. It has been planned far in advance, and the overall agenda will include reducing the world's population drastically (eugenics), taking away sovereignty and democratic representation from the people, bankrupting the world and consolidating wealth into the hands of the elite, taxing the public into the ground, and setting up a socialist police state globally. It will essentially amount to a form of neo-feudalism. Another major world war (with the banks funding and indebting both sides) is likely in the cards as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| While there is a trend toward larger political/economic units there is also an opposite trend. Now that many corporations have bigger budgets than bunches of countries, there is the possibility that something like a medieval European system with a weak central government and lots of other power centers will develop and beat out the nation state. Given the rise of fundamentalism, the anti-science atmosphere lately and what seems to be growing anti-government sentiment, I'm beginning to think that scenario is the more likely one. With entities like Blackwater around, corporations can now hire their own armies. How long can it be until Somebody Inc hires an army and overthrows some little country's government? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| While there is a trend toward larger political/economic units there is also an opposite trend. Now that many corporations have bigger budgets than bunches of countries, there is the possibility that something like a medieval European system with a weak central government and lots of other power centers will develop and beat out the nation state. Given the rise of fundamentalism, the anti-science atmosphere lately and what seems to be growing anti-government sentiment, I'm beginning to think that scenario is the more likely one. With entities like Blackwater around, corporations can now hire their own armies. How long can it be until Somebody Inc hires an army and overthrows some little country's government? |
Government is more centralized now than ever, and the real government is the banking establishment. Major corporations are also beholden to the banking elite - who control the central banking system around the world - and dependent upon them for credit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eIn07912
Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
This is already happening. Nations and their currencies will still appear to exist, sort of like brand names, but if the banking establishment has its way, nation states will be conglomerated into superstates, administered by undemocratic bureaucracies, and controlled by central banks.
The template for world government is the EU. It already has its own European central bank, and is run by unelected officials. The North American Union is now basically a reality. The next step is a world government (which is what the UN was set up to become) with its own world central bank (basically what the IMF is). All currencies will be pegged to a fiat issued by the world bank, which will be controlled by exact same elites who control the Fed and central banks around the world today. The funding mechanism will be carbon taxes (which is why the AGW hoax was perpetrated), performing a similar function to income tax in the US, which goes straight to paying off interest to the private Fed. This is what will be discussed at the upcoming Copenhagen climate conference.
If a world government is allowed to form, it will be an altogether tyrannical and authoritarian government. This is clear from the documents people in control have written over many years. It has been planned far in advance, and the overall agenda will include reducing the world's population drastically (eugenics), taking away sovereignty and democratic representation from the people, bankrupting the world and consolidating wealth into the hands of the elite, taxing the public into the ground, and setting up a socialist police state globally. It will essentially amount to a form of neo-feudalism. Another major world war (with the banks funding and indebting both sides) is likely in the cards as well. |
And then, the sky falls down, and the walls drip blood, and tails wag dogs, and.... blahblahblahblah. Conspiracy nuts are all the same.
I don't think the EU is as much of a template as the U.S. itself is. Independent states with their own governments, militaries, and laws, that take a partnership in a larger centralized government. The EU is build as "American capitalism/democracy" on an international scale. If it works, it could very well take place in North America, Africa, East Asia, etc..
But it's not like we didn't see this coming. Go back 200 years ago and there were relatively more nations than there are now (considering where the majority of the worlds population was located.) China was once 5 or 6 countries, now it's one. Several American colonies were their own nation until joining the Union. We naturally lump ourselves together with a group that seems to be working better.
As for currency, this too is obvious if you look at history. In ancient times, what was used for money by one town was completely different than one a few hundred miles away. Throughout human evolution, as populations centralize, so does the commonality of their social practices and economic policies.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Let's say your dooms day theory is correct. What makes you think we can stop it? If it's been in place for decades or hundreds of years, it certainly has some powerful people in charge of it. If it's the elites and the rich that are controlling it, well, they've got all the money. Which means they can buy more guns and bombs, and pay people like you and me and fight each other for them. If the major world governments are already working on this, there is little to nothing you can do about it. So, why fight it? Go with the flow. They control all the tanks and war planes, not to mention the banks and money, besides falling off the grid and living in a shack out in the wilderness, what else are you gonna do about it?
But again, I think all this "new world order" and "one world government" talk is nonsense. I do think we're headed down a more unified human population. A global democracy if you will. But I think it will be a positive thing. Not a big scary thing. Think about his. Look back at all the alien movies where there's one superior race our in the universe, quietly watching what happens here. It's been done over and over again. What do they share? Their planet functions as a whole. The entire population is a part of the same "nation" if you will. Men created these stories. You know why? Because it makes sense. It makes sense that the only way the human race can survive our future struggles (which are gonna make our historical ones look like pancake breakfast) is to act all together. Is to have the entire human race as one unified people. A planet without border. A nation without lines. The citizens of Earth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
This is already happening. Nations and their currencies will still appear to exist, sort of like brand names, but if the banking establishment has its way, nation states will be conglomerated into superstates, administered by undemocratic bureaucracies, and controlled by central banks.
The template for world government is the EU. It already has its own European central bank, and is run by unelected officials. The North American Union is now basically a reality. The next step is a world government (which is what the UN was set up to become) with its own world central bank (basically what the IMF is). All currencies will be pegged to a fiat issued by the world bank, which will be controlled by exact same elites who control the Fed and central banks around the world today. The funding mechanism will be carbon taxes (which is why the AGW hoax was perpetrated), performing a similar function to income tax in the US, which goes straight to paying off interest to the private Fed. This is what will be discussed at the upcoming Copenhagen climate conference.
If a world government is allowed to form, it will be an altogether tyrannical and authoritarian government. This is clear from the documents people in control have written over many years. It has been planned far in advance, and the overall agenda will include reducing the world's population drastically (eugenics), taking away sovereignty and democratic representation from the people, bankrupting the world and consolidating wealth into the hands of the elite, taxing the public into the ground, and setting up a socialist police state globally. It will essentially amount to a form of neo-feudalism. Another major world war (with the banks funding and indebting both sides) is likely in the cards as well. |
And then, the sky falls down, and the walls drip blood, and tails wag dogs, and.... blahblahblahblah. Conspiracy nuts are all the same. |
Except that I never said any of that. People who label others "conspiracy nuts" are all the same. Close minded (and usually brainwashed).
| Quote: |
| I don't think the EU is as much of a template as the U.S. itself is. Independent states with their own governments, militaries, and laws, that take a partnership in a larger centralized government. The EU is build as "American capitalism/democracy" on an international scale. If it works, it could very well take place in North America, Africa, East Asia, etc.. |
The EU is not a democracy. It is administered by commissars, and is run by the central banking establishment in Europe (agglomerated into the European central bank). The US is also very close to becoming a part of a North American Union, run in a similar un-democratic manner, with bankers at the helm.
| Quote: |
| But it's not like we didn't see this coming. Go back 200 years ago and there were relatively more nations than there are now (considering where the majority of the worlds population was located.) China was once 5 or 6 countries, now it's one. Several American colonies were their own nation until joining the Union. We naturally lump ourselves together with a group that seems to be working better. |
It's a question of sovereignty. If your nation becomes part of a superstate, it cedes its sovereignty to that state (as has happened in the EU). Sovereignty is necessary for democratic representation. When the central banks of multiple countries merge to form a new debt-based, fractional reserve fiat currency, then all the countries becomes slaves to that entity, and are perpetually indebted to it. If it's just a national central bank, the citizens can revolt against it. If it's an international central bank, there is no escape.
| Quote: |
| As for currency, this too is obvious if you look at history. In ancient times, what was used for money by one town was completely different than one a few hundred miles away. Throughout human evolution, as populations centralize, so does the commonality of their social practices and economic policies. |
Ok, so you lack a basic understanding of what money is... In ancient times, money itself contained value (ie. gold or precious stones). Today, the money is just paper (backed by nothing), and has no inherit value. We are forced to "pretend" it has value, and accept it as payment by government fiat. But this inflationary monetary system debases the currency and causes it to lose its value over time (the dollar has lost something like 97% of its original value) and eventually collapse like the ponzi scheme it is... this is what's happening to the US dollar at present. But the bankers use all the money they create ex nihil to buy up all the real assets and wealth. This is the simple fraud they use, and most people don't even understand how it works.
| Quote: |
| But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Let's say your dooms day theory is correct. What makes you think we can stop it? If it's been in place for decades or hundreds of years, it certainly has some powerful people in charge of it. If it's the elites and the rich that are controlling it, well, they've got all the money. Which means they can buy more guns and bombs, and pay people like you and me and fight each other for them. If the major world governments are already working on this, there is little to nothing you can do about it. So, why fight it? Go with the flow. They control all the tanks and war planes, not to mention the banks and money, besides falling off the grid and living in a shack out in the wilderness, what else are you gonna do about it? |
The problem is that there is an open eugenicist agenda at work. This is not conspiracy hoopla, but is quite easily verifiable (if you take the time to look it up). People like John Holdren (Obama's science czar), Maurice Strong (UN secretary general) write about putting sterilants in the water supply and reducing the population by 80% or more. They advocate this. The Rockefellers funded the eugenics movement around the world (mainly in the US, where people were sterilized) in the first half of the 20th century, and are now still the largest funders of the environmentalist movement (eugenics 2.0) in the second half. The elite don't just want us to be docile little slaves, they want us dead. They believe it is necessary to make the world a better place, and they write books about it (books like John Holdren's Ecoscience).
| Quote: |
| But again, I think all this "new world order" and "one world government" talk is nonsense. I do think we're headed down a more unified human population. A global democracy if you will. But I think it will be a positive thing. Not a big scary thing. Think about his. Look back at all the alien movies where there's one superior race our in the universe, quietly watching what happens here. It's been done over and over again. What do they share? Their planet functions as a whole. The entire population is a part of the same "nation" if you will. Men created these stories. You know why? Because it makes sense. It makes sense that the only way the human race can survive our future struggles (which are gonna make our historical ones look like pancake breakfast) is to act all together. Is to have the entire human race as one unified people. A planet without border. A nation without lines. The citizens of Earth. |
Oh man... you've been watching way too much Star Trek... There is nothing democratic about it. The communists in Russia and elsewhere used to have propaganda showing people flying on space ships, living in a futuristic wonderland. In reality, you become a slave and your government grinds you into the dirt, starves you, taxes you, controls every aspect of your life, and ultimately kills you. This is where we are headed if world government is allowed to form. It will be hell.
This has already happened so many times in history. Just think about how many governments in the last century brutalized their populations and murdered millions of people. Hitler learned about eugenics from the US and the British. The exact same banking establishment that funded Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and pretty well every other dictator, as well as both sides in both world wars, is still in control today. All of this is verifiable. Given their track record (as well as what they are openly talking about doing), why on earth would you think they're going to create some futuristic utopia for us to live in? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eIn07912
Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
This is already happening. Nations and their currencies will still appear to exist, sort of like brand names, but if the banking establishment has its way, nation states will be conglomerated into superstates, administered by undemocratic bureaucracies, and controlled by central banks.
The template for world government is the EU. It already has its own European central bank, and is run by unelected officials. The North American Union is now basically a reality. The next step is a world government (which is what the UN was set up to become) with its own world central bank (basically what the IMF is). All currencies will be pegged to a fiat issued by the world bank, which will be controlled by exact same elites who control the Fed and central banks around the world today. The funding mechanism will be carbon taxes (which is why the AGW hoax was perpetrated), performing a similar function to income tax in the US, which goes straight to paying off interest to the private Fed. This is what will be discussed at the upcoming Copenhagen climate conference.
If a world government is allowed to form, it will be an altogether tyrannical and authoritarian government. This is clear from the documents people in control have written over many years. It has been planned far in advance, and the overall agenda will include reducing the world's population drastically (eugenics), taking away sovereignty and democratic representation from the people, bankrupting the world and consolidating wealth into the hands of the elite, taxing the public into the ground, and setting up a socialist police state globally. It will essentially amount to a form of neo-feudalism. Another major world war (with the banks funding and indebting both sides) is likely in the cards as well. |
And then, the sky falls down, and the walls drip blood, and tails wag dogs, and.... blahblahblahblah. Conspiracy nuts are all the same. |
Except that I never said any of that. People who label others "conspiracy nuts" are all the same. Close minded (and usually brainwashed).
| Quote: |
| I don't think the EU is as much of a template as the U.S. itself is. Independent states with their own governments, militaries, and laws, that take a partnership in a larger centralized government. The EU is build as "American capitalism/democracy" on an international scale. If it works, it could very well take place in North America, Africa, East Asia, etc.. |
The EU is not a democracy. It is administered by commissars, and is run by the central banking establishment in Europe (agglomerated into the European central bank). The US is also very close to becoming a part of a North American Union, run in a similar un-democratic manner, with bankers at the helm.
| Quote: |
| But it's not like we didn't see this coming. Go back 200 years ago and there were relatively more nations than there are now (considering where the majority of the worlds population was located.) China was once 5 or 6 countries, now it's one. Several American colonies were their own nation until joining the Union. We naturally lump ourselves together with a group that seems to be working better. |
It's a question of sovereignty. If your nation becomes part of a superstate, it cedes its sovereignty to that state (as has happened in the EU). Sovereignty is necessary for democratic representation. When the central banks of multiple countries merge to form a new debt-based, fractional reserve fiat currency, then all the countries becomes slaves to that entity, and are perpetually indebted to it. If it's just a national central bank, the citizens can revolt against it. If it's an international central bank, there is no escape.
| Quote: |
| As for currency, this too is obvious if you look at history. In ancient times, what was used for money by one town was completely different than one a few hundred miles away. Throughout human evolution, as populations centralize, so does the commonality of their social practices and economic policies. |
Ok, so you lack a basic understanding of what money is... In ancient times, money itself contained value (ie. gold or precious stones). Today, the money is just paper (backed by nothing), and has no inherit value. We are forced to "pretend" it has value, and accept it as payment by government fiat. But this inflationary monetary system debases the currency and causes it to lose its value over time (the dollar has lost something like 97% of its original value) and eventually collapse like the ponzi scheme it is... this is what's happening to the US dollar at present. But the bankers use all the money they create ex nihil to buy up all the real assets and wealth. This is the simple fraud they use, and most people don't even understand how it works.
| Quote: |
| But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Let's say your dooms day theory is correct. What makes you think we can stop it? If it's been in place for decades or hundreds of years, it certainly has some powerful people in charge of it. If it's the elites and the rich that are controlling it, well, they've got all the money. Which means they can buy more guns and bombs, and pay people like you and me and fight each other for them. If the major world governments are already working on this, there is little to nothing you can do about it. So, why fight it? Go with the flow. They control all the tanks and war planes, not to mention the banks and money, besides falling off the grid and living in a shack out in the wilderness, what else are you gonna do about it? |
The problem is that there is an open eugenicist agenda at work. This is not conspiracy hoopla, but is quite easily verifiable (if you take the time to look it up). People like John Holdren (Obama's science czar), Maurice Strong (UN secretary general) write about putting sterilants in the water supply and reducing the population by 80% or more. They advocate this. The Rockefellers funded the eugenics movement around the world (mainly in the US, where people were sterilized) in the first half of the 20th century, and are now still the largest funders of the environmentalist movement (eugenics 2.0) in the second half. The elite don't just want us to be docile little slaves, they want us dead. They believe it is necessary to make the world a better place, and they write books about it (books like John Holdren's Ecoscience).
| Quote: |
| But again, I think all this "new world order" and "one world government" talk is nonsense. I do think we're headed down a more unified human population. A global democracy if you will. But I think it will be a positive thing. Not a big scary thing. Think about his. Look back at all the alien movies where there's one superior race our in the universe, quietly watching what happens here. It's been done over and over again. What do they share? Their planet functions as a whole. The entire population is a part of the same "nation" if you will. Men created these stories. You know why? Because it makes sense. It makes sense that the only way the human race can survive our future struggles (which are gonna make our historical ones look like pancake breakfast) is to act all together. Is to have the entire human race as one unified people. A planet without border. A nation without lines. The citizens of Earth. |
Oh man... you've been watching way too much Star Trek... There is nothing democratic about it. The communists in Russia and elsewhere used to have propaganda showing people flying on space ships, living in a futuristic wonderland. In reality, you become a slave and your government grinds you into the dirt, starves you, taxes you, controls every aspect of your life, and ultimately kills you. This is where we are headed if world government is allowed to form. It will be hell.
This has already happened so many times in history. Just think about how many governments in the last century brutalized their populations and murdered millions of people. Hitler learned about eugenics from the US and the British. The exact same banking establishment that funded Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and pretty well every other dictator, as well as both sides in both world wars, is still in control today. All of this is verifiable. Given their track record (as well as what they are openly talking about doing), why on earth would you think they're going to create some futuristic utopia for us to live in? |
Oh god. You jumped off into the "sterilize the water to kill us off" pool. Come on man, think about it. If the rich kill off the poor, who benefits from that? No one. Who's gonna build the cars the rich want to buy? Who's gonna maintain the private spas that they want to go to? Who's going to do 98% of the physical labor that makes our economy work? You can't make money trading stocks on companies that don't have any employees. Seriously try to be realistic about this stuff. Why would someone want to wipe out a majority of the population? It would just ultimately mean the human race dies off that much faster, including all those rich people and their kids. This is nuts.
There is cause for concern over the total population of the Earth right now. There are more people alive at this very second, than were ever alive in all of human history combined. If you took all 6 billion+ people off the planet right now and counted all the corpses of people that were buried from yesterday all the way back to the beginning of our species, there still wouldn't be 6 billion total. We are putting a massive strain on our ecosystem. We are pulling more resources from the Earth than we ever have before and only replacing about half of them. Our population centers are spreading to places they were probably never meant to spread. Entire species of animals and plant have gone extinct because of human expansion alone. And if the damage we're causing to the planet isn't reason enough to control the population, there are also more starving people on the planet than ever before. There are more hungry children and babies on Earth than ever before. There is more suffering, more disease, more preventable death happening every day than anyone in all of human history could ever imagine.
I'm not saying poison the water. I'm saying hand out condoms like crazy. I'm saying end the stigma of abortion. I'm saying to let people voluntarily have themselves steralized.
And not to get too far off topic, but as far as I know, I'm the only one that has come up with this theory... but could the sudden surge in homosexuality be evolution's way of controlling the population? We evolved to stand upright because that's where the food was. Walking around like that might have been inconceivable to those that time, but when evolution sees a problem, she deals with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| Oh god. You jumped off into the "sterilize the water to kill us off" pool. |
 it's not me who's saying it. Go look it up yourself (google John Holdren's Ecoscience, the actual text is available for you to read at your convenience, and you're going to feel pretty foolish calling me "crazy" after you've read it with your own eyes).
| Quote: |
| Come on man, think about it. If the rich kill off the poor, who benefits from that? No one. Who's gonna build the cars the rich want to buy? Who's gonna maintain the private spas that they want to go to? Who's going to do 98% of the physical labor that makes our economy work? You can't make money trading stocks on companies that don't have any employees. Seriously try to be realistic about this stuff. Why would someone want to wipe out a majority of the population? It would just ultimately mean the human race dies off that much faster, including all those rich people and their kids. This is nuts. |
This is easy: the answer is technology. The elite don't want to kill "all" of us, just the majority. It makes it easier for them to control the remaining population, and they can still enjoy all the best technology themselves (not that they share it with us even now). They don't care about "money", because they create it all themselves out of nothing and use it to buy up the world. The rest of us are in their debt. Since the entire system is a debt-based ponzi scheme (all money in existence is literally debt), they know full well that it will burst eventually. Eventually the swinish multitude (as they see us) will start to get fed up and revolt, so they try to dumb us down with drugs and TV etc. and feed us mass produced crap to keep us quiet. But eventually the bubble will burst and people will get desperate and then angry.
However, if they can find a way to make us accept our lowered standard of living voluntarily in the name of the "greater good" (like telling us that people are akin to bacteria and exhale CO2 that destroys the earth), then they can kill us "softly" without our really even realizing it (kind of like how so many people are obese and die of cancer these days). This may seem simple (it is), but it is their plan, written in their own documents, and it's been going on for some time now. This is what carbon taxation is all about - shutting off the resources, lowering our standard of living to supposedly "save the planet" (even though AGW is a proven sham), and feeding us propaganda so we'll believe that our dying is a good thing. I talk to people all the time who believe it would be a good thing for most of us to die off. Even people on this forum!
| Quote: |
| There is cause for concern over the total population of the Earth right now. There are more people alive at this very second, than were ever alive in all of human history combined. If you took all 6 billion+ people off the planet right now and counted all the corpses of people that were buried from yesterday all the way back to the beginning of our species, there still wouldn't be 6 billion total. We are putting a massive strain on our ecosystem. We are pulling more resources from the Earth than we ever have before and only replacing about half of them. Our population centers are spreading to places they were probably never meant to spread. Entire species of animals and plant have gone extinct because of human expansion alone. And if the damage we're causing to the planet isn't reason enough to control the population, there are also more starving people on the planet than ever before. There are more hungry children and babies on Earth than ever before. There is more suffering, more disease, more preventable death happening every day than anyone in all of human history could ever imagine. |
Oh I see you're one of them... The earth is not actually overpopulated (Malthusians have been consistently wrong about this for hundreds of years, and yet it's always the same old argument). We have more than enough resources to provide for everyone very comfortably, and technology makes this ever easier. It's true that our debt based monetary system requires us to rapaciously consume resources at an ever greater rate, mis-allocating them for harmful and wasteful consumption (take the whole concept of suburban sprawl for example, and all that it entails), but this does not mean our current population couldn't live at relative harmony with the earth if we fundamentally changed our system.
There are many ways of doing this, the most important first step is scrap our debt-based monetary system and switch to true free market economics (easier said than done, but there you have it). This would allow the kinds of technologies that would truly benefit us to be developed, and allow us to live sustainably and debt-free. Free humanity would be far less wasteful than the government controlled debt slaves we are now.
| Quote: |
| I'm not saying poison the water. I'm saying hand out condoms like crazy. I'm saying end the stigma of abortion. I'm saying to let people voluntarily have themselves steralized. |
Ok, then feel free to live by example, and sterilize yourself first. If you're not willing to do it, then you're a hypocrite. Even if you are willing to do it, it doesn't mean we have to follow your example.
Others, like Obama's science czar, are saying that adding sterilants to the water supply would work even better.
| Quote: |
| And not to get too far off topic, but as far as I know, I'm the only one that has come up with this theory... but could the sudden surge in homosexuality be evolution's way of controlling the population? We evolved to stand upright because that's where the food was. Walking around like that might have been inconceivable to those that time, but when evolution sees a problem, she deals with it. |
No comment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| And not to get too far off topic, but as far as I know, I'm the only one that has come up with this theory... but could the sudden surge in homosexuality be evolution's way of controlling the population? |
No you are not the only one; in fact, you probably got the idea from me as I posited it quite some time ago.
If there were a good way to measure the incidence of homosexuality, the hypothesis could be tested. One would have to compare its incidence with population densities in various times and places around the world. Unfortunately, measurement of "homosexuality" is exceedingly difficult and inexact. (I put it in quotes because we do not even have a good definition, much less an accurate measure of it.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
runthegauntlet
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Location: the southlands.
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| Oh god. You jumped off into the "sterilize the water to kill us off" pool. |
it's not me who's saying it. |
No, you're just regurgitating absurdities to appear as if you're in the know instead of actually stepping back and logically thinking about the stupid things you're posting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
runthegauntlet
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Location: the southlands.
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| And not to get too far off topic, but as far as I know, I'm the only one that has come up with this theory... but could the sudden surge in homosexuality be evolution's way of controlling the population? |
No you are not the only one; in fact, you probably got the idea from me as I posited it quite some time ago.
If there were a good way to measure the incidence of homosexuality, the hypothesis could be tested. One would have to compare its incidence with population densities in various times and places around the world. Unfortunately, measurement of "homosexuality" is exceedingly difficult and inexact. (I put it in quotes because we do not even have a good definition, much less an accurate measure of it.) |
Orrrrr, it's just as likely that homosexuality has stayed fairly stable through the millenia but was repressed by religious and other social norms and is just now being openly accepted.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| runthegauntlet wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| eIn07912 wrote: |
| Oh god. You jumped off into the "sterilize the water to kill us off" pool. |
it's not me who's saying it. |
No, you're just regurgitating absurdities to appear as if you're in the know instead of actually stepping back and logically thinking about the stupid things you're posting. |
And you're just another troll who is unable to offer any real rebuttal and contributes nothing to the discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| He's from Alberta. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think what has happened over the last century is not that nation-states have begun to "wither away", but instead that driven by technology, the "interface" between one state and another has reached levels of unprecedented complexity. Sovereign states have attempted to reduce that complexity through mutual agreement and treaties, but the sovereignty of individual nation-states essentially hasn't been sacrificed. Any EU member is free to opt out of the EU if they really want to do so, but for the sake of convenience and economy, they choose not to. There is nothing preventing them from opting out in the future, if conditions change and make the EU uneconomical, or burdensome. In addition, regardless of international treaties, nobody prevented the US from closing its airspace during 9/11, regardless of the economic impact.
Nation-states aren't withering away, instead the interactions between them are simply becoming more complex and multidimensional. This is a good thing, because as it happens, ideas are free to spread from individual to individual across international boundaries, and the spread of human rights and democracy is thus fostered. The idea that international agreements will result in global tyrrany (sp?) is just wishful thinking by the paranoid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| I think what has happened over the last century is not that nation-states have begun to "wither away", but instead that driven by technology, the "interface" between one state and another has reached levels of unprecedented complexity. Sovereign states have attempted to reduce that complexity through mutual agreement and treaties, but the sovereignty of individual nation-states essentially hasn't been sacrificed. Any EU member is free to opt out of the EU if they really want to do so, but for the sake of convenience and economy, they choose not to. There is nothing preventing them from opting out in the future, if conditions change and make the EU uneconomical, or burdensome. In addition, regardless of international treaties, nobody prevented the US from closing its airspace during 9/11, regardless of the economic impact. |
This is nonsense. Aside from political considerations, EU countries share a common banking system and currency. This is because their central banks have merged into a European central bank. No country can possibly opt out of this arrangement without being completely sidelined and ruined.
| Quote: |
| Nation-states aren't withering away, instead the interactions between them are simply becoming more complex and multidimensional. This is a good thing, because as it happens, ideas are free to spread from individual to individual across international boundaries, and the spread of human rights and democracy is thus fostered. The idea that international agreements will result in global tyrrany (sp?) is just wishful thinking by the paranoid. |
More nonsense. There is no democracy in this process. It is a vertical integration of power from central banks on a national level, to larger international central banks (and eventually a world central bank). It is the BANKS that run the world and have for centuries. They print the money (out of nothing) and everyone is in debt to them, especially our governments. Get a clue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
