I think the only people who could fit your description would not particularly care to lead the world, or even a country. Why don't we just do away with the concept of leadership? Install a true democracy? if this world is gonna go to shit, I at least want us to be responsible for our own downfall. That leaves the problem of mob rule, though. Money would still fuel the media and therefore the opinions of the majority. We could ensure that everybody - EVERYBODY - gets paid the same amount, but then you've got communism. Whether that is good or bad I can't say, but that system hasn't faired too well in the past. To hell with it, I say. As long as the larger group of people is controlled by a smaller group of people, we're screwed. We've been screwed since we conceived of the concept of government. World or local, its all a heaping pile of fecal paste. What can we do? We just keep choking that shit down because we've become so accustomed to it that we'll die without it.
communism only failed because of greed man. In its essence it was a utopian government, but greed derailed that train just like it has so much else
Rat LOL You ask me what you promote then go on to promote your ideas. But the thing is you’ve been promoting the same shit for years and time and again I’ve asked you to explain why you promote things that you seem unable to defend and that would only help the wealthy elites but you refuse and instead just keep promoting the pro-wealth line under the ludicrous disguise of being anti-wealth. I mean you stopped been openly a right wing libertarian because it was too obvious that you were right wing and began saying your ideas were not of the right or left. But the ideas that you continue to promote are in a lot of ways exactly the same the very same ideas that would favour the rich and you still don’t seem able to defend. So a lot of what I said when you were openly libertarian still applies today many of the views you held then are basically the same as now the only thing thats changed is that you now claim you are not a libertarian. Why do the national libertarians keep reminding me of the Nazis? http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=104835 Bringing in libertarianism http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=151086 Is libertarianism about liberty or tyranny? http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=75059 ** “Here is a more personal viewpoint from many conversations with libertarians. To me the problem is that sometimes it seems like there are as many versions of libertarianism as there are libertarians. With some emphasising the social element or minimal state argument over the economic side of libertarianism. The difficulty is that often it is hard to see how you can have one without the other and at other times the two elements seem to contradict each other. ** Ok, here are some of the ideas associated with libertarianism Removing or drastically lowering of taxation – making the already rich vastly richer. Removal or reduction in regulations – repealing all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and the abolition of employment laws such as health and safety provision. There also seem to be many contradictions here because many libertarians - when asked - seem to be in favour of quite a few regulations but still say they are in favour of having fewer. Replacing state welfare by charitable donations – but when it is pointed out that the reason state provision was brought in, was that charity was unable to cope and was often controlled by the wealthy and could be unfair, corrupt and linked to patronage, they somehow claim they could get it to work. Reduction in government power – after many arguments this still has never been successfully explained to any degree of satisfaction because the goal post always seem to be moved. It seems that libertarians want contradictory outcomes they wish for a government that is both strong and weak.” ** But for those that are not taken in by the wealth favouring libertarian ideas there is another approach. Try and get people to do nothing to actually counter wealth. Don’t vote, don’t organise, don’t demonstrate, and above all don’t do anything left wing and especially not socialist. As I’ve said before there is an old political maxim ‘if you can’t get them to vote for you the next back thing is stop them voting for your opponent’ **
All planet Earth is infected with millitarists. Armies are creating new weapon toys and playing with provocation game one with another for simple fun. I have a nightmares almost every night about war thread, bombing around my house. I hope that it is not our future. World biggest phisican Michio Kaku and all aware human beings on the world knows that if the human rase want to survive and obtain so called civilisational 'stage one' - be able control own planet energy sources we need to unite. There was a plan of NASA in 1989 to create orbital port for building the spaceships on the orbit in 30 years. Cost 450 billions of $ only. Government didn't approved this. Such cost could lower military supplies for the Earth's demons - soldiers. That's why I would rather accept world government if such will be created. With all pluses and minuses it can end the war game on our planet and start proceed with our future and development - I see here only chance.
You quote bad decisions by a government as the reason you support One World Government. While One World Government would reduce the number of governments (to 1) and hence the number of bad decisions, I don't like the aspect that each of those errors will be universally applied.
Millitarists are the source of all evil on the planet. Every action that will reduce gun industry and use of weapons will be good. But of course such gevernments like the young govenment of China who is directly responsible for assasination of tzar familly (like Russians also) need to find their justice. Untill that time corruption, oppresion and unjustice will be on the rule.