FT.com / Columnists / Gideon Rachman – And now for a world government — What can stop this? Read the entire column which appeared not in some nutjob magazine, but the Financial Times.
The importance that Mr Obama attaches to the UN is shown by the fact that he has appointed Susan Rice, one of his closest aides, as America’s ambassador to the UN, and given her a seat in the cabinet.
A taste of the ideas doing the rounds in Obama circles is offered by a recent report from the Managing Global Insecurity project, whose small US advisory group includes John Podesta, the man heading Mr Obama’s transition team and Strobe Talbott, the president of the Brookings Institution, from which Ms Rice has just emerged.
The MGI report argues for the creation of a UN high commissioner for counter-terrorist activity, a legally binding climate-change agreement negotiated under the auspices of the UN and the creation of a 50,000-strong UN peacekeeping force. Once countries had pledged troops to this reserve army, the UN would have first call upon them.
These are the kind of ideas that get people reaching for their rifles in America’s talk-radio heartland. Aware of the political sensitivity of its ideas, the MGI report opts for soothing language. It emphasises the need for American leadership and uses the term, “responsible sovereignty” – when calling for international co-operation – rather than the more radical-sounding phrase favoured in Europe, “shared sovereignty”. It also talks about “global governance” rather than world government.
But some European thinkers think that they recognise what is going on. Jacques Attali, an adviser to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, argues that: “Global governance is just a euphemism for global government.” As far as he is concerned, some form of global government cannot come too soon. Mr Attali believes that the “core of the international financial crisis is that we have global financial markets and no global rule of law”.
So, it seems, everything is in place. For the first time since homo sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government.
Didn’t Genghis Khan, then Hitler try this before?
related links:
Nutball site promoting this crap
Beginning of Global Food supply attack
Blame it on the dollar
Found by JRC.
I’d like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked, fought for, and even died for freedom. I have enjoyed my freedom very much. It is important to me. I sense trouble ahead.
We already have global government. That’s how you get the ruling that the war in Iraq is ‘illegal’
#35 – Lyin’ Mike
>>We already have global government. That’s
>>how you get the ruling that the war in Iraq
>>is ‘illegal’
Naw, that’s just common sense.
If we had a real “world government”, Dumbya, Heart Attack, Rummy, and the rest of the chickenhawk warriors would all be getting prosecuted for war crimes right now.
I found this video after following one of hhopper’s blog posts yesterday:
http://tinyurl.com/5axup9
I thought it might put things in perspective.
We are all trapped in a Matrix-like world and we are nothing more than free-range livestock to the ruling class. World Government is just a way to bring all the worlds “people farms” into one giant collective controlled by the Masters of the Universe!!!
A little far fetched but there is something to be taken from it. It is very thought provoking. It is worth a watch.
It might be a better idea if attempted by stealth bit by bit, aided by “crises” where people themselves demand the imposition of a world government aka dictatorship and the abolition of national soveriegnity.
I think the Mongols had the biggest land empire while the British had the biggest empire.
The problem with one world government is that means all governments can fail at the same time.
A league isn’t a bad idea but a Federal government strikes me as a bad idea.
The UN may not be much of an answer for much of anything and stronger UN may not make anything better.
found this on several sites. Did Rocky say that? Can’t find any sources.
Has anyone noticed that the UN is not entirely … Democratic?
Has anyone noticed that the UN is not entirely free from corruption?
I mean, usually, one takes over the world and _then_ rots to the core. The UN offends tradition by reversing the order.
Has anyone noticed that the UN’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” states that the UN need not respect any of the listed rights if it does not suite it’s purposes to do so. (Article 29). Or that the USSR was a member in good standing during the Stalin years?
#40
Since we aren’t doing anything about it, I presume we’ve been happy to have the bankers running the world. The current state of the banking industry is – I must admit – shaking my confidence in the ultimate wisdom of that arrangement.
Here’s Talbot in his natural habitat:
http://fora.tv/2008/02/07/Strobe_Talbott_on_Great_Experiment
Ever eagar to eulogize the Good Ole USA
As if the mega corporations are not already a “world government”. But go hysterically barking on, stroking nationalist feelings (no matter how hollow) makes the hoi-polloi happy.
So far it isn’t too bad here, but how is that sky falling with you guys? Much damage?
McDonalds rules the world. If the US decides to get healthy and stop them, they will attack with a lot of young people on low wages and very fat people who are hungry.
You don’t mess with fat people who are hungry.