Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
One World Government
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aertnam Triticus" data-source="post: 66609" data-attributes="member: 3834"><p>I have to say that I appreciate this topic being brought up as I often find myself considering how to have a peaceful existence on a global scale.</p><p> </p><p>I will start by defining the difference between Social Order and Government.</p><p> </p><p>The fundamental difference is Force verses Mutual Benefit.</p><p> </p><p>Government is predicated upon coercive force for sake of an edict. People vote, accept, or otherwise support government that makes laws that are to be enforced via some sort of violence and coercion. At the other end of every law is a gun to force it upon someone. Thus is it an inherent violation of human rights and a means to divide populations. What you end up with is a portion of your populace using government to force, themselves as well as the rest, into living as has been suggested and supported.</p><p> </p><p>Humans will naturally form some sort of appropriate social order in the absence of government. The basis of any community or civilization is mutual gain or benefit. Whereas government is for the benefit of some over others by means of force.</p><p> </p><p>Mutuality is where it starts according to human nature, thus this is your cornerstone for a peaceful civilization. So when considering a global context, you have to consider what all humans have in common, in spite of cultural differences and moral standards, and how we manage it for mutual benefit/gain.</p><p> </p><p>Everyone has an inherent inalienable rights, basic needs, and personal as well as communal responsibility, thus defining such is the universal standard in which to build from...a corner stone, if you will.</p><p> </p><p>~ Rights:</p><p> </p><p>Everyone has inalienable rights, as well as an inherent and/or basic understanding of right/wrong from birth. Take a bottle from a baby and what happens? It gets upset as it knows it has been violated. Over time, this idea of wrong/right is developed and influenced through social interaction, religious values, social norms/culture, etc. As we develop, we learn to live peacefully with our neighbors according to some sort of moral standard and respect for how rights have been defined.</p><p> </p><p>Ultimately, it boils down to the Golden Rule. That being treating others as you would like them to treat you. It is essentially a simple universal standard that everyone understands and applies to almost any culture or social situation, and is rooted in the above example of the baby motivated and understood by selfish interest.</p><p> </p><p>I suppose you could come up with some sort of universal definitive standard of 'what are rights' that would likely be modeled similar to the US Bill of Rights, but it still boils down to the Golden Rule. Otherwise, adding the concept of Live and Let Live, which essentially means minding your own business, as no one has a right to decide the standard of welfare or lifestyle of another. So long as you are not being encroached upon or violated in some way, what business is it of yours to mind someone else's business?</p><p> </p><p>~ Responsibility</p><p> </p><p>Everyone has a responsibility to manage their own life and family according to whatever makes them happy or otherwise benefits them, and as they see fit ...so long as it does not violate the rights of others.</p><p> </p><p>Additionally, if you expect to live in any community or civilization, you have responsibilities that will be shared, and a certain obligation to contribute. These should be voluntary as forcing someone to do anything is a form of slavery and violation of rights. If it is mutually beneficial and needed, self organized behavior tends to take care of things like this. An example would be infrastructure. It is to everyone's benefit to have a water supply, sewage systems, roads and traffic signals, etc. As things are needed, people tend to willingly cooperate to make it happen whether or not someone is demanding taxes at the end of a gun. Enough hours sitting in traffic, and people start to want traffic signals and expanded roads. How long before people are motivated to rectify the situation? How you organize a voluntary time/fund-raiser for such things is only limited by your imagination.</p><p> </p><p>But how does this fit into a global context? It does so in the same way as it does a neighborhood, small town or county. The difference is numbers and geography. All human action is ultimately individual, thus it has to be standardized by whatever is naturally universal according to core aspects of individuals, human nature.</p><p> </p><p>I think centralization combined with force is where you get into trouble as it works against rights and responsibility as defined by mutual benefit. What is good for one community may not be good for another according to whatever cultural differences they may have.</p><p> </p><p>Some cultures may not be compatible with another or the rest of them, thus there has to be a universal way to respect their right to live as they choose and allow them to take responsibility for their way of life. I believe decentralization is the answer.</p><p> </p><p>So, on a global scale it would have to be based upon some sort of decentralized Libertarian social order, where it is like a big network of separate communities rather than centralized national or state governments.</p><p> </p><p>Economics would have to be based upon a free market as it is the only means of maintaining balance. A truly free market is self balancing as it is regulated only by the natural economic forces of supply and demand. Anything that interferes with these natural market forces will only work to interfere and cause imbalance, that if continued will 'fishtail' out of control and eventually destroy itself.</p><p> </p><p>The only thing I can come up with in terms of currency that is universal and non-inflatable is 'time'. It all boils down to time anyway, right? (Tempus Edax Rerum). Money is essentially a medium of exchange representing the value of goods and services that is obtained by trading it for time, effort. You are owner of your time/life, and exchange it for monetary compensation that is used to obtain goods and services. So why not cut to the chase and just make currency in the form of time credits?</p><p> </p><p>For shared economic responsibilities and/or benefits among communities, and the whole world for that matter, you could easily work it on a system of a vast network of decentralized voluntary communistic organizations/offices. It would be far more efficient than theft by taxation if everyone could volunteer a little money or time as they see fit, and work to share it with others as well as other communities as needed. It would basically work like a network of charity organizations.</p><p> </p><p>This is just a general outline of what I've come up with. I am interested in discussing it in more detail with anyone willing.</p><p> </p><p>I am all for a New World Order, but adamantly opposed to a Global 'Government'. What say you?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aertnam Triticus, post: 66609, member: 3834"] I have to say that I appreciate this topic being brought up as I often find myself considering how to have a peaceful existence on a global scale. I will start by defining the difference between Social Order and Government. The fundamental difference is Force verses Mutual Benefit. Government is predicated upon coercive force for sake of an edict. People vote, accept, or otherwise support government that makes laws that are to be enforced via some sort of violence and coercion. At the other end of every law is a gun to force it upon someone. Thus is it an inherent violation of human rights and a means to divide populations. What you end up with is a portion of your populace using government to force, themselves as well as the rest, into living as has been suggested and supported. Humans will naturally form some sort of appropriate social order in the absence of government. The basis of any community or civilization is mutual gain or benefit. Whereas government is for the benefit of some over others by means of force. Mutuality is where it starts according to human nature, thus this is your cornerstone for a peaceful civilization. So when considering a global context, you have to consider what all humans have in common, in spite of cultural differences and moral standards, and how we manage it for mutual benefit/gain. Everyone has an inherent inalienable rights, basic needs, and personal as well as communal responsibility, thus defining such is the universal standard in which to build from...a corner stone, if you will. ~ Rights: Everyone has inalienable rights, as well as an inherent and/or basic understanding of right/wrong from birth. Take a bottle from a baby and what happens? It gets upset as it knows it has been violated. Over time, this idea of wrong/right is developed and influenced through social interaction, religious values, social norms/culture, etc. As we develop, we learn to live peacefully with our neighbors according to some sort of moral standard and respect for how rights have been defined. Ultimately, it boils down to the Golden Rule. That being treating others as you would like them to treat you. It is essentially a simple universal standard that everyone understands and applies to almost any culture or social situation, and is rooted in the above example of the baby motivated and understood by selfish interest. I suppose you could come up with some sort of universal definitive standard of 'what are rights' that would likely be modeled similar to the US Bill of Rights, but it still boils down to the Golden Rule. Otherwise, adding the concept of Live and Let Live, which essentially means minding your own business, as no one has a right to decide the standard of welfare or lifestyle of another. So long as you are not being encroached upon or violated in some way, what business is it of yours to mind someone else's business? ~ Responsibility Everyone has a responsibility to manage their own life and family according to whatever makes them happy or otherwise benefits them, and as they see fit ...so long as it does not violate the rights of others. Additionally, if you expect to live in any community or civilization, you have responsibilities that will be shared, and a certain obligation to contribute. These should be voluntary as forcing someone to do anything is a form of slavery and violation of rights. If it is mutually beneficial and needed, self organized behavior tends to take care of things like this. An example would be infrastructure. It is to everyone's benefit to have a water supply, sewage systems, roads and traffic signals, etc. As things are needed, people tend to willingly cooperate to make it happen whether or not someone is demanding taxes at the end of a gun. Enough hours sitting in traffic, and people start to want traffic signals and expanded roads. How long before people are motivated to rectify the situation? How you organize a voluntary time/fund-raiser for such things is only limited by your imagination. But how does this fit into a global context? It does so in the same way as it does a neighborhood, small town or county. The difference is numbers and geography. All human action is ultimately individual, thus it has to be standardized by whatever is naturally universal according to core aspects of individuals, human nature. I think centralization combined with force is where you get into trouble as it works against rights and responsibility as defined by mutual benefit. What is good for one community may not be good for another according to whatever cultural differences they may have. Some cultures may not be compatible with another or the rest of them, thus there has to be a universal way to respect their right to live as they choose and allow them to take responsibility for their way of life. I believe decentralization is the answer. So, on a global scale it would have to be based upon some sort of decentralized Libertarian social order, where it is like a big network of separate communities rather than centralized national or state governments. Economics would have to be based upon a free market as it is the only means of maintaining balance. A truly free market is self balancing as it is regulated only by the natural economic forces of supply and demand. Anything that interferes with these natural market forces will only work to interfere and cause imbalance, that if continued will 'fishtail' out of control and eventually destroy itself. The only thing I can come up with in terms of currency that is universal and non-inflatable is 'time'. It all boils down to time anyway, right? (Tempus Edax Rerum). Money is essentially a medium of exchange representing the value of goods and services that is obtained by trading it for time, effort. You are owner of your time/life, and exchange it for monetary compensation that is used to obtain goods and services. So why not cut to the chase and just make currency in the form of time credits? For shared economic responsibilities and/or benefits among communities, and the whole world for that matter, you could easily work it on a system of a vast network of decentralized voluntary communistic organizations/offices. It would be far more efficient than theft by taxation if everyone could volunteer a little money or time as they see fit, and work to share it with others as well as other communities as needed. It would basically work like a network of charity organizations. This is just a general outline of what I've come up with. I am interested in discussing it in more detail with anyone willing. I am all for a New World Order, but adamantly opposed to a Global 'Government'. What say you? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
One World Government
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top