🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4adv0q$nju@news.sas.ab.ca>, mjavid@fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca 
says...
>
>
>                   Turning Point for All Nations
>
>                           A Statement of 
>                 the Baha'i International Community's
>                     Office of Public Information
>                     
>                         on the Occasion of 
>               the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations 
>
>    "Unification of the whole of mankind is the hall-mark of the stage 
>    which human society is now approaching. Unity of family, of tribe, 
>    of city-state, and nation have been successively attempted and 
>    fully established.  World unity is the goal towards which a 
>    harassed humanity is striving. Nation-building has come to an end. 
>    The anarchy inherent in state sovereignty is moving towards a 
>    climax. A world, growing to maturity, must abandon this fetish, 
>    recognize the oneness and wholeness of human relationships, and 
>    establish once for all the machinery that can best incarnate this 
>    fundamental principle of its life." 
>                                           -Shoghi Effendi, 1936 


I snipped everything below, but left the above segment so that you could 
tell what this entire post was about.

This is a very, very bad idea. There are quite a few reasons. I'll give 
you one.

When is the last time you called City Hall, or the main offices of a 
large corporation, and were able to get through to someone who could tell 
you what you wanted to know?

Whether it's an answering machine telling you to Press One for This and 
Press Two for That, or a person who not only does not know the answer to 
your question, but does not even know who to ask, big organizations are 
unweildy and dumb.

Like the classic images of dinosaurs, with 100-ton bodies and 12-ounce 
brains, big organizations suffer from transmission errors and waste in 
almost everything they do.

If you can't get through to the right person at City Hall, do you think 
you can reach one particular person in the State offices? How about the 
federal government? How much worse will it be with a world government.

In fact, excellent service is more possible in smaller organizations.

In addition, government offices are notorious for poor service. I give 
you for example the United States Post Office. I give you the State 
Unemployment Office. How much worse will the service be when you have to 
deal with a world government office?

In a town, one person matters. One person can make a difference.

In a county one person can make a difference. One person matters.

In a state, one person can make a difference, but it is damned hard. You 
have to join, or create, a political machine to carry out your desires. 
Does one person matter? Not very much. To catch the attention of the 
state government, you have to be damned, damned important.

At the level of the federal government, individual humans are just 
numbers -- they are significant only in a statistical sense.

At the level of this proposed world government, your life and death will 
be scarcely noted by the "powers."

"Unity of family, of tribe, of city-state, and nation" -- to the fellow 
quoted above, these are signs of human progress. Yet to me they are signs 
of the decreasing importance of the individual person. They are signs of 
a consolidation of power into larger and larger blocks, into more and 
more dangerous concentrations. The rulers of each succeeding century 
learn their lessons from their predecessors, and reach out to grasp ever 
greater power.

In a sense, the dominant life form on the planet ceased being the 
individual human being back about the time of the Egyptian civilization. 
The dominant life form became Government. In the last 200 years, that 
dominant form has been joined by another: the corporation.


What these people advocate will supercede those lifeforms, and we'll end 
up with one uncaring, unstoppable, supergovernment that will be 
invulnerable to any question or challenge.

In small countries, revolution is at least possible. But revolution will 
not be possible against the world government -- even in its formative 
moments, this supergovernment will fall into the hands on one ruling 
party, and we will have a world monarchy -- in fact if not in name -- 
that will be diffuse, diverse, and all-encompassing. Its 
never-all-in-one-place nature will make it unapproachable by ordinary 
humans. It will never be able to be stopped, or even slowed.

Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Charlemagne -- all will be pikers compared to the 
the people who pull the strings of the supergovernment.

With growing computer and technological capabilities, the possibilities 
for control of the subject population (that's all of us, kids) are 
virtually illitimable.

These foggy-thinking Baha'i people think we will come together in 
idealistic harmony under a world government. I think the possibility is 
much greater that we will descend into unspeakable political and social 
horror.