🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug12.002637.14449@news.unomaha.edu> trajan@cwis.unomaha.edu (Stephen McIntyre) writes:
>nelson_p@apollo.hp.com  writes:
>
>> In article <BstxFE.C88@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:
>> >In article <1992Aug11.145521.29060@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
>> >...
>> >>World govenrment is closer at hand now than in the 60's and yes I will
>> >>not hide it Frank can speak for himself but I will stand proud and say
>> >>I AM IN FAVOR OF WORLD GOVERNMENT AND I REFUSE TO FEEL ANY ALLEGENCE TO
>> >>ANY SUBUNIT OF THE WHOLE COMMONLY KNOWN AS A COUNTRY!!!!
>> >
>> >    Do you realize that if the New World Order takes hold,
>> >    there will be no place to hide?
>> 
>>    This is correct.   The single biggest problem with one world
>>    government is that if you don't happen to agree with it or
>>    like it you're still stuck with it.  Note that this is a 
>>    problem even if it's not some sort of totalitarian police
>>    state.   And what if is IS some sort of totalitarian police
>>    state?
>
>Proof, I beg you-- PROOF!  I say that if you don't agree with the one
>     world government, then change it.  You're allowed to do that
>     in the U.S.; why not with a body that governs the world?

   So I take it you agree with everything the US government does.  
   (else you would have changed it; you're allowed to do that, you
   know)  I hope you realize this makes you, personally, responsible
   for the federal budget deficit.   (Let's get him, boys!)


>The biggest (not the only) problem I see in implementing a body
>     that would serve the world happens to be religion.  Beyond
>     that (and some other problems, such as language), I see no
>     evil in placing a government that would serve the needs of
>     our Earth.

   Who gets to decide what those needs are?   Why do you assume
   that what the majority (I assume you have in mind some form 
   of democracy) would want is what's good for the Earth?  Why
   are you so sure that people won't just want what's good for
   them, personally?   In America people vote for pork-barrel
   projects to bring jobs, wealth, etc to them, by raising taxes
   on everybody else.  Why wouldn't this just happen on a worldwide
   scale?     Anyway, what gives a a bunch of French, Indians,
   Argentinians, Chinese, or Swedes, the right to make laws and
   decisions affecting *my* life?   


---peter