🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug12.150704.6252@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
>In article <BsvGz4.MC9@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug12.002637.14449@news.unomaha.edu> trajan@cwis.unomaha.edu (Stephen McIntyre) writes:
>>>nelson_p@apollo.hp.com  writes:

>>   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?   
>>
>Ok the same thing that gives Texans Nevadans Vermontans etc..
>what is the difference ? You seem to accept other americans
>voting for a common government why not cut the atificial boundaries
>and let all human beings do this.

   What's artificial about them?  Don't I have a lot more in common 
   culturally and economically with people in Texas, Nevada, or Vermont
   than I do with people in France, China, Argentina, or Nigeria? 

   Nations only work when there is a basic set of values or common
   culture to bind people together.  Attempts to create nations where
   these don't exist is folly.  Witness Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, 
   USSR, India before partition, etc.   

    
---peter