Re: world pacification

Joao Pedro (
Sun, 21 Sep 1997 01:30:57 -0700


Anton Sherwood wrote:
> Arjen Kamphuis writes
> : [...] any and all human-rights violations should be ended (by force if
> : neccecary) by a sort of world governement.
> Why a world government? Why not thousands of volunteer forces
> in parallel? If there's just one super-state, what happens
> when *that* goes bad?

Volunteer forces? Don't you think people are naive and selfish?
There is a need for government, weather or not you hate it. A small part
of the world is exploring the great majority and one day these majority
will revolt. Then, you will see a need for a world government.
You are picturing a giant, super-state in the forms of the American
government. That, I agree, could go wrong but my idea of a world
government is of a less powerful institution with local governments
assuring most of the world's policies.

> : Altough I would never use the term conquer the world.
> (How else can you create a world government?)

Because it's the right path to follow for our species to have a future,
once people understand that, they'll want to change and we will change
We will have a world government in the future or we will have no future
at all.

> : Just remove the dictator and then organize elections A.S.A.P and get out.
> What is on the ballot? Candidates for new dictator?
> Forms of government? New boundaries?

World government for assuring peace, security, liberty and equitity
between nations that, of course, would have their own, local

         Hasta la vista...

"Life's too short to cry, long enough to try." - Kai Hansen Visit my site at: