Politics is a word with a wide variety of texture and context, but for the most part, politics is the art and/or struggle for control. Wherever you find two or more people, you will find politics because people live in communities and rely on each other for our success and there is no such thing as anarchy outside of a temporary vacuum in the seat of power after a revolution. It doesn't last long, though, because there is always a rush to fill a vacuum; any sort of vacuum, and that includes a vacuum of power.
At all levels of politics, the purpose of it is control and/or dominance. In a democracy/republic, politicians seek to control the hearts and minds of voters so that they can pursue a career of power, in which they will exert that power over the very people that elect them. In tyrannical states, politics is exerting direct control of the state and it's peoples, often through coercion and brute force. But no matter how you look at it, politics is about power, control and dominance.
People inclined to seek political office may have any number of motives for doing so, but ever "higher" office and ever "higher" levels of power and control seem to be the ultimate goal of most. And this fact is what makes the concept of "One World Government" a preposterous notion.
Which of the World's heads of state want to cede their power to some higher One World Order authority? Which of the overinflated egos running countries around the world want to be the lackey for some super-secret NWO illuminati mastermind type? Hint: None of them. In order for there to ever be a true "New World Order" in the form of one world government, there would have to be first a true World War and I don't mean in the loose sense such as WWI or WWII. No, I mean EVERY country would end up being involved and every country conquered and ONE dictator put in place with the world as his empire. And no one's going to sit for that, either.
Seriously, the nature of politics itself makes the concept of "One World Government" virtually impossible. The Romans gave it a go. The English gave it a go. Attempts to conquer and govern the world aren't new and they've always failed and always will fail just as surely as gravity keeps us from flying off into space as the Earth rotates. The nature of politics makes it impossible.
gardenhackle: Politics is a word with a wide variety of texture and context, but for the most part, politics is the art and/or struggle for control. Wherever you find two or more people, you will find politics because people live in communities and rely on each other for our success and there is no such thing as anarchy outside of a temporary vacuum in the seat of power after a revolution. It doesn't last long, though, because there is always a rush to fill a vacuum; any sort of vacuum, and that includes a vacuum of power.
At all levels of politics, the purpose of it is control and/or dominance. In a democracy/republic, politicians seek to control the hearts and minds of voters so that they can pursue a career of power, in which they will exert that power over the very people that elect them. In tyrannical states, politics is exerting direct control of the state and it's peoples, often through coercion and brute force. But no matter how you look at it, politics is about power, control and dominance.
People inclined to seek political office may have any number of motives for doing so, but ever "higher" office and ever "higher" levels of power and control seem to be the ultimate goal of most. And this fact is what makes the concept of "One World Government" a preposterous notion.
Which of the World's heads of state want to cede their power to some higher One World Order authority? Which of the overinflated egos running countries around the world want to be the lackey for some super-secret NWO illuminati mastermind type? Hint: None of them. In order for there to ever be a true "New World Order" in the form of one world government, there would have to be first a true World War and I don't mean in the loose sense such as WWI or WWII. No, I mean EVERY country would end up being involved and every country conquered and ONE dictator put in place with the world as his empire. And no one's going to sit for that, either.
Seriously, the nature of politics itself makes the concept of "One World Government" virtually impossible. The Romans gave it a go. The English gave it a go. Attempts to conquer and govern the world aren't new and they've always failed and always will fail just as surely as gravity keeps us from flying off into space as the Earth rotates. The nature of politics makes it impossible.
If it can be national, it can be continental as long as they speak the same language.. Wait for North Africa to be one..
Paldi5: If it can be national, it can be continental as long as they speak the same language.. Wait for North Africa to be one..
A united North Africa and One World Government are entirely different things and I'd even wager against all of North Africa uniting under a single umbrella of political control. I'm not even sure the EU is going to still be standing throughout my lifetime and it's a very loose association.
Paldi5: If it can be national, it can be continental as long as they speak the same language.. Wait for North Africa to be one..
It's not the same world as it was 40 years ago... both parties have blurred together and they are all being paid off .... so exactly WHO has the dominance now? Whoever has the least amount of conscience... which is of course why the power has been extending out of THIS continent for years.
gardenhackle: Politics is a word with a wide variety of texture and context, but for the most part, politics is the art and/or struggle for control. Wherever you find two or more people, you will find politics because people live in communities and rely on each other for our success and there is no such thing as anarchy outside of a temporary vacuum in the seat of power after a revolution. It doesn't last long, though, because there is always a rush to fill a vacuum; any sort of vacuum, and that includes a vacuum of power.
At all levels of politics, the purpose of it is control and/or dominance. In a democracy/republic, politicians seek to control the hearts and minds of voters so that they can pursue a career of power, in which they will exert that power over the very people that elect them. In tyrannical states, politics is exerting direct control of the state and it's peoples, often through coercion and brute force. But no matter how you look at it, politics is about power, control and dominance.
People inclined to seek political office may have any number of motives for doing so, but ever "higher" office and ever "higher" levels of power and control seem to be the ultimate goal of most. And this fact is what makes the concept of "One World Government" a preposterous notion.
Which of the World's heads of state want to cede their power to some higher One World Order authority? Which of the overinflated egos running countries around the world want to be the lackey for some super-secret NWO illuminati mastermind type? Hint: None of them. In order for there to ever be a true "New World Order" in the form of one world government, there would have to be first a true World War and I don't mean in the loose sense such as WWI or WWII. No, I mean EVERY country would end up being involved and every country conquered and ONE dictator put in place with the world as his empire. And no one's going to sit for that, either.
Seriously, the nature of politics itself makes the concept of "One World Government" virtually impossible. The Romans gave it a go. The English gave it a go. Attempts to conquer and govern the world aren't new and they've always failed and always will fail just as surely as gravity keeps us from flying off into space as the Earth rotates. The nature of politics makes it impossible.
amahlala: "Scuse please..meant to say which North African countries speak the same language?
Right across North Africa they speak Arabic. Algeria,Morocco,Tunisia,Libya and Egypt.....Morocco has some Spanish and Algeria French this is a throwback to colonial times....
patmac: Right across North Africa they speak Arabic. Algeria,Morocco,Tunisia,Libya and Egypt.....Morocco has some Spanish and Algeria French this is a throwback to colonial times....
Colleene1024West Warwick, Rhode Island USA1,225 posts
patmac: Right across North Africa they speak Arabic. Algeria,Morocco,Tunisia,Libya and Egypt.....Morocco has some Spanish and Algeria French this is a throwback to colonial times....
amahlala: Um...Paldi, exactly which North Africans speak the same language?
Just about all of them and it extends through the Middle East as well. At one time it was a great expanse without national borders. I have a thread going about that. (Somewhere, not many have stopped in.)
Colleene1024West Warwick, Rhode Island USA1,225 posts
patmac: Lmao......Really
Well, I didn't know about the languages. You know how I love to learn new things. Once my internet gets turned off I will be living at the library! LOL
"the future, unsurprisingly, is with the youth, the very demographic that is taking the lead in battling corruption and autocracy and one that is communicating, encouraging and helping others across borders in the spirit and language of togetherness.
Sure, this does not by itself denote that borders are now irrelevant. What it does suggest, however, is that political and economic issues and opportunities cannot be dealt with simply within the confines of borders any longer. The pent-up frustrations of the Arab youth, the economic inequalities, the demands for better representation extend across the entire region. A single voice is emerging in search of a single value: Freedom."
Colleene1024: Well, I didn't know about the languages. You know how I love to learn new things. Once my internet gets turned off I will be living at the library! LOL
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
At all levels of politics, the purpose of it is control and/or dominance. In a democracy/republic, politicians seek to control the hearts and minds of voters so that they can pursue a career of power, in which they will exert that power over the very people that elect them. In tyrannical states, politics is exerting direct control of the state and it's peoples, often through coercion and brute force. But no matter how you look at it, politics is about power, control and dominance.
People inclined to seek political office may have any number of motives for doing so, but ever "higher" office and ever "higher" levels of power and control seem to be the ultimate goal of most. And this fact is what makes the concept of "One World Government" a preposterous notion.
Which of the World's heads of state want to cede their power to some higher One World Order authority? Which of the overinflated egos running countries around the world want to be the lackey for some super-secret NWO illuminati mastermind type? Hint: None of them. In order for there to ever be a true "New World Order" in the form of one world government, there would have to be first a true World War and I don't mean in the loose sense such as WWI or WWII. No, I mean EVERY country would end up being involved and every country conquered and ONE dictator put in place with the world as his empire. And no one's going to sit for that, either.
Seriously, the nature of politics itself makes the concept of "One World Government" virtually impossible. The Romans gave it a go. The English gave it a go. Attempts to conquer and govern the world aren't new and they've always failed and always will fail just as surely as gravity keeps us from flying off into space as the Earth rotates. The nature of politics makes it impossible.