What with the ongoing collapse of the world's economic and political structure, Global government is clearly in the cards.
As James Warburg said nearly a century ago.
“We shall have global government whether you like or not like it, whether by conquest or by consent.”
But in view of the trend towards rubber stamp parliaments and ever more powerful executive leaders, I'm having a tough time deciding who we should put in charge of the whole world?
RayfromUSA: What with the ongoing collapse of the world's economic and political structure, Global government is clearly in the cards.
As James Warburg said nearly a century ago.
“We shall have global government whether you like or not like it, whether by conquest or by consent.”
But in view of the trend towards rubber stamp parliaments and ever more powerful executive leaders, I'm having a tough time deciding who we should put in charge of the whole world?
Well, the way I figure it, any global government is going to be totally socialist/communist/fascist anyway, and will turn out to be the antichrist government to boot.
So the job should go to somebody who really deserves the lake of fire.
The answer is really simple. You are wasting your time on any belief that you will have any say in who runs anything. It's laughable. when it comes to that point the people with the power will be the same people with real power now. They will appoint a leader as they see fit. You will of course get to "vote" on it, because they keep you under control with the illusion of your ability to have control. I agree entirely that global government is coming but the leader we will see in power will be the one who is most in line with the desires of the banks and corporations and is willing to do as he or she is told by those entities.
RayfromUSA: Well, the way I figure it, any global government is going to be totally socialist/communist/fascist anyway, and will turn out to be the antichrist government to boot.
So the job should go to somebody who really deserves the lake of fire.
Alex_D: The answer is really simple. You are wasting your time on any belief that you will have any say in who runs anything. It's laughable. when it comes to that point the people with the power will be the same people with real power now. They will appoint a leader as they see fit. You will of course get to "vote" on it, because they keep you under control with the illusion of your ability to have control. I agree entirely that global government is coming but the leader we will see in power will be the one who is most in line with the desires of the banks and corporations and is willing to do as he or she is told by those entities.
What you don't realize is that those folks have put me in charge of finding the leader. I just wanted to get some other opinions before I decide. Maybe I'll just flip a coin.
suggasugga: I vote for you but you live in another country
That's no problem. Under globalism another country will be just like another US state. I'm not sure if I should appoint myself though. It wouldn't look good.
RayfromUSA: That's no problem. Under globalism another country will be just like another US state. I'm not sure if I should appoint myself though. It wouldn't look good.
since you do all the ragging about the Present President just who in the hell do you have in mind all you are doing is ranting without a backup I who you got Rayform?
Alex_D: The answer is really simple. You are wasting your time on any belief that you will have any say in who runs anything. It's laughable. when it comes to that point the people with the power will be the same people with real power now. They will appoint a leader as they see fit. You will of course get to "vote" on it, because they keep you under control with the illusion of your ability to have control. I agree entirely that global government is coming but the leader we will see in power will be the one who is most in line with the desires of the banks and corporations and is willing to do as he or she is told by those entities.
been trying to tell him this since I have been in this forum I
suggasugga: since you do all the ragging about the Present President just who in the hell do you have in mind all you are doing is ranting without a backup I who you got Rayform?
Personally I think politics is just an elaborate puppet show. Part of the overall Matrix of delusion.
George Bush and Barak Obama aren't "opposites". In fact they're very much alike. The same forces control them both.
Obama is doing what he was selected, groomed, and put into office for. He is overseeing the destruction of the US economy and political system. By the time he leaves office the US will be a full-fledged dictatorship.
RayfromUSA: Personally I think politics is just an elaborate puppet show. Part of the overall Matrix of delusion.
George Bush and Barak Obama aren't "opposites". In fact they're very much alike. The same forces control them both.
Obama is doing what he was selected, groomed, and put into office for. He is overseeing the destruction of the US economy and political system. By the time he leaves office the US will be a full-fledged dictatorship.
So, you are saying that Pres. Obama is like a modern-day one crying in the wilderness and positioning things for the one true leader to come? Who's being groomed for the top dictator job then?
galrads: So, you are saying that Pres. Obama is like a modern-day one crying in the wilderness and positioning things for the one true leader to come? Who's being groomed for the top dictator job then?
galrads: So, you are saying that Pres. Obama is like a modern-day one crying in the wilderness and positioning things for the one true leader to come? Who's being groomed for the top dictator job then?
Well I'm not ruling Obama out entirely. Although I don't think he's dynamic enough to be the AC.
He's a slick talker, and they really hyped him up during the campaign. But he doesn't really have much genuine personal charisma, and I can't imagine anyone, not even from his own party thinking that he's the answer to the world's problems.
So yeah, I think they're still setting the stage.
Another round of staged terrorist attacks might possibly make the people paranoid enough to look to Obama as their great hope, but I doubt it. He's already lost his initial following, and most people consider him a dud now.
RayfromUSA: Well I'm not ruling Obama out entirely. Although I don't think he's dynamic enough to be the AC.
He's a slick talker, and they really hyped him up during the campaign. But he doesn't really have much genuine personal charisma, and I can't imagine anyone, not even from his own party thinking that he's the answer to the world's problems.
So yeah, I think they're still setting the stage.
Another round of staged terrorist attacks might possibly make the people paranoid enough to look to Obama as their great hope, but I doubt it. He's already lost his initial following, and most people consider him a dud now.
RayfromUSA: What with the ongoing collapse of the world's economic and political structure, Global government is clearly in the cards.
As James Warburg said nearly a century ago.
“We shall have global government whether you like or not like it, whether by conquest or by consent.”
But in view of the trend towards rubber stamp parliaments and ever more powerful executive leaders, I'm having a tough time deciding who we should put in charge of the whole world?
Help me out with your opinions.
Who says theres an "ongoing collapse of the worlds economic/political structure"??? That certainly isnt happen from where Im sitting??
I know you've been singing this globalism song for years but it will never happen. Or maybe your saying that it will be most countries instead of all countries under one government? I seriously doubt it will happen because there are too many countries and egotistic dictators around to make your scenario a non starter. Let's start with China. Do you really think that China is going to join and submit to a world government? How about North Korea, Iran, Burma, Somalia, Venezuela, scores of African countries?
Maybe it would be better if the world was run by corporations at least there would be no longer any need to invade another couporation/country just stage a hostile take over in the stock market. They call it M&A, Mergers & Aqusitions. No killing, no bombs, no armys. Just buy a controling interest in their stock and badda bing it's done.
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 »
Which political leader would be best suited to run the world under globalism?(Vote Below)
As James Warburg said nearly a century ago.
“We shall have global government whether you like or not like it, whether by conquest or by consent.”
But in view of the trend towards rubber stamp parliaments and ever more powerful executive leaders, I'm having a tough time deciding who we should put in charge of the whole world?
Help me out with your opinions.