09 Jul 09
4 edits
I talked to a guy the other day who had an interesting perspecitve on world events. Specifically, he viewed the world as moving to a one world order of sorts. It was his view that the global move towards statism/progressivism/socialism etc, (however you would like to describe it), is what we see in most countries around the world. However, those that do not play this game, such as regimes like that of Saddam or even North Korea or even Pakistan etc, have become international targets of sorts because they are outsiders in many respects. My quesiton is, have these regimes been demonized simply because they are not "progressive" or are they demonized because their just plan "bad"? In additoin, as crazy as it may sound, are they the last bastions of freedom in a world moving toward collectivism and a herd mentality?
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraYou're starting to lose grip of reality.
So in the light of the world becoming more "progressive", how do you explain the losses of the social democrats at the EU elections last month?
You're starting to lose grip of reality.
I think he lost it a long time ago. but its more evident now that Obama was elected.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraIts simply a back lash on what the public has been subjected to. However, we will see if it actually results in any substinative change. If not, it was simply the public crying out with no one to hear them.
So in the light of the world becoming more "progressive", how do you explain the losses of the social democrats at the EU elections last month?
You're starting to lose grip of reality.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by whodeyare you hallucinating?
Its simply a back lash on what the public has been subjected to. However, we will see if it actually results in any substinative change. If not, it was simply the public crying out with no one to hear them.
what exactly are the people being subjected to? They voted Obama into power for christ's sake.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by whodeyI think the World has actually moved away from socialism more than towards it over the last few decades, northern Europe excepted perhaps.
I talked to a guy the other day who had an interesting perspecitve on world events. Specifically, he viewed the world as moving to a one world order of sorts. It was his view that the global move towards statism/progressivism/socialism etc, (however you would like to describe it), is what we see in most countries around the world. However, those that do no ...[text shortened]... hey the last bastions of freedom in a world moving toward collectivism and a herd mentality?
I don't think NK is a target because it is not progressive, but because it is run by power hungry borderline mentally ill despot who is Hell bent on subjugating his own people and developing nuclear weapons to achieve more wealth and power for himself.
I fail to see how Iraq under Saddam or NK under Kim are examples of freedom.
09 Jul 09
2 edits
Originally posted by sh76All valid points. Of course, to sound even MORE paranoid, if that is even possible, is what we hear about them really true? Of course, I believe what we hear to be the truth, at least, I'm not that far gone.....yet anyway. 😛
I don't think NK is a target because it is not progressive, but because it is run by power hungry borderline mentally ill despot who is Hell bent on subjugating his own people and developing nuclear weapons to achieve more wealth and power for himself.
I fail to see how Iraq under Saddam or NK under Kim are examples of freedom.[/b]
In all seriousness though, these rogues states are all that is left to stand up to such things as a global economy etc. In order to stand up to it, however, they must be strongly independent. I guess it is then no wonder that those countries left are run by power hungry and controling dictators. All the "nice" nations have been absorbed.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by sh76What I am looking at is the "Big Picure". In other words, how have nations become global? Another right wing term might be how have we moved towards a "One World Order"? The fall of communism was key to this step in the former USSR as well as that of China. In short, the walls had to come down!!
Reagan and GWB were both more conservative economically than most of their predecessors. Communism collapsed around the World. Even China is now CINO (Communist in name only). I guess Latin America is another exception though.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by whodeyGlobalization is happening because of advances in technology that allow it, not because of a shift in World attitude.
What I am looking at is the "Big Picure". In other words, how have nations become global? Another right wing term might be how have we moved towards a "One World Order"? The fall of communism was key to this step in the former USSR as well as that of China. In short, the walls had to come down!!
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by whodeyIn 2006, a health care reform was conducted in Holland, which changed the system from universal health care for the poor and private health care for the upper middle class and above to a semi-privatized system where private insurance is mandatory but is partially compensated if you are poor.
Well I suppose that is one example, Any others?
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by whodeyThey are wild cards to the one world order. The United States are as well. The leadership here is on board with it, but the population needs more dumbing down. They will be coming for the guns and or Ammo soon.
I talked to a guy the other day who had an interesting perspecitve on world events. Specifically, he viewed the world as moving to a one world order of sorts. It was his view that the global move towards statism/progressivism/socialism etc, (however you would like to describe it), is what we see in most countries around the world. However, those that do no ...[text shortened]... hey the last bastions of freedom in a world moving toward collectivism and a herd mentality?