The march towards one world govt.

[PureCarnage]

It all started when I took a look into Europa, the European Union. I remember they first formed back in 1999, and the notion of the Euro seemed odd but not worth investigating. It wasn't until rumor came my way that the North American Union was also in the works. Not to mention the African Union formed in 2001 in a way that I didn't even realized it had until I googled for it.

The North American Union is forming under the guise of Nafta and the SPP. (North American Free Trade Agreement and the Security and Prosperity Partnership) with a unified Amero in the works. I had to really stop and scratch my oblivious head... is this really happening?

The EU claims that its not a state, yet it's formed a constitution of its own. It claim's that it won't have an army, but lo and behold it does, and that army is growing and preforming more and more missions along side of Nato. The silent workings of this entity is sliding its arm deep into North America.

Will we too, have a new constitution? Will America cease to exist? All the sovergne nations of the EU are slowly having their laws, borders and freedoms washed away by the every changing EU.

The new world order is upon us, I don't think any of us will want to go where its going to take us.

As Han Solo so often said, "I have a really bad feeling about this!"

[cellardoor6]

Related.

Europeans are basically signing away their sovereignty to the EU.

[Drakim]

The EU is becoming more like America, and you say that because of this they are losing freedom?

Hilarious.

[cellardoor6]

At 12/13/07 07:16 AM, Drakim wrote: The EU is becoming more like America, and you say that because of this they are losing freedom?

It's not becoming more like America.

It's becoming more like the Soviet Union, that's a better comparison.

Hilarious.

Nope, and your analogy is entirely inaccurate. The US is a federalized republic.

The EU is made up of separate countries who currently have sovereignty over their individual countries, but are signing some of it over to a entity which in turn has this from a larger group of nations.

What the EU is doing is creating an overarching political authority which will take away a lot of the decision making of each individual country. It's not becoming like the US, it's becoming like the Soviet Union, formerly independent countries are signing over their nations decisions and ordinances, including foreign policy, to a union who will be controlled by people of different countries.

That's giving up freedom, not gaining it.

Let's take a look shall we?

The treaty creates an EU president and a vastly more powerful foreign policy chief for the Union's 27 nations.

At the same time the document scraps veto powers in many policy areas.

There will also be a foreign policy chief, controlling a big budget and thousands of diplomats and officials, and a permanent EU president appointed for up to five years.

-Creates new European Council president
-New foreign policy supremo to increase EU profile
-Commissioners reduced from 27 to 18
-Removes national vetoes in around 50 policy areas
-Voting weights between member states redistributed

[Drakim]

At 12/13/07 08:17 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: There will also be a foreign policy chief, controlling a big budget and thousands of diplomats and officials, and a permanent EU president appointed for up to five years.

-Creates new European Council president
-New foreign policy supremo to increase EU profile
-Commissioners reduced from 27 to 18
-Removes national vetoes in around 50 policy areas
-Voting weights between member states redistributed

How is this so diffrent from the states in America? Can they veto the president in many issues? Do they get soverty over president in any issues at all?

I'm not saying that every little thing EU does is perfect. I myself don't really like the EU too much. However, it seems you are critizising the EU from taking away freedom from the countries in Europa, when, the states in America face pretty much the same.

And, is there really much diffrence in having a president for up to 5 year or having one 4 years (with a possible 8?)

[squallie2002]

A bad thing is that a lot of countries will probably start to eliminate borders. Many cultures are going to be forgotten as this happens and thats a terrible thing.

[morefngdbs]

At 12/13/07 11:31 AM, squallie2002 wrote: A bad thing is that a lot of countries will probably start to eliminate borders. Many cultures are going to be forgotten as this happens and thats a terrible thing.

;
I don't see it as 'terrible' or even 'bad'. History shows us that thousands of cultures have been here before us . Some have evolved into what we live with today, some have faded & others have completely disappeared.
But the one constant has been mankinds slow evolution , our grasp & understanding of the universe has advanced.
I think the most terrible thing that has come with our advancement is our ability to kill each other . No where in the past has 1 man been able to kill millions of his fellows at the push of a button.
That we haven't done this more than twice gives me room for hope ; we actually might be getting smarter.

[KeithHybrid]

Doesn't bother me too badly. We all know that when power grows beyond its control that it will eventually crumble, probably thanks to a brave resistance group.

[Britkid]

At 12/13/07 08:17 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: It's becoming more like the Soviet Union, that's a better comparison.

Haha

What the EU is doing is creating an overarching political authority which will take away a lot of the decision making of each individual country. It's not becoming like the US, it's becoming like the Soviet Union, formerly independent countries are signing over their nations decisions and ordinances, including foreign policy, to a union who will be controlled by people of different countries.

What? No they aren't. Why then did Britain go to war in Iraq, and lots of other European countries didn't? What about Afghanistan? France aren't there, yet we are. 'Their nation's decisions' are not being dictated by the EU, it's merely the principle that together, we are stronger. There's no overruling body which is controlling its states.

That's giving up freedom, not gaining it.
The treaty creates an EU president and a vastly more powerful foreign policy chief for the Union's 27 nations.

Ok, here is where you misunderstand the EU's role. There is no secret EU panel where some shifty Swiss people decide what laws will be held in the Commons or if Germany should send troops to Afghanistan. The leaders of all these European countries go to the conferences, and DISCUSS issues. This is how they come to an agreement.

At the same time the document scraps veto powers in many policy areas.

That's a good thing...indeed if this was applied to the security council then a lot more issues could be explored. The veto is a relic of an imperial age, very undemocratic.

There will also be a foreign policy chief, controlling a big budget and thousands of diplomats and officials, and a permanent EU president appointed for up to five years.

Someone to oversee, organise. Chase dodgy leaders up. If a neutral, central organisation is able to do the talking then there is less bias.

And 'EU President' doesn't mean very much. It doesn't mean 'Emperor of Europe'. This President won't be able to decide most of what happens in its member states.

-Voting weights between member states redistributed

Another good thing. Taking away the overbearing influence that France, Britain and Germany have, and making the EU fairer.

A lack of co-operation causes wars. A body, such as the EU or the UN is supposed to strengthen relations as well as economic strength by working together.

[cellardoor6]

At 12/13/07 08:51 AM, Drakim wrote:

At 12/13/07 08:17 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: There will also be a foreign policy chief, controlling a big budget and thousands of diplomats and officials, and a permanent EU president appointed for up to five years.

-Creates new European Council president
-New foreign policy supremo to increase EU profile
-Commissioners reduced from 27 to 18
-Removes national vetoes in around 50 policy areas
-Voting weights between member states redistributed

How is this so diffrent from the states in America?

Because the states were never independent countries with independent national governments. The US was created as a republic, not a union between formerly independent nations.

Can they veto the president in many issues? Do they get soverty over president in any issues at all?

All those states are still in a single country, the states aren't independent nations.

Europe is made up of several nation states that are signing over their sovereignty to a multinational body.

That's basically what the Soviet Union did.

It took away freedom, it didn't create it.

I'm not saying that every little thing EU does is perfect. I myself don't really like the EU too much. However, it seems you are critizising the EU from taking away freedom from the countries in Europa, when, the states in America face pretty much the same.

The United States is ONE COUNTRY. But the power in that country is divided between states.

The EU ( at least formerly) was made up of severla independent countries. FRANCE was ONE COUNTRY, ITALY was ONE COUNTRY etc...

Now they are signing over those national ordinances over to a new government that will have power over several other countries as well.

That's not like the US, where the very foundation of the US was as a republic, under a single federal government. Europe was not founded under a single government, but the EU is creating a single government where there was once several independent governments.

Big fucking difference from the US.

[Nevarine]

At 12/13/07 10:00 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Now they are signing over those national ordinances over to a new government that will have power over several other countries as well.

That's not like the US, where the very foundation of the US was as a republic, under a single federal government. Europe was not founded under a single government, but the EU is creating a single government where there was once several independent governments.

Big fucking difference from the US.

Assuming you know nothing about American history you are absolutely correct. The United States of America was a loose confederation of separate entities. As this confederate federal government was proved inefficient the states gave more power to the federal head. Over the decades power has shifted more and more into the Federal government; however, the states are fifty separate entities with separate laws and separate governments with a gathering of elected officials whose decisions, for the most part, must be approved by the fifty states. There has been a recent change in actual policy execution as well in policies and we may see the states gaining more control in the future.

[Imperator]

Now they are signing over those national ordinances over to a new government that will have power over several other countries as well.

So.....

EU countries will be responsible for their own countries, but answerable to an overreaching government.

Much like states are responsible for their own territory but answerable to an overreaching federal government.

And you don't see the connection?

[cellardoor6]

At 12/13/07 10:51 PM, Imperator wrote:

Now they are signing over those national ordinances over to a new government that will have power over several other countries as well.

So.....

EU countries will be responsible for their own countries, but answerable to an overreaching government.

Yes, formerly INDEPENDENT nations with their own independent federal governments are going to sign it over to a multinational government.

Much like states are responsible for their own territory but answerable to an overreaching federal government.

Much like states still belong to a single country, and except for only one state I can think of (texas) were never independent.

The US is a single nation, with administrative units called states. These states have never had the independent power that the EU countries had before the EU existed.

The EU will be a union, in which several formerly completely independent nations sign over their sovereignty to a new government that will override the self-rule of those formerly independent nations.

And you don't see the connection?

And you don't see how it's entirely different?

[cellardoor6]

At 12/13/07 02:26 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

At 12/13/07 08:17 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: It's becoming more like the Soviet Union, that's a better comparison.

Haha

What the EU is doing is creating an overarching political authority which will take away a lot of the decision making of each individual country. It's not becoming like the US, it's becoming like the Soviet Union, formerly independent countries are signing over their nations decisions and ordinances, including foreign policy, to a union who will be controlled by people of different countries.

What? No they aren't. Why then did Britain go to war in Iraq, and lots of other European countries didn't? What about Afghanistan?

Maybe you need to read the link. The EU treaty that is in the works, and will likely be passed, is what will create the new singular foreign policy.

Ok, here is where you misunderstand the EU's role. There is no secret EU panel where some shifty Swiss people decide what laws will be held in the Commons or if Germany should send troops to Afghanistan. The leaders of all these European countries go to the conferences, and DISCUSS issues. This is how they come to an agreement.

And their decisions become BINDING, and since each formerly independent nation will make up a minority of the EU, their self-rule will be compromised. Veto power in several issues will no longer be in the hands France, or Britain etc.. as regarding themselves. The EU calls the shots.

At the same time the document scraps veto powers in many policy areas.

That's a good thing...indeed if this was applied to the security council then a lot more issues could be explored. The veto is a relic of an imperial age, very undemocratic.

Um what? You mean veto of independent nations is undemocratic, but somehow you have no problem if the veto power is in the hands of a government that holds sway over several formerly democratic countries?

Interesting concept.

[aviewaskewed]

At 12/13/07 10:56 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

The US is a single nation, with administrative units called states. These states have never had the independent power that the EU countries had before the EU existed.

I beg to differ somewhat, under the Articles of Confederation states were basically independent recognizing basically they're own laws and the federal government was much like the UN, a weak sanctioning body saying "no no, don't do that" or "please consider doing this" but most of their decrees were weak, and states didn't neccessarily have to obey them. That's why the Articles were quickly repealed, the Constitution put in place, and the Federal Government strengthened.

I have nothing else to add beyond that. Just what I feel is a slight factual correction :)

[therealsylvos]

At 12/14/07 12:38 AM, aviewaskewed wrote:

I beg to differ somewhat, under the Articles of Confederation states were basically independent recognizing basically they're own laws and the federal government was much like the UN, a weak sanctioning body saying "no no, don't do that" or "please consider doing this" but most of their decrees were weak, and states didn't neccessarily have to obey them. That's why the Articles were quickly repealed, the Constitution put in place, and the Federal Government strengthened.

I have nothing else to add beyond that. Just what I feel is a slight factual correction :)

Well for the most part the Articles of confederation are not considered the "U.S." as we consider it today. I mean when you say who our first president 9991 out of 10000 will say, "Washington", 8 will say "huh?" and 1 will say "Hanson".

[cellardoor6]

At 12/14/07 12:38 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: I beg to differ somewhat, under the Articles of Confederation states were basically independent recognizing basically they're own laws and the federal government was much like the UN, a weak sanctioning body saying "no no, don't do that" or "please consider doing this" but most of their decrees were weak, and states didn't neccessarily have to obey them.

So you're saying that the state governments had/have power over their states that were/are equal in degree to the governing power the countries of Europe had before the EU?

I don't even think you believe that.

The fact is, the European Union is not becoming like the US, because the countries that make it up were previously completely independent nations. The states the US has now are not independent nations, and except for Texas (I think), were never independent nations in any way similar to the independence of countries like France, Italy, Germany, etc..

I have nothing else to add beyond that. Just what I feel is a slight factual correction :)

It's not really a factual correction, it's a different perspective of what is essentially the same concept. You're seeing similarities that I don't see.

[therealsylvos]

At 12/14/07 12:48 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 12/14/07 12:38 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: I beg to differ somewhat, under the Articles of Confederation states were basically independent recognizing basically they're own laws and the federal government was much like the UN, a weak sanctioning body saying "no no, don't do that" or "please consider doing this" but most of their decrees were weak, and states didn't neccessarily have to obey them.

So you're saying that the state governments had/have power over their states that were/are equal in degree to the governing power the countries of Europe had before the EU?

I don't even think you believe that.

The fact is, the European Union is not becoming like the US, because the countries that make it up were previously completely independent nations. The states the US has now are not independent nations, and except for Texas (I think), were never independent nations in any way similar to the independence of countries like France, Italy, Germany, etc..

That is true, but that does not mean that each state was extremly individualistic. I mean they had their own currencies, their own armies, hell for the most part they didn't even pay any taxes to the federal government.

[iiREDii]

The EU is going to cripple Europe economically. The central planinng of economies, protectionism, Keynesian horseshit... has predictable and disastrous consequences.

[Nevarine]

At 12/14/07 12:58 AM, therealsylvos wrote:

That is true, but that does not mean that each state was extremely individualistic. I mean they had their own currencies, their own armies, hell for the most part they didn't even pay any taxes to the federal government.

Before they were states they were colonies, separate, individual colonies some having power for a century and a half before Britain began locking down on them 1607 Virgina was settled and the last was Georgia in 1733. They had no governing from England with the exception of a few governors in a few of the territories or a few corporations in a few of the territories. And when they were handed laws they were largely ignored in the later days. When the Intolerable Acts were passed (which were not intolerable at all but that is neither here or there) some colonists stood up and openly rebelled against the mother country. When success looked viable many more jumped on and the nations of France and Spain decided to help out. Then came the articles and then came the rough draft of the Constitution. The federal government was still incredibly weak and most of the power was restricted to the states and the people (read the latter Articles of the Constitution). However, over the course of history, especially during periods of war or incredible hardship, power has shift from the state to the federal and the congress to the presidency.

No one is saying the EU will be perfect - compromises between nations and states never are, however, if you honestly don't think that the kinks won't be worked out then you are a fool, so much of history shows that this is indeed the right move. Controlled economics, not so much, however unity and confederation is a good thing.

Besides there is no North American Globalization conspiracy - it is the truth and it isn't a bad thing. In a time when war between two states could mean World War III and M.A.D. is it not comforting that there is a move away from the Victorian Imperial Nationalism and toward a new Global Populus? I doubt that we will see the destruction of states and borders, and I doubt that nations like Catholicism, Judaism, and Islam will ever vanish, but we will be one population of Earth. Every governor will be responsible for his actions and any acts of destructive ends or means such as wars will be considered an act against humanity. Safeguards must be put in place (no state would SHARE sovereignty without safeguards) but it could work. Equality and Fraternity - they don't sound all that bad.

[Nevarine]

At 12/14/07 02:26 AM, iiREDii wrote: The EU is going to cripple Europe economically. The central planinng of economies, protectionism, Keynesian horseshit... has predictable and disastrous consequences.

And last time I checked the Euro wasn't doing to shoddy in the world Economics. Besides America has a general planned Economics and it has kept us from anything too heinous thus far (knocks on wood). And yes America's economy looks really shaky but that is in part due to an experiment the committee is trying out - lessening the value of the dollar to decrease the debt. It is basic (Macro)economics.

[iiREDii]

At 12/14/07 07:39 AM, Nevarine wrote:

At 12/14/07 02:26 AM, iiREDii wrote: The EU is going to cripple Europe economically. The central planinng of economies, protectionism, Keynesian horseshit... has predictable and disastrous consequences.

And last time I checked the Euro wasn't doing to shoddy in the world Economics. Besides America has a general planned Economics and it has kept us from anything too heinous thus far (knocks on wood). And yes America's economy looks really shaky but that is in part due to an experiment the committee is trying out - lessening the value of the dollar to decrease the debt. It is basic (Macro)economics.

LOL. "Lessening the dollar" will create debt not reduce it retard. What Keynesian dumbasses fail to realize is that money is a development of the free market, a commodity like any other. And controling and manipulating that commodity only hurts the people who rely upon it for trade.

Central planning of the economy destroys the proper allocation of resources developed in a free market through pricing and demand structures. EU has already banned certain items and driven up the costs of certain others within thier borders.

[emmytee]

this will make pretty much no difference to us, it's just a way of stopping the shitty new EU members from trying to exterminate each other every second week. Besides, how the hell do you know any cultures will be forgotten? British, French, German and Italian cultures are far too different and strong just to be forgotten.

Also, lol @ cellardoor and his soviet Russia comment. I suppose it would be like a soviet Russia but divided up into separate countries with separate armies who meet in a democratic forum to discuss foreign policy. Also, like fuck do we want to be like America, right now we are more free than you are, but we don't feel the need to use the word freedom at least 10 times in every political debate.

[emmytee]

At 12/13/07 04:04 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Related.

Europeans are basically signing away their sovereignty to the EU.

"Ireland and the UK currently have an opt-out from European policies concerning asylum, visas and immigration. Under the new treaty they will have the right to opt in or out of any policies in the entire field of justice and home affairs."

[Britkid]

At 12/13/07 11:00 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Maybe you need to read the link. The EU treaty that is in the works, and will likely be passed, is what will create the new singular foreign policy.

It's not binding by any means.

These organisations will never sway the individual leaders, unless their people are behind the measures that are being suggested. Leaders care about staying in power, and people in France cannot vote Gordon Brown out of office.

And their decisions become BINDING, and since each formerly independent nation will make up a minority of the EU, their self-rule will be compromised. Veto power in several issues will no longer be in the hands France, or Britain etc.. as regarding themselves. The EU calls the shots.

Yes, if by the EU you mean the majority vote. So that one or two countries can't call the shots. However, if someone disagrees, then no one will force them to apply the same decision to themselves.

Um what? You mean veto of independent nations is undemocratic, but somehow you have no problem if the veto power is in the hands of a government that holds sway over several formerly democratic countries?
Interesting concept.

What do you mean?

It doesn't hold sway over anything. The House of Commons makes decisions for Britain and the same for other countries. There's no 'government veto', it's the majority decision. The only people against this are over-patriotic fools like The Daily Express who can't understand that by working together, the countries of Europe each remain separate but stronger.

[SmilezRoyale]

The EU is probably going to have a bit more trouble feeling 'unified' by the united states. if you were to make europe into a country and each independent nation into a state, you would agree that european 'states' are far more culturally diverse than in the united states. And it's common sense that it's not fun feeling like there's a higher power looming over you when it's not of your own cultural idenity. [otherwise we'd have plenty more Asian politicians, considering how smart we know asians can be]

Consider that in the united states, tensions between states already exist strongly, and have for a long period of time. [Dumbfuckistan versus the intelligent, tollerant, liberal democrat blue states of the midwest, california, and the 'new england' states.]

If the EU starts passing laws that boss other countries around in ways that go against their cultural identity, the EU will face civil issues like that of the US in the 1860's...

[Humbucker740]

At 12/15/07 09:48 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: The EU is probably going to have a bit more trouble feeling 'unified' by the united states. if you were to make europe into a country and each independent nation into a state, you would agree that european 'states' are far more culturally diverse than in the united states. And it's common sense that it's not fun feeling like there's a higher power looming over you when it's not of your own cultural idenity. [otherwise we'd have plenty more Asian politicians, considering how smart we know asians can be]

Asians are not charismatic.

Consider that in the united states, tensions between states already exist strongly, and have for a long period of time. [Dumbfuckistan versus the intelligent, tollerant, liberal democrat blue states of the midwest, california, and the 'new england' states.]

Only half of the states in the Midwest are blue. If you're going to make an argument at least pretend to have an objective viewpoint so its not apparent that you're totally biased. Its cute that you think the party which caters to the uneducated laborer is the more intelligent one too. Especially since the core of the Republicans happens to be wealthy, highly educated people.

If the EU starts passing laws that boss other countries around in ways that go against their cultural identity, the EU will face civil issues like that of the US in the 1860's...

Its a union. It is inevitable that issues arise and are dealt with, violently or not. This is how they progress and become more unified, "like that of the US in the 1860's..."

[ZJ]

At 12/13/07 11:31 AM, squallie2002 wrote: A bad thing is that a lot of countries will probably start to eliminate borders. Many cultures are going to be forgotten as this happens and thats a terrible thing.

But wouldn't they just morph into one super culture?

[SmilezRoyale]

At 12/15/07 10:05 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

Only half of the states in the Midwest are blue. If you're going to make an argument at least pretend to have an objective viewpoint so its not apparent that you're totally biased. Its cute that you think the party which caters to the uneducated laborer is the more intelligent one too. Especially since the core of the Republicans happens to be wealthy, highly educated people.

*Shoves Sarcasm up his add* Did you feel that?

http://www.kennworld.net/uploaded_images /dumbfuckistan-750073.jpg

Smart, kind, tolerant, open minded, liberal America our only hope and salvation for the future.

If the EU starts passing laws that boss other countries around in ways that go against their cultural identity, the EU will face civil issues like that of the US in the 1860's...

Its a union. It is inevitable that issues arise and are dealt with, violently or not. This is how they progress and become more unified, "like that of the US in the 1860's..."

[RommelTJ]

^
That is the funniest pic I have seen all day.

Anyway, I don't see what the big deal is with a world without borders. I remember a song by John Lennon being pretty popular that had to do with this. I can't IMAGINE how it went.