Snowbird
28th March 2011, 00:29
...World Government of World Citizens
This is new to me, although this has been around for over 60 years. And, this may possibly very well become the foundation for a New and Different World Order (NDWO) of our choosing and our making. We can call it whatever we'd like.
I have just started reading through this site. I was introduced to this organization by listening to Mel Fabrigas interview Dr. Carol Rosin. Carol knows of and about this organization and knows the originator Garry Davis.
When you read through this site, please keep in mind that this is a global organization that contains aspects of several differing types of political and governmental underpinnings. You may see words or terms that might cause knee-jerk reactions. But my suggestion is simply keep reading to learn of the whole and not simply the part. They even have a World Citizen Group which you will find in the right sidebar.
Please report back and let us know what you think and what you have learned. We are, after all, in this thing together.
As I am reading through the material at this site, I am noticing different areas whereby TPTW (the powers that were) have borrowed ideas from this or some other source material, and have turned the meaning of the item, such as money, around to their convenience and profit.
The essence of money is therefore trust.
Anyone read fiat currency which is based upon trust and has absolutely no value backing?
Some highlights:
Who owns the World?
by Garry Davis
Mutual Affluence System
A global "mutual affluence system" therefore may be said to be the economic philosophy of
the embryonic World government.
Capital Formation Process Defective
If everyone is to have a chance to own his share of capital, then the current process
whereby most newly formed capital automatically flows into the hands of the upper 5 to 10
per cent of families who already own all the existing capital is defective. Ways must be
devised to allow the acquisition of newly-formed capital to be acquired by the remaining
90% of families.
(Personally? I would love to see system whereby we invest in employee-owned companies that are actually producing goods and services that benefit society. A good read for those who are seeking a totally different form of capitalism is, The Divine Right of Capital, Dethroning the Corporate Aristocracy, by Marjorie Kelly. I have a copy.)
National "Security" vs, Global Affluence
As national economics are increasingly linked with "national security" and yet the inevitable
outcome of a total arms race between them is war, let us start from the opposite polarity:
general and total disarmament strictly from an economic viewpoint.
"World military expenditures since 1960 reached the $3 trillion mark
($3,000,000,000,000) in 1975." Then from 1975 to 1981, one-third the period, world
military spending rose another $3 trillion. "National security" today costs the citizens of all
states between 8 and 9% of the world's gross national product. Five nations, however,
contribute 75% of the monstrous sum for sheer destruction: the U.S.A., the USSR, Great
Britain, France and West Germany, the first two making up 60%.
http://www.worldservice.org/whoowns.html
This is new to me, although this has been around for over 60 years. And, this may possibly very well become the foundation for a New and Different World Order (NDWO) of our choosing and our making. We can call it whatever we'd like.
I have just started reading through this site. I was introduced to this organization by listening to Mel Fabrigas interview Dr. Carol Rosin. Carol knows of and about this organization and knows the originator Garry Davis.
When you read through this site, please keep in mind that this is a global organization that contains aspects of several differing types of political and governmental underpinnings. You may see words or terms that might cause knee-jerk reactions. But my suggestion is simply keep reading to learn of the whole and not simply the part. They even have a World Citizen Group which you will find in the right sidebar.
Please report back and let us know what you think and what you have learned. We are, after all, in this thing together.
As I am reading through the material at this site, I am noticing different areas whereby TPTW (the powers that were) have borrowed ideas from this or some other source material, and have turned the meaning of the item, such as money, around to their convenience and profit.
The essence of money is therefore trust.
Anyone read fiat currency which is based upon trust and has absolutely no value backing?
Some highlights:
Who owns the World?
by Garry Davis
Mutual Affluence System
A global "mutual affluence system" therefore may be said to be the economic philosophy of
the embryonic World government.
Capital Formation Process Defective
If everyone is to have a chance to own his share of capital, then the current process
whereby most newly formed capital automatically flows into the hands of the upper 5 to 10
per cent of families who already own all the existing capital is defective. Ways must be
devised to allow the acquisition of newly-formed capital to be acquired by the remaining
90% of families.
(Personally? I would love to see system whereby we invest in employee-owned companies that are actually producing goods and services that benefit society. A good read for those who are seeking a totally different form of capitalism is, The Divine Right of Capital, Dethroning the Corporate Aristocracy, by Marjorie Kelly. I have a copy.)
National "Security" vs, Global Affluence
As national economics are increasingly linked with "national security" and yet the inevitable
outcome of a total arms race between them is war, let us start from the opposite polarity:
general and total disarmament strictly from an economic viewpoint.
"World military expenditures since 1960 reached the $3 trillion mark
($3,000,000,000,000) in 1975." Then from 1975 to 1981, one-third the period, world
military spending rose another $3 trillion. "National security" today costs the citizens of all
states between 8 and 9% of the world's gross national product. Five nations, however,
contribute 75% of the monstrous sum for sheer destruction: the U.S.A., the USSR, Great
Britain, France and West Germany, the first two making up 60%.
http://www.worldservice.org/whoowns.html