.jpg)
I don't want to be an alarmist, but there is a lot of talk coming from all corners of the earth to create a truly global financial system. Great Britain's Prime Minister has used the economic crisis to call for just that. Gordon Brown is set to speak tonight on foreign policy, but the policy sounds more like a bad sci-fi flick from the 1970's. "My message is that we must be: internationalist not protectionist; interventionist not neutral; progressive not reactive; and forward looking not frozen by events. We can seize the moment and in doing so build a truly global society." Just how do we build that truly global society? The first step is to convince America to give up her sovereign right to her own currency. The argument will be made that the dollar is weak, hard to regulate and has pictures of those guys that don't look like our president elect. The Euro will be the preferred currency of the world. Of course, it will have to be renamed to appease Americans who are more concerned about the name than they are the consequences. Perhaps the new note should be called the "Worldo" or the "Globalo." Oh, how the far left would love that. We will be told that all money is fiat money anyway, so why does it matter what you carry in your wallet. Besides, you won't have to worry about exchange rates on your next trip to Belgium. Heck, why even carry paper money at all. We all have plastic now and cash is so senior citizen like. You think it can't happen here? Take a look at those governments across the pond about ten years back. Look familiar? "...And if we learn from our experience of turning unity of purpose into unity of action, we can together seize this moment of change in our world to create a truly global society." Mr. Brown will champion it tonight. He has gone as far as to advocate global tax guidelines, with Americans picking up most of the tab, I am sure. Even former USSR head Mikhail Gorbachev has said "being a liberal himself, he thinks that the world will take a left turn," and that "a global perestroika would be a logical response to the global crisis." "The paradigm of global development is about to change. The era inaugurated by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher 30 years ago is over." Oh my!
I can hear the chants now....Obama for president of the world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Oh, you are oh so right.
You should add an explanation as to why a one world system would be bad. You rag about it a lot, but you never seem to provide reasons why I should fear it.
Have fun. Should be right down your alarmist alley.
OK, I will take the bait. Roger, you yourself probably don't have anything to fear. I suspect you are eagerly awaiting the global colonization of America as much as any other European. I know you are a student of history and can recall not so long ago when a man attempted to take total control of the world. Just like sheep, half of Europe said no problem, welcome. What we all should fear is loosing our national sovereignty, being socially manipulated, having no legal rights in a world court, having the government track our every move and restricting the flow of information. It is already happening in China and your beloved Europe with censorship online. It is happening in America with the federal government taking control of entire industries. Your question was what is there to fear? My question to you is what is there to like?
Golly. And I thought Brown's speech was about cooperation.
Good call, Jeff. I was busy trying to figure out how the prime minister of a nation that voluntarily lies outside the Euro zone was advocating a world currency, seeing as I couldn't find any mention of it in the actual text of his speech, and then I remembered.
I'd reckoned without hallucinogenic texts.
You asked what there was to fear and I answered. I didn't add to or take away from the speech. Do you think Gordon Brown will say outright that he advicates these things?
advocates
The issue is the nature of your fear.
OK, I will take the bait. Roger, you yourself probably don't have anything to fear. I suspect you are eagerly awaiting the global colonization of America as much as any other European.
Fear tends to be irrational, as illustrated by this first broadside. The global nature of commerce and communications is a given among thinkers of most, if not all, political stripes … including me. I do my best to live by the mantra, “act locally, think globally,” taking the best of what is international and the best of what is right here in my town. There’s nothing in any of this to indicate an advocacy of global “colonization,” itself an intentional choice of words, and a misleading one … and yes, semantics is a big part of encouraging fear, isn’t it?
I know you are a student of history and can recall not so long ago when a man attempted to take total control of the world. Just like sheep, half of Europe said no problem, welcome.
You’re not being specific, but you’re being Eurocentric in deference to my proclivities, so I’m assuming that your man is Hitler. Certainly parts of occupied Europe welcomed him, although in your eagerness to over-simplify, the existence of resistance movements is being conveniently ignored. I thought you might have been referring to Communism, which Stalin managed to impose by force on the eastern half of Europe, and to which I can attest – having been there during the 80’s – was not greeted with open arms.
Just to be curmudgeonly, I’d add that no single man has ever been able to render humankind into sheep … with the possible exception of Jesus, and I find that brand of bondage fairly alarming, too.
What we all should fear is loosing our national sovereignty, being socially manipulated, having no legal rights in a world court, having the government track our every move and restricting the flow of information.
All these points comprise the familiar “Dr Dan Straw Man” by which the most extreme example of an already delusional fear is posited, and then bashed into bits. The national sovereignty argument has been around since the United Nations. Social manipulation? To me, that’s what happens when children get raised and brainwashed into a religious indoctrination without being afforded the ability to think for themselves. The question of legal rights in a world court better addresses our refusal to concede that we as Americans have on occasion broken our own laws, not to mention international standards (think Gitmo and “it’s not fascism if we do it”). Banning books is a restriction on the flow of information, and it has occurred in repressive foreign dictatorships as well as small towns in Mississippi.
It is already happening in China and your beloved Europe with censorship online. It is happening in America with the federal government taking control of entire industries. Your question was what is there to fear? My question to you is what is there to like?
It will surprise you to learn that I agree up to a point with your fear of the feds controlling industries. I’d like to see the monoliths crumble and fresh seedlings of small, local business permitted to flourish.
My overall point is that within three or so paragraphs, you spew forth a couple dozen debatable assertions and exaggerate pretty much every one, which seems calculated to enhance the preconception of fear without providing the reader with details that might explain and enhance the argument. Thus, examined and probed, your fear begins to fall apart. It turns out to be irrational, like fearing thunder or enclosed spaces.
The naïveté...
The poltronnerie ...
I, for one, want to be an American! I have no desire to live under Chinese law or to be a part of the EU. I believe what I believe and push it on no one, I don't like our current political system, but it is far better than anywhere else in the world. Alarmist? I would say realist! I don't want to be told what to believe, or be ruled by a One world system. If people are so concerned with thinking for themselves then why would anyone except the load of $&*+ we are fed daily by the press or the 2 party political system people are so blindly devoted to. Two hand picked men willing to go along with a system set up by the weathiest people in the world, part of an establishment that's allowed our economy to get to where it is today, preaching change, when it was their votes who got us to this point in time. I for one have chosen to truly open my eyes and think for myself. Obama, try Brzezinski! Nothing more than a puppet in the fiction most see and believe to be true. I refuse to be labeled an alarmist or conspiracy theorist, or whatever else the intellectuals choose to pin on me.
I for one think Daniel Short's commentary is a refreshing change.
Post a Comment