"governing body" "world governing body" "citizenship"

Governance, by definition, involves 'governors' and the 'governed'.

No thanks.

I'm not inclined to abide the current batch of 'governors': I have absolutely no interest in trading in the old, national, variety for the new, global, type.

Now if you wanna talk about elected and appointed 'proxies': that's a different matter.

Hiring someone to unplug my toilet (a proxy) is not the same as hiring someone to tell me what to do (and giving them a stick to bop me up-side the head when I decline to abide).

Hiring folks to manage the plumbing (national or global affairs, real and esoteric) is not the same as hiring folks to manage 'me' (I can manage myself just fine, thank you).

*shrug*


You're putting the horse before the cart: before talking about 'governance' (or proxy-hood) the conversation should begin with (and, perhaps, end with) 'civilization'.

Civilization is the on-going, dynamic, ill-defined, result of at least two individuals agreeing to NOT steal from, rape, or kill/injure one another so that each can go and do something (anything!) else.

If both parties abide then whatever results is 'civilization'.

If one or the other doesn't abide: all bets are off...WAR!

I find honest, open, war preferable to the blunt(ing) restraint of 'governance' or 'government'.


Perhaps I missed it in the other threads (far too much dick-waving there for me to do much more than scan the threads): what's the point of this "world governing body" you're talking about? That is: what's the reason or purpose for this "world governing body"?

Seems to me: a "world governing body" (of any stripe) just furthers and consolidates the current agenda of all national governments (that agenda being: 'domestication').

I'm not seeing how this "world governing body" is in my best interest.

LOL henry skip the sniping posts read the proposals. This is more than just two parties. If we cannot come together eventually given that we are not locked into time then how can we expect any to build a sustaining governing body? We all come from different walks of life, A microcosm of the world. Here we can do what the real world does not have time to do correctly. To me IMO its worth a shot.

You're not fooling anyone around here, except perhaps deluded, naive Kristy.

MonoExplosion, you fucking faggot, quit making new accounts to hide your little bitch self.


You're empty. You have no soul, you pathetic fuck. Stick to ONE account, ONE name. Or I'll squash what is left of you.

Fucking coward.

Henry Quirk wrote:Governance, by definition, involves 'governors' and the 'governed'.

No thanks.

I'm not inclined to abide the current batch of 'governors': I have absolutely no interest in trading in the old, national, variety for the new, global, type.

Now if you wanna talk about elected and appointed 'proxies': that's a different matter.

Hiring someone to unplug my toilet (a proxy) is not the same as hiring someone to tell me what to do (and giving them a stick to bop me up-side the head when I decline to abide).

Hiring folks to manage the plumbing (national or global affairs, real and esoteric) is not the same as hiring folks to manage 'me' (I can manage myself just fine, thank you).

*shrug*


You're putting the horse before the cart: before talking about 'governance' (or proxy-hood) the conversation should begin with (and, perhaps, end with) 'civilization'.

Civilization is the on-going, dynamic, ill-defined, result of at least two individuals agreeing to NOT steal from, rape, or kill/injure one another so that each can go and do something (anything!) else.

If both parties abide then whatever results is 'civilization'.

If one or the other doesn't abide: all bets are off...WAR!

I find honest, open, war preferable to the blunt(ing) restraint of 'governance' or 'government'.


Perhaps I missed it in the other threads (far too much dick-waving there for me to do much more than scan the threads): what's the point of this "world governing body" you're talking about? That is: what's the reason or purpose for this "world governing body"?

Seems to me: a "world governing body" (of any stripe) just furthers and consolidates the current agenda of all national governments (that agenda being: 'domestication').

I'm not seeing how this "world governing body" is in my best interest.

IT isn't in my opinion in anyone's best interest to govern or be governed. Domestication is for those who seek domestication, but no Freedom Lover can ever be domesticated - that said, ordinary wars by ordinary governments are useless and foolish. The ungovernable ones will always fly in freedom's light, just because that is what they do. No wars are needed by the un-needy.

kriswest wrote:LOL henry skip the sniping posts read the proposals. This is more than just two parties. If we cannot come together eventually given that we are not locked into time then how can we expect any to build a sustaining governing body? We all come from different walks of life, A microcosm of the world. Here we can do what the real world does not have time to do correctly. To me IMO its worth a shot.

Lovely thoughts, Kris. Wars can't do this because people will always seek freedom even if they don't know how to. It's embedded in the genes. That is why governments cannot work. The fact is, the smarter and more advanced and open a mind is, the less it can be led by governments. It (if smart enough) will learn from science, but never be bound by current theoretical restrictions.

Kristy you need to make a rule that disallows morons (MonoExplosion) from making multiple new accounts to post under.

This fucking idiot does this everywhere he goes. What a scumbag.

If you allow this to continue on this website then enjoy a slow rotting death, same as all the other shit forums left-behind by this slug of a being.

"skip the sniping posts read the proposals"

Can't, frankly, be bothered to dance around the shit dribbling off the ends of a jackass's fingers.

#

"how can we expect any to build a sustaining governing body?"

Again: why do 'we' need such a thing?

I don't...why do 'you'?

Henry Quirk wrote:"skip the sniping posts read the proposals"

Can't, frankly, be bothered to dance around the shit dribbling off the ends of a jackass's fingers.

#

"how can we expect any to build a sustaining governing body?"

Again: why do 'we' need such a thing?

I don't...why do 'you'?

Filth like you DOES need to become governed. How else would any mother or father protect their children from pedo rapists like you? You fucking faggot, filth is what you and your kind are.

When I am crowned Emperor, I'll snip your tiny, microscopic pecker off with my own pair of scissors.

Then I'll sterilize everybody you've laid a hand on in your entire life, including the disgusting filth children you've wrought.

Pull the weed from the root, is how I deal with scum, shit like you.

Username wrote:Kristy you need to make a rule that disallows morons (MonoExplosion) from making multiple new accounts to post under.

This fucking idiot does this everywhere he goes. What a scumbag.

If you allow this to continue on this website then enjoy a slow rotting death, same as all the other shit forums left-behind by this slug of a being.

I am a little surprised that someone claiming not to know about the forum some of us came here from mentioning another member of that same forum, and accusing him of being another poster he is clearly not. This has nothing philosophical about it. It's just lying junk, like Henry said, not worth the time. It's also ridiculously stupid. Soooo lame. Henry and Mono have completely different energy imprints and syntax etc.

One small point many of us are members of several forums and this might just be a coincedence, but probably lying on his part. Havn't seen 'Mono' anywhere for awhile.

thedoc wrote:Havn't seen 'Mono' anywhere for awhile.

You're all the same. And I will cleanse you from the "perfect society".

Because the "perfect society" does not allow pedophiles in it, as simple as that.

The perfect society has no humans in it. By human nature there can never be perfection. Animal nature has flaws within flaws. It must to survive and thrive.

kriswest wrote:The perfect society has no humans in it. By human nature there can never be perfection. Animal nature has flaws within flaws. It must to survive and thrive.

I would word it a little bit differently. The perfect society may include humans and other animal members but not be limited to them. There are so many possibilities and in fact quantum physics may say infinite ones. There are dream states for both humans and other animals, and humans also have meditative states to explore. The perfect society is arguably here and only needs to be realized and enjoyed. A mistake it may be to think we have to create or force what we already have privvy to.

Then we must define perfect society. Your perfect will not be mine and visa versa. To that we will only end up with a facade of perfection because we would have to compromise our sense or ideas of perfection.