all 8 comments

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Well, there are many motivations proponents of this can have. Some will cite high minded ideals of freedom of movement, world citizenry or the like. Some people think diversity is always a 'good', although the most generous societies tend to be homogenous, as people tend to not helping those they view as 'others'.

However, I think the real driver of this is the power desired by certain people to enforce agendas worldwide. Things like tackling environmental problems don't work unless everyone is doing it. We also saw this with covid policy, where countries that never agree on anything all of a sudden all agreed in lockstep to implement completely unfounded public policies like quarantining healthy people and shutting down economic activity.

The billionaires and corporations are so multinational, that the power structures between nations are now quite interelated. The corporations dont give two fucks about national borders, they are international profit machines that view themselves as stakeholders on a higher level than government

[–]JohnRaymond 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The naive, hopelessly stupid who are blinded by deceptions of communism cite the "noble" reasons. No more war! That's right. They will be able to slaughter at will. And hopefully the naive commie traitors will be the first to go... As they would richly deserve

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This is the inverse of communism, though it will likely have similar totalitarian results. In communism you have no market economy, and the 'public' (the government) own the means of production. This is literally the opposite of the WEF agenda, they LOVE market economies and LOVE private capital. They want to do away with individual states, and have a private corporate elite alliance ruling the world. This is pure hyper-capitalism. Communists worship the state and nationalism, they do NOT want to eliminate borders and are intensely nationalistic, look at any historical example, China, USSR, Cuba, etc

What is similar in concept is that both of these ideologies want to combine all the economic and governmental powers into one body - The state with communism, and the private corporation alliance in WEF style globalism, and historically doing so leads to tremendously oppressive conditions

[–]JohnRaymond 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To Hong K: You are defining communism as they would want you to believe. Communists are militant atheists and they don't want to redistribute wealth to you. They want one world gvt... And want you and me dead, or in slave camp

[–]panel30[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

and historically doing so leads to tremendously oppressive conditions

are there any ways that have worked to avoid the oppressive situation in the past? especially nonviolent (may as well start there if it works then that's nice to be able to do it that way)?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As far as I am aware, combining powers has always led to oppression. You have left-wing communists, and right-wing fascists both attempt to combine the powers of government and economic production and fail. This also seems to hold true in the past when the issue was more the state and the church - separating these entities was of paramount importance to establishing some manner of liberty in the U.S. We took this idea even further and separated the government powers into 3 branches, and even delegated some powers to the states, counties, and cities.

I am unaware of any historical examples where combining powers like this in one body has not led to more rather than less authoritarian conditions, though perhaps some exceptions to this rule exist, as I am not the worlds best historian by any means

[–]panel30[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. Hm.

Some will cite high minded ideals of freedom of movement, world citizenry or the like. Some people think diversity is always a 'good'

re freedom of movement, the wikipedia page talks about the ability to move within one's own country and to enter and leave one's own country. that sounds more reasonable. they say it sometimes goes further than that, i guess that's where the borderless stuff comes from.

I guess it seems good to me for ethnic groups to be able to have a home. People can bring their different perspectives to collaboratively work towards global wellbeing without intruding in places that are someone else's home. It seems like that's part of wellbeing for each group, to be able to have a home they are secure in, where they can exist among themselves and live and develop according to their culture etc.

It also seems like people understand and support this a lot for groups considered "indigenous" but not for some other groups. I know it's more questionable with the united states canada australia etc, but the saami are not the only group in europe that needs a home. All technology is part of nature the same way hooves and woven baskets are part of nature, it doesn't make a group less indigenous because they have a different technological style.

Well I suppose this got a bit long. Some of my thoughts right now I guess. People wanting to protect their home and continuing to have a home is normal and healthy and not only compatible with but part of global friendship, prosperity, health, etc. imo. as is each having a healthy love and appreciation for their own ethnic group (pride, as in dignity and self-respect, not vanity).

[–]JohnRaymond 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The very evil, who want extreme control of world, will then habe a pathway to consolidating Rural Americans, conservative and independent Americans with guns and who love America, their freedom, stand in the gap. Don't give up your guns