Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
quote: Originally posted by dandini:
not waste that is the insurgents.
The insurgents are wasting pounds sterling? |
| |
|
|
pounds sterling and lives
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by dandini:
pounds sterling and lives
Not as many civilian lives as the US/uk war machine though. But I guess people are more important than to be counted as numbers. What I meant was that the UK government spends billions on a pointless war exercise in another country, then pleads poverty when it comes to housing and health. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
The idea of the nation state is flawed and out dated.
No state = no laws, no NHS, no security, no self determination. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
The idea of the nation state is flawed and out dated.
No state = no laws, no NHS, no security, no self determination.
Not at all. It seems to be that nation states = no security, and no self determination for us the people. We could have an international health service. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
The idea of the nation state is flawed and out dated.
No state = no laws, no NHS, no security, no self determination.
Not at all. It seems to be that nation states = no security, and no self determination for us the people. We could have an international health service.
And where would the accountability be ? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
The idea of the nation state is flawed and out dated.
No state = no laws, no NHS, no security, no self determination.
Not at all. It seems to be that nation states = no security, and no self determination for us the people. We could have an international health service.
And where would the accountability be ?
With us. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL! 
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Tequila_nic: quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
And why should I leave? I said I think people should be free to live where they choose.
Can I move to Mecca then? Nic
I think you should be allowed to live where you choose.
On that basis if a load of rich Westerners decided they rather like the idea of living in the Seychelles and priced all the people living in the Seychelles out of their islands, that would be fine by you I presume? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves.
That wouldn't work with 6 billion people, its difficult to get 6 billion people round a table, so I presume you would have to elect a world Government? So how big would the constituencies be? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves.
That wouldn't work with 6 billion people, its difficult to get 6 billion people round a table, so I presume you would have to elect a world Government? So how big would the constituencies be?
We can run our own lives without government. There are loads of examples of organisation without authority. Colin Ward's "Anarchy In Action" would be a good starting point if you are interested. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Tequila_nic: quote: Originally posted by Nick14:
And why should I leave? I said I think people should be free to live where they choose.
Can I move to Mecca then? Nic
I think you should be allowed to live where you choose.
On that basis if a load of rich Westerners decided they rather like the idea of living in the Seychelles and priced all the people living in the Seychelles out of their islands, that would be fine by you I presume?
No, if you are talking about "pricing people out" then that is removing the CHOICE element I was talking about. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves.
That wouldn't work with 6 billion people, its difficult to get 6 billion people round a table, so I presume you would have to elect a world Government? So how big would the constituencies be?
We can run our own lives without government. There are loads of examples of organisation without authority. Colin Ward's "Anarchy In Action" would be a good starting point if you are interested.
I don't think so, for there are political decisions to be made, so who makes them, and who do they represent? But even though you are ignoring the basic fact that human beings are social animals and work in social groups, I'll humour you and say we have this happy clappy world. So in this happy clappy world people get together to make their decisions, but as 6 billion can't get together for a Pow Wow, I presume groups decide their own thing ? And I presume some groups decide to do things differently from other groups? OOOPS It looks like we've gone and reinvented countries! |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves.
That wouldn't work with 6 billion people, its difficult to get 6 billion people round a table, so I presume you would have to elect a world Government? So how big would the constituencies be?
We can run our own lives without government. There are loads of examples of organisation without authority. Colin Ward's "Anarchy In Action" would be a good starting point if you are interested.
I don't think so, for there are political decisions to be made, so who makes them, and who do they represent? But even though you are ignoring the basic fact that human beings are social animals and work in social groups, I'll humour you and say we have this happy clappy world. So in this happy clappy world people get together to make their decisions, but as 6 billion can't get together for a Pow Wow, I presume groups decide their own thing ? And I presume some groups decide to do things differently from other groups? OOOPS It looks like we've gone and reinvented countries!
Those groups do not have to be organised on national lines. As I stated such a mode is outdated. I have not ignored the fact that humans are social beings. This is an essential fact to asserting that we can live, work, and organise our lives along non hierarchical ways. Mutual aid, co-operation, and a rejection of authority would be a basis for such organisation. I think the nation state springs from self interest, profit, and the exploitation of resources. |
| |
|
|
The system as it stands now, with your "democracies" and nation states is failing. There is terrible inequality and poverty in the world - yet great wealth and personal richness.
|
| |
|
|
Hey!
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MRTIBBS.:
Hey!
What is it Mr Tibbs? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: quote: Originally posted by Flanker: quote: Originally posted by Nick14: with us ALL!
Well that makes no sense, are you going to do away with democracies and have autocratric rulers of the world? Or perhaps a world Government ? Would there be parties to this world Government?
Who needs lying politicians to structure our lives? We can run things ourselves.
That wouldn't work with 6 billion people, its difficult to get 6 billion people round a table, so I presume you would have to elect a world Government? So how big would the constituencies be?
We can run our own lives without government. There are loads of examples of organisation without authority. Colin Ward's "Anarchy In Action" would be a good starting point if you are interested.
I don't think so, for there are political decisions to be made, so who makes them, and who do they represent? But even though you are ignoring the basic fact that human beings are social animals and work in social groups, I'll humour you and say we have this happy clappy world. So in this happy clappy world people get together to make their decisions, but as 6 billion can't get together for a Pow Wow, I presume groups decide their own thing ? And I presume some groups decide to do things differently from other groups? OOOPS It looks like we've gone and reinvented countries!
Those groups do not have to be organised on national lines. As I stated such a mode is outdated. I have not ignored the fact that humans are social beings. This is an essential fact to asserting that we can live, work, and organise our lives along non hierarchical ways. Mutual aid, co-operation, and a rejection of authority would be a basis for such organisation. I think the nation state springs from self interest, profit, and the exploitation of resources.
But if groups in your happy clappy world go off and do their own thing, they are going off to do their own thing in self interest, for they ain't going to do it if it isn't to their interest, and that means profit from their self interest, how ever you like to view that profit ,like the NHS. So you get back to reinveting countries. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ewellguy: quote: Originally posted by Mugatu: quote: Originally posted by Ewellguy:
I've said this before but a writer in the Independent said that the supermarkets ahve told him, sotto voce, that they believe that they are feeding 70 million people, not 60.6 million.
Maybe 10 million fat knackers are having two dinners?
lol. Potentially so. But I do find it terrifying that the government really has no idea how many people are here.
Yes look at Prescotts £4335 food bill he claimed as food expenses for his London residence I bet he was going home and asking "Please Sir, I want some more." |
| |
|
|
I am in favour of an NHS and state welfare but... If we had no immigration controls, no border security we should then all be responsible for our own health, kid's education etc, the weakest go to the wall and the strongest survive, feudal society, let it roll then.  |
| |
|
|
