One People, One State, One Purpose

Sovereigntist said:
There will be no political parties but instead politically independent individuals who have completed the four years' course of political education and therefore are qualified to be in office. Since there will be no political parties, there will be no seats divided among them. It is not that there will be a one party system, but that there will be no parties at all. Even George Washington was an out spoken critic of political parties, because he knew that they would divide and eventually destroy the government. George Washington said that political parties "always serve to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion."

In order to stop corporate influence, we must first get rid of "corporate personhood."
Click to expand...

lol. bullshit, you fool.

nobody wants your technocratic utilitarianism.

go fuck yourself.
 
Hello and welcome Sovereigntist,

I routinely like to acquaint new people here with my Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

If that is agreeable we'll be fine. If not then we won't be talking. I hope it is.

Sovereigntist said:
No, it is not too late to change the government. We just need people to stop fighting among themselves and focus their anger at those in government. They are the reason why people are angry in the first place.
Click to expand...

John Lennon would agree.

 
Hello Sovereigntist,

Sovereigntist said:
Greetings everyone, it is with great honor and humility that I reach out to you today and ask for just a moment of your time. As you all know, we are facing the greatest economic crisis in history and it has become evidently clear that our governments do not have even the slightest idea of what to do. Now, there are many things which can be attributed to the present state of affairs, but there is no denying that poor leadership and corruption played a central role in all of it. National leaders need to take immediate action and work together to overcome this crisis, but unfortunately they are neither willing nor capable of doing so. The harsh reality is that global stability is deteriorating at an alarming rate and we are heading towards a complete economic collapse. So what are national leaders around the world doing to prevent this from happening? Unfortunately, our so-called leaders are doing absolutely nothing except blaming one another for a crisis they are all guilty of creating. The fact is that this crisis was deliberately created by them or at the very least made worse by their sheer incompetence. It is no secret that our governments are made up very largely of politicians who are either corrupt or incompetent. The only real mystery is how they have been able to hide their criminal activities from us for so long. But if this crisis has revealed anything about them it is just how quickly they will resort to lying and false accusations in order to cover up their mistakes. And what better way for a politician to evade personal responsibility than by diverting the public’s attention away from themselves? The unfortunate truth is that we have become tolerant of corruption and have forgotten that it is our constitutional right to not only remove criminals from office but, if necessary, create an entirely new government. The Declaration of Independence states “that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.” We need a new government now more than ever which is why I invite you to read Sovereignty for free. Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government. I believe, as do my fellow Sovereigntists, that only by working together will we be able to save true democracy from corruption and ultimately prevent the impending economic collapse. There is still time for us to set things right, but only if we take action here and now. For Sovereignty!
Click to expand...

First of all, it would be nearly impossible for me to even be moved enough to read the 119 page proposal because I do not think a world government is possible.

Secondly, if our Constitution is not working, what could possibly be better?

The Constitution is so beautiful, if that isn't working then what could?
 
The whole idea is way too idealistic and not practical. Never gonna happen. Sounds great, needs to go into a Star Trek plot. Realistically, there is far too much hatred and religion which stands in the way. And then there is the matter of getting the currently powerful to give up their power.

I am an atheist, and I have often dreamed of a world government, but the more I have learned, the more I know why that isn't happening. Humans are indeed social animals, but not THAT social. We like our independence far too much to all be part of one big collective.

It would be beautiful, but it's fictional.

It would be interesting though, to see if that impossible dream were somehow done, if the (maybe) visitors from space who don't seem to choose to reveal themselves, would then choose to. If humans on Earth are not alone in the cosmos, and more advanced beings came here, who could blame them for NOT wanting to get involved with humans? There seems to be plenty of evidence we have been visited, but no official contact. That is probably because we are so violent, untrustworthy, and destructive. And the LAST thing we need is amazingly advanced technology. We've already nearly wiped ourselves out several times. And we appear to be in the process of destroying our own habitat. Higher intelligence would be wise to stay away unless we make some kind of huge change.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Sovereigntist,

First of all, it would be nearly impossible for me to even be moved enough to read the 119 page proposal because I do not think a world government is possible.

Secondly, if our Constitution is not working, what could possibly be better?

The Constitution is so beautiful, if that isn't working then what could?
Click to expand...

Greetings PoliTalker, let me begin by saying that I do agree with you that the Constitution is beautiful in its own right. Proof of this is that it is one of the only democratic systems which has withstood the test of time. The problem, however, is that over the years certain parts of it (like the electoral system) have become increasingly corrupt. The Constitution was not created with political parties or corporate entities in mind. George Washington warned us many times that the creation of political parties would only lead to a divided government—something which is clearly evident today. The Constitution works, but political parties are deliberately trying to destroy it. Sovereignty addresses this issue by demanding the dissolution of all political parties and by creating a system that will ensure politicians will be held accountable for their actions.
 
Sovereigntist said:
Greetings PoliTalker, let me begin by saying that I do agree with you that the Constitution is beautiful in its own right. Proof of this is that it is one of the only democratic systems which has withstood the test of time. The problem, however, is that over the years certain parts of it (like the electoral system) have become increasingly corrupt. The Constitution was not created with political parties or corporate entities in mind. George Washington warned us many times that the creation of political parties would only lead to a divided government—something which is clearly evident today. The Constitution works, but political parties are deliberately trying to destroy it. Sovereignty addresses this issue by demanding the dissolution of all political parties and by creating a system that will ensure politicians will be held accountable for their actions.
Click to expand...

I think removing the hegemony of two parties is definitely good. but a multiplicity of parties like europe is more practical. no party = one party. like ccp.
 
Hello Sovereigntist,

Sovereigntist said:
Greetings PoliTalker, let me begin by saying that I do agree with you that the Constitution is beautiful in its own right. Proof of this is that it is one of the only democratic systems which has withstood the test of time. The problem, however, is that over the years certain parts of it (like the electoral system) have become increasingly corrupt. The Constitution was not created with political parties or corporate entities in mind. George Washington warned us many times that the creation of political parties would only lead to a divided government—something which is clearly evident today. The Constitution works, but political parties are deliberately trying to destroy it. Sovereignty addresses this issue by demanding the dissolution of all political parties and by creating a system that will ensure politicians will be held accountable for their actions.
Click to expand...

It all sounds fine and well but it is essentially a pipe dream. It relies upon people with common sense recognizing the problem and then falling mostly into agreement on some basic concepts. I don't see that happening. The party divisions will refuse to see anything which is not cast in the light of the party power struggle.

The way to deal with the corruption is to deal with the corruption.

That is already in progress. It is a process which is time-honored, but it takes time. It is not a solution which can simply be agreed upon and enacted overnight, but something which practically changes the system from within the system. It has to happen slowly but surely.

It can be laid out in simple terms but to be completed, it must wait for people to be exposed to it and let it sink in that this idea preserves the party power struggle but sets new rules which prevent corruption. Many in both parties like the corruption. They will be reluctant to give it up. But they will because of a simple fact: That fact is this idea forces them to take a public position on corruption itself. Are they for corruption or against it? Since neither party, nor any individual within eaither party wishes to take a public position in favor of corruption, they will not fight this one proposal, which is non-partisan.

Here it is:



Anti-Corruption Act
 
Last edited:
the concept of any human institution being totally pure is a dangerous lie.

schemes like this are just the upper echelons of the hidden hand betraying their cultivated bourgeoisie, and reinstating their feudalism.

surveillance state will make their dominion absolute.

this is the book within the the book from 1984.

don't fall for this horseshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top