Newsgroups: alt.politics.socialism Subject: "EU citizen" "high boss of UN" "EU foreign policy cheaf" Organization: * From: Jos (...) EU citizens (...) [cnn] (...) the blablawhatever person from Tjech Republic, the foreign policy chief of the EU (...) [cnn] (...) the high boss of the UN, (...) [rtlZ] I'm opposing these (publicly formally rejected) concepts. For fear that silence on these creeping attacks could be confused for silent agreement. Die EU, Die UN. Die Capitalism. Our countries must be sovereign, the UN must be dismanteled and made irrelevant. Most all countries should learn true economics to keep their lands safe and corruption down. A multi-sovereign world comprises a market of sovereignties, all can learn from each others successes and mistakes. Empires, worst the one-world-empire, make that impossible: empires are for countries what monopolies are for productie markets. No. no, no, no, no, no, no, no ! COMPRENDE ?! (sigh) Against EU all the way, in sound & silence. EU is technically worse then the UN, since EU is truly a single empire, while the UN has some qualities of a free to attend forum (undermined by "high boss," and all its subsidiaries.) UN is not viable anymore, because: - it is located in a fixed location - it is located on land donated by capitalists - it has subsidiary organizations making it an entity in its own right - it has an absurd structure - it is corrupt - the attending governments are for the most part too corrupt / bad, discrediting the forum - it has made the big mistake of selecting a boss of bosses (capi di tuti capi in Italian mafia movie speak...) Better an international forum like so: - is organized per event, or as a recurring event - has no organizations of its own whatsoever, no subsidiaries of any kind - it exists as a true forum set up by some countries to talk to each other - it has no address - it has no telephone number - it has no staff - it has no leader - it has no agenda - it has no power structure - it has no constitution - makes no decisions - makes up no treaties - enforces no law of any kind Attending Governments exchange info, see then what they want to do on their own. If its nothing, than its nothing. If its everything, or partial: it flows from national sovereign power only. If 5 nations want to harmonize some laws, they can simply implement the same laws. If some nations want to end the harmonization: simply change those laws again. A good way to fight a world-government threat is to simply start organizing more Government conference events, thus dilluting some events that might start to get out of hand. It is an easy to do strategy. Losing national sovereignty is the same as is losing the self determination of companies in a free market system: it destroys the free market, turns it into a fixed plan economy. Stagnation, corruption, suffering. I note that almost all countries agree that a free market is best, essential, and/or natural. That could mean an agreement that the same holds for nations: an empire is a cartel, the one-world-government a monopoly. It does not work. Is this a fair analogy: yes, because we are talking in both cases about self-cleaning properties of a system working on limited sized group efforts, the dirt being incompetence/corruption. In both companies and entire countries this can occur (countries typically Government, high finance and high industry, and media). Countries fully sovereign means they are free floating in the system, their collapse causes pain in that ill performing population, they get forced to learn (or simply die/get cut down). The other countries see the negativity, and may be stimulated to do better. Positive example is followed to achieve same successes. The world with many, many sovereign countries is in essential ways the same as a free market, hence a useful analogy. NWO = what monopoly is for a market: death, corruption, inefficiency, .................................. True sovereignty for countries is something that can be maintained with some soft pressures: science and logic cross borders, countries influence each other through trade and culture. It may not be possible to eject anomalies by force, but by maintaining large segments of free sovereign country "markets," the grand imperial anomaly should eventually implode for reasons that make empires bad (distance leaders/public, problems large/many). In principle such an anomaly is part of the market system, proving the error in size. "EU citizenship" "UN high boss" "EU foreign policy": I am opposed. Stop with them. Cut down the EU, remake the gulden. Stop going to the UN. Stop bringing Dutch troops accross the Dutch border, stop working with Nato. Respect other nations, stop working with the disastrous USA schemes, simply don't return their calls, ignore their invitations, deal only with the USA Embassador for peaceful trade relations but step out of their attack on the whole world. If the USA wants to attack us militarily for that: let them come. Better dead but satisfied in our choices. Make friendly relations with all nearby countries, far too. Should be easier after capital has been put out of power. Let us be a nice low country that we know. Why not ? We only got to lose with the USA empire, the EU, the UN, all that megalomaniacal nonsense. All we get back is megalomaniacal problems. Let the Poles fix their country, let the Tjechs fix their country, what does that have to do with us. If they want our help they can ask for it, but we don't have to become them.