Google+ Studio 25: April 2012


Single Government

I like Zeitgeist, za movie! It was put together in such a charismatic way, with a lot of sarcasm used, mixed up with facts, historical interviews, and a lot of questions. A lot of questions!... and a lot of answers, some direct, some, well, not so direct... But, hey, it opened more perspective on some events, some of them crazy and ridiculous, while some quite serious and valid. I liked a lot the description of the Federal Reserves explanation, I loved the part about religion, and really loved the part trying to connect some dots about the conflict in Vietnam, and the two World wars. Also, the lobby for sustainable energy is an interesting part, but just a bit unrealistic, and plagued by omission. But, above all, one subject drew my attention, not only because it sparked controversy, but also because of the hypothetical implications over everyone's life: Single Government!

Now, Single Government,
as described in "za movie" is bad, really bad. And, the idea that a group of organized elite can push world politics in a direction they want, it's like Hitler believing the Jews forced the war upon The Third Reich, and only writing about it now makes me laugh. The whole noise about The Bilderberg Group, to me, seems like a paranoid hysteria of a bunch of drunken house-wifes with far too much free time. Yes, New World Order is a legitimate expression, but more into the changing of poles of power, rather than world domination of elitist few. Effectively, after World War Two, the antagonism of two European Powers (or three - including France), represented by British Empire (allied with France) and The Third Reich, changed to a  bipolar world with the biggest winners in the war: USSR and USA. This expression was used by many politicians in that sense, but Conspirational Theorists managed to extract the seeds of paranoia, as they can develop anything into a conspiracy. Oppressive, repressive, secretive and ruthless are the attributes given, and no human would be safe when they are in charge. That would be bad!...Really, really bad!

But, wait!...
Bad?!... Why, bad?!... Why does it necessarily have to be bad?!.... Well, it is, in the version presented to us! But it doesn't have to be like that. Lets just pause, and take things seriously, if only for a moment; when we talk about Single Government, we talk about a single structure, an entity if you will, with the sole purpose of human betterment, society improvement and global unity. What would be the benefits of this? While our most enlightened heads are working for cures to various diseases, renewable power sources, space exploration, explaining the secrets of the universe, our separated governments work for political advantages, economical advantages, remaining blind to the fact that the future should hold not world dominance, but World Unity. I know, it is like asking angels to have sex with demons, a utopia bigger than communism, but the advantages of it are huge! Think about it (and here, I mean about the ideal case), with a single government we get:

  • A singe organizational structure to finance.
  • A single, unified set of rules governing trade, justice, administration.
  • No customs (stimulating trade, production).
  • Uniform prices for basic necessities (or very close to uniform).
  • No armies. Those huge amounts of money that fund military organizations (most of which having deterrence as a sole purpose), can go into research. No borders, no national interests equals no need for armies.
  • Equal living standards (maybe not equal, but more uniform). That would mean a lot for poor Countries and areas.
  • A single currency. Now, I don't know much economics, but I tend to think that one currency avoids many problems related to exchange rates between different currencies, with effects in inflation (if you are economist, correct me if I'm wrong).

There are other benefits to this idea that elude me now ( put them in a comment, if you find any ), and, I admit, some disadvantages. World powers will never relinquish their dominant position in the world, but it is because we do not dare to dream and wish such a thing, and some even fear it.

And, yes, it is daydreaming!
But please, let me dream! I thought this to be a good discussion topic and I have put my 2 cents in. I would love to hear your thoughts on the matter.


Building Faith

Faith. Religion.

Where do they come from? Why do they exist? Some might say they come from the sick but intelligent mind of one individual (or group) that had the insight and charisma to gather more weak minds to follow their beliefs, that religion exists mainly because humans, when faced with their own mortality, can’t admit to themselves that death is absolutely the end of everything the individual stands for; others say that religion is just the book of prejudice, where everything affecting us is the result of a pre-determined set of rules. Some, like me, tend to believe that religion is the first state, the basic form of social organization, the first lawmaker. To have a state you need two important things: Kings and laws. Whether we have a finite number of kings (gods), or just one, in all cases we talk about set of rules by which, one should live his life.  And to ensure this, we have the reward, thus the afterlife was created. Be it the Elysian Fields, the Christian Heavens , Valhalla etc. And to ensure continuity, here comes the institution. Call it Christianity, Judaism, Islam or Buddhism, they all are an organized monopoly of the spiritual identity, and faith is their engine, and as part of an apparatus, it needs building, with all its processes, from idea to design, implementation and commissioning, and from then on, evolution and adaptation that continue to this day. The worst adaptation, I believe, is the need for money (cause, boy, do they make the world go around!). The idea of using money to build instruments of faith (among other non spiritual assets) is the very sign of hypocrisy in the basis of a religious organisation.

Lets take the Christian example... preaching humility, love for thy neighbour... I dare you to go in Europe and find humility in any cathedral...among golden artifacts. I have to mention the Inquisition, and the control the church had over every aspect of life, and the toxic effect over the development of humanity (I wonder where would humanity be if people like Galileo would have been helped, and not persecuted). A similar phenomenon takes place in the Muslim world at present time. How did they grow so much to justify murder, forgiveness, love or hate, cry and laughter?

How come they still have power over us? Well, they do... many countries have a cut of the budget going to religious organization in one way or another. There are many countries where the number of religious assets far outnumbers the number of hospitals, or that of schools (sad, isn’t it?). In many countries religion plays a role in elections. The established religious institutions managed to take advantage of the political system, while being taken advantage of. In some, it identifies itself with the political system, and this is where the horror begins to unfold to its maximum intensity, and gives the worst example of religious establishments given free hand, starting with the Inquisition, persecution of Jews, systematic persecution or condemnation of great minds,etc and ending with the horrors that took place in Afghanistan, or the inquisition styled regime in Iran.

The worst crime is hypocrisy. Islam’s adepts claim it is a religion of peace, but its been brought to us in violence, and has violence and terror as instruments of control. Christians claim theirs is a religion of love, forgiveness and compassion, yet has a history of wars, conquering, oppression and ruthlessness. And it all comes from institutionalizing it, and by that, having  the power of organizing it went beyond the boundary of helping humanity deal with life to making policies.

I end this now, with the firm belief i haven’t said it all, that there are still issues I didn’t cover. I encourage dialog, and the comments will not be moderated. Feel free to add your thoughts, suggestions...

Live free and prosper!



Coming back to a topic, that immigrants (and not only them) have many things to say, is not easy. Proving discrimination is very hard due to the range of ways it can manifest itself, and the evading mist that surrounds such occurrence. Sometimes it happens without the offender even realising it, or even the offended failing to realize it. Sometimes it is so small that some, or most, think it is natural, that it is in the nature of things, or relations to be so. Take example in Advertising Jobs. How many times have you met the formula  “would like to employ female, maximum age 30...”, or “ restaurant seeks to employ waitress”? Just a generic example...

Is there a cure? Yes, awareness! That is exactly the point here. This is not a wake up call, not even a complaint, it is just taking the subject and throwing it in your face