Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pampango

(24,692 posts)
Thu Aug 22, 2013, 07:49 PM Aug 2013

This will set those conservative NWO believers abuzz: Why the UN Should Actually Take Over the World

Can you imagine a world where the United Nations (UN) has control over your country? Imagine a world with a collective sovereignty. In this new world order, each country has their own head of state, but the UN acts as an uber-parliament, or Congress. Elections still occur, but political parties are now international. Ambassadors are replaced by presidents and prime ministers to represent their nation. War is illegal and military authority rests in the hands of the Security Council to oversee multiple armies.

The UN has been a staple in international diplomacy in the post-WWII world. For all the good that the institution has done, that has not stopped conspiracy theories that the UN is attempting to take over the world. The crux of the argument appears to be rooted in the resentment of the few who fear that their nation’s sovereignty is challenged.

The scarcely known Agenda 21 has been at the focal point of UN opponents. Agenda 21 was the result of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and is meant to ensure a more sustainable world in spite of a rapidly growing population and decreasing natural resources. ... At best, it is a nonbinding resolution formed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. At worst, it is an international plot to “destroy the middle-class way of life,” according to Judd Saul, Tea Party activist from Cedar Falls, Iowa.

Collective diplomacy is not always unilateral and friction does arise between member nations. That friction often comes across as disagreements and no major world war has broken out since the UN's formation in 1945. A world under a UN government would not necessarily be a negative as long as individual countries have autonomy (but with less military power.) Conflict is constant and unavoidable at some degree, but in a perfect future, the UN would act as a benevolent, enlightened ruler of a world where there are no third world countries and no war.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/59991/why-the-un-should-actually-take-over-the-world

Do you believe that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order, or not?
'Very Liberal' : Yes - 12%, No - 69%;
'Somewhat Liberal' : Yes - 20%, No - 51%;
'Moderate': Yes - 23%, No - 56%;
'Somewhat Conservative' : Yes - 33%, No - 38%;
'Very Conservative' : Yes - 45%, No - 26%.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This will set those conservative NWO believers abuzz: Why the UN Should Actually Take Over the World (Original Post) pampango Aug 2013 OP
When NWO's global fascism is complete, the UN will be the FIRST world organization forced to close. blm Aug 2013 #1

blm

(113,082 posts)
1. When NWO's global fascism is complete, the UN will be the FIRST world organization forced to close.
Thu Aug 22, 2013, 07:52 PM
Aug 2013

Getting the RW crowd to blame the UN was a pretty good plan. Idiocracy flourishes while corporate elite laugh.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This will set those conse...