| View Question |
|
|
 | ||
|
| Subject:
Global Government
Category: Relationships and Society > Government Asked by: humangoodorevil-ga List Price: $30.00 |
Posted:
03 Feb 2006 17:35 PST
Expires: 05 Mar 2006 17:35 PST Question ID: 441149 |
What is the probability that a global government (a real government, democratic or otherwise, not some impotent international organization) will be established on earth in the future? I know, I know, that's a difficult question, but I ask it in all seriousness. Give me your best guess. Oh, and just for the hell of it, please give me an exact probability percentage. As far as my own research goes, it indicates that there is a likelihood that researchers at M.I.T. in collaboration with Intel and other organizations will develop an autonomous superintelligent computer or computers that will take over governance of the world in 2.5 milliseconds. It seems unlikely to me that humanity will ever establish a global government, but it is possible that any sentient successors to humanity might. What say you? | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
| ||
|
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
Answered By: hedgie-ga on 11 Feb 2006 12:40 PST Rated:  |
Introductory quote (Motto)
"Can the trends rightly noted by Bergson and Teilhard ? basic tendencies in
biological evolution and in the technological and social evolution of the
human species ? be explained in scientific, physical terms? I think so.."
Robert Wright, author of Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny
http://www.nonzero.org/intro.htm
Intro
======
Condensing all the possibilities into one Google Answer was definitely a
"challenge"! As this is not a doctoral thesis, I have used two shortcuts.
The answer would be even longer if I had pasted in passages explaining every
link. So, for many thoughts, you will find the amplification in the link.
It may make it a bit harder to read, but it deals with the complexity and
limits the length.
Also, I use some abbreviations, and even a smattering of simple math:
Your question:
What is the probability (P) of a Global Government (gg) before time T ?
can be restated, with the abbreviations and symbols, as :
What is the Pgg(T) ? (for T=3000 or T<3000).
(gg will always stand for 'Global Government')
We agreed that in simplest terms Pgg = 1 -x = 1 - P1 * P2 * P3, where
P1, P2, P3 .. are probabilities of that a chain of events
which would prevent this (having a gg) from happening.
We agreed on limiting the time so that T< 3000, to exclude the cosmic
issues and 'Planet of the Apes' scenarios and just deal with current
mankind, as it may change in the relatively near future.
We have not actually clarified the question completely:
Interpretation ONE is :
What is Pgg(3000) ? meaning "Will there be a gg (Global
Government) at the year 3000 AD? "
Interpretation TWO two is :
" Will there be gg at any time before T=3000, which will last
at least 10, 100, ... years?"
(The scenario of Woody Allen's "Sleeper" film, with possible victory
for rebels , desintegration of gg or extinction in the fight)
I am using Interpretation TWO here.
Without further ado:
Bayesian Graphs
===============
The method we are using to deal with the inherent uncertainty of the future
of this complex system is called Bayes Nets or Bayesian Networks.
Using this approach we represent all possible futures as
a graph in which the nodes are the decision points. Between such
branching points, events follow their expected path, which DeChardin called
'complexification'. We call these segments between the Decision Points
"Evolution", knowing that Darwin's Evolution is just one special case, as
elaborated in the links quoted in this old GA:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=437723
What is a "Decision Point" ?
Here is an example based on the US presidential elections.
US presidential voting has been running close to 50% / %50 lately;
their outcomes have been hard to predict. There is a polarization of
the political opinions, and while both main parties care for the welfare of
US inhabitants, their perspectives differ.
Three Butterflies
==================
Here is story as an example of a Decision Point:
Butterflies Ballot's "Butterfly Effect"
----------------------------------------
"Sometime back in 2000, Theresa LePore, had the idea to enlarge the typeface
on the ballot paper she was designing for Palm Beach voters in the US
Presidential election, thinking it would make it easier to read. Whether she
had not had a good night's sleep, or had had one too many cups of coffee that
morning, we may never know, but for one reason or another she did not notice
that the new design, which now became two pages instead of one (and as a
result was most aptly named "the butterfly ballot") could confuse voters about
which button to press to register their vote..:"
http://www.peterussell.com/SP/Butterfly.html
Physicist Peter Russell, author of the 'Global Brain' book which extended
some ideas of the 'Gaia Hypothesis,' proposed a mathematical model of the US
presidential politics.
This butterly ballot definitely had a "butterfly effect" (the poetic term
used in chaos theory) on the election
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect
The third 'butterfly' is the visual shape of the Lorentz Attractor:
This Java applet draws a graphical illustration of the Lorentz Attractor.
The point moving in the plane shows evolution of the system. (One has to
click START few times and use a browser which supports Java applets)
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~mcc/chaos_new/Lorenz.html
How is this moving point like US politics?
-------------------------------------------
The point sways to the left, and then to the right, unpredictably and
irregularly. When the point comes to the center, (The decision point = the
presidential elections) small things, things like Theresa's coffee, decide the
course of events for the next four years. Sometimes a small, routine
decision may influence politics for decades. (Perhaps Al Gore would not have
invaded Iraq unilateraly) Sometimes decades of brinkmanship, such as during
the Cold War, may lead to larger Decision Points (such as the Cuban Missile
Crisis) where evolution branches again. The middle point of the butterfly
represents the presidential elections: Every four years voters, and chance,
decide the future course of the country, and to a large degree of the world.
Small fluctuations here can have larger consequences at this point
of instability, when the system is chaotic.
Optional reading material
1) Butterfly effect and Chaos
http://necsi.org/guide/concepts/butterflyeffect.html
2) Bayes Nets and graphs
Tutorial in a set of slides
http://www.autonlab.org/tutorials/bayesnet.html
and in more detail here
http://www.niedermayer.ca/papers/bayesian/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes_net
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0387952594/102-0246444-9262576?v=glance&n=283155
Doomsday argument
==================
To estimate Pgg - Probability of Global Government gg, we need to know x -
the probability of a disaster.
Nuclear war, WWIII would be just one of many possible disasters..
We discuss disasters, because we assert:
Unless some chain of events leads us into disaster, it is (almost)
certain that gg will evolve by the process of complexification.
This is the evolutionary process which already produced cells, multicellular
organisms, tribes, clans, nations, and .. the United States.
So, when we estimate total probability of all scenarios which end in
disaster, leading either to extinction or to regression to the stone age, we
will have x which will give us the Pgg we are seeking.
Pgg is 1 -x , and x is really sum of all those products P1 * P2 * P3 ,,
of probabilities that scenario which leads to a disaster. Pi are the
probabilities that 'bad' branch gets selected at the Decision Points.
There is a whole catalog of the Doomsday Scenarios,
which have been classified as Doom Soon or Doom Late.
Here's a nice list of such possible futures:
"This will be based on our ordinary empirical estimates of potential
threats to human survival, such as nuclear or biological warfare, a
meteorite destroying the plant, runaway greenhouse effect,
self-replicating nanomachines running amok, a breakdown of a
metastable vacuum state due to high-energy particle experiments and so
on (presumably there are dangers that we haven?t yet thought of).
Let?s say that based on such considerations, you think that there is a
5% probability of Doom Soon. The exact number doesn?t matter for the
structure of the argument..."
http://www.anthropic-principle.com/primer1.html
This following argument and related anthropic-principle contains subtle
mathematical reasoning and complex logic. You should skip the links on
first reading, unless you are alert, well rested, have a fresh cup of
coffee, -- and appetite for studying grim futures.
If you don't, just accept the conclusion which says:
"A Bayesian doomsday argument, originated by Brandon Carter, presents a
sophisticated argument the human race will end fairly soon.."
You can now skip to the sunny scenarios below.
"Rarely does philosophy produce empirical predictions. The Doomsday argument
is an important exception. From seemingly trivial premises it seeks to show
that the risk that humankind will go extinct soon has been systematically
underestimated. Nearly everybody's first reaction is that there must be
something wrong with such an argument. Yet despite being subjected to intense
scrutiny by a growing number of philosophers, no simple flaw in the argument
has been identified"
http://www.anthropic-principle.com/primer1.html
" Let?s formulate the following two rival hypotheses. Doom Early:
humankind goes extinct in the next century and the total number of
humans that will have existed is, say, 200 billion. Doom Late:
humankind survives the next century and goes on to colonize the
galaxy; the total number of humans is, say, 200 trillion. To simplify
the exposition we will consider only these hypotheses. (Using a more
fine-grained partition of the hypothesis space doesn?t change the
principle although it would give more exact numerical values."
http://www.springerlink.com/(rnkru5auhwekau55lehsbq55)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,7,12;journal,43,124;linkingpublicationresults,1:102906,1
Major branches
=============
Sunny scenarios
______________
We will now construct a tree of different scenarios and will guesstimate
the probability of the branches. This is basically a tree with hooks, on
which different people may hang different probabilities and come to different
conclusions. While we are (trying to be) politically neutral, it is likely
that different groups would produce different estimates. Estimates by
Democrats vs Republicans, Russians vs Americans, women vs men, and even
different personality types (extroverts vs introverts) ...would differ.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=608788
The re-election of president Bush in year 2004 was apparently seen by some
as an affirmation of the neo-con plan for the world.
Here are two conflicting views of this plan.
http://www.fas.org/man/docs/nwc/nwc.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm
The Project 'New American Century' believes that the plan may be
successful . It posits that other countries, such as those in the "third
world" and EU will accept US leadership. That will prevent nuclear
proliferation by force, if necessary by unilateral force disregarding
international treaties. International organizations, such as the UN, are
perceived by adherents of this view as weak and bureaucratic, as toothless
and impotent.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
This plan is important for our topic here:
If successful, it will create a de-facto world government.
The SSS (Sole Surviving Superpower) will lead the Coalition of The Willing
and will jointly enforce Pax Americana.
Pnacs = Probability of the New American Century plan being successful.
If the plan succeeds, insurgencies stop. Russia is further isolated from
both its 'near abroad' neighbors in the former Soviet Union and from the
natural resources it once controlled. The nuclear nations of EU follow the US
lead and other, less developed nation realize that they have no chance of
developing nuclear weapons to threaten the first world and not enough power to
hurt America.
This sunny scenario leads to a system is that is stable. The system is
not democratic, since only US citizens vote on the 'leader of free world'
(and all the nations are now free) but due to the American tradition of
democracy and respect for human rights, over the course of 1000 years, other
nations can learn and evolve in direction of democracy ...
We could add other branches to the scenario here: the probability of
revolution, of terrorists or anarchists getting nukes, and all those nano-goo
and cosmic catastrophes. . .but we will neglect them. There is probability .01
of any such catastrophe.
Probability is .8 that it would evolve to stable democracy, about .2
that it will become an oligarchy or even monarchy, though still a gg,
Sometimes there are clouds.
--------------------------------
The plan above will fail with probability (1 -Pnacs)
If the neocon plan is unsuccessful,
the attempt to implement it will trigger a Second Cold War, (CWII).
In this scenario Bush's 'Axis of Evil' will consolidate into one alliance
(which, taking cues from history, may call itself the Camp of Peace,
and will include Russia, China, Latin America, and Muslim countries).
The "Coalition of the Willing, including Japan", perhaps also
called 'the Axis of Righteousness' will form the second alliance.
Two such aliances will engage in a new Cold War - the CWII.
Probability that such a CWII will melt and follow the path of CWI is
small - about .1 (=Pnw3)
Two such global opposing alliances, with their politics of brinkmanship
(such as Cuban missile crises) are a necessary prerequisite for a world war,
WWIII, a war which would be nuclear, the first nuclear war for this planet.
Probability of that happening, probability of nuclear war, is then
(1-Pnacs) * (1-Pnw3) = about .9 * .9
There then follow sub-branches, marked by the decision points of
"civilization" surviving OR many people surviving OR few people surviving OR
none. The year 3000 allows no time for recovery, for a new species to evolve
in only a thousand years.
Silver Lining of a Sort
----------------------------
If there is a WWIII and civilization survives in an 'as we know it' state,
then there is near certainly that an effective Global Government will be
formed by consensus, right after the war. This is similar to creation of UN,
but more so. This New UN (let's call it NUN) will (by definition) have teeth
and will not give any power the right of veto. Invading a foreign land,
without a NUN mandate will result in instant law enforcement by all other
counties.
Why we assert this:
Wars present a big learning experience for individuals as well as
mankind at large.
Because the probability that civilization can survive a full scale nuclear
is low, this whole branch leading to a democratic gg, formed by consensus is
also low, about .05
Minor Branches:
===============
Minor scenarios are unlikely because they contain at least one branch
where at a decision point a low probability outcome was chosen. We can
call such a decision 'a miracle' (That definition, more or less, is from
one of G.B. Shaw's plays where the bishop says that a miracle is a ( low
probability) event, which evokes faith.
In abstract terms:
If we consider scenarios with N decisions each, each
scenario represented as path with N nodes through a graph
which represents the Bayes net, we end up with 2^N branches.
Probabilities of all of them add up to one.
But 2 to the power of N is just too much to consider in this $30 answer.
So we skip most of those branches which contain one or more
unlikely events, choices with Pi near zero, which makes the
products of probabilities of the path, x=P1 * P2 .. *Pi* .. *Pn small.
For our purpose, we classify all branches into just three bundles,
those which lead to:
1) Democratic Global Government - with sum of the products to be Pdgg
2) Non-democratic global government - with sum of the products to be Pngg
3) All other branches, branches leading to disaster
extinction or return to the Stone Age. The total of these products to be Pn
The probability we seek, Pgg, is then Pdgg + Pngg which is equals 1-Pn
Miracles
--------
You "brought this one on yourself," goodorevil one, by your comment.
Some pretty wild scenarios have been considered by (at least half serious)
scientists,
such as "does this giant computer of a universe exist?"
(also called Lem's hypothesis), see e.g.
http://ryskamp.org/brain/books/notes-from-three-scientists-and-their-gods
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060972572/102-0246444-9262576?v=glance&n=283155
I find your argument based on a quote from Matthew 16:28: unconvincing:
Every major monograph - a scientific tome, contains some errors, mistakes
of the author, or errors 'created in translation', ..
that does not invalidate the main arguments and insights.
For example, Darwin's "Origin of Species" has a major mistake of
rejecting the 'catastrophes' theories. Because of the mistakes and
misuse of some concepts, we should not close our minds to other concepts,
and insights which are used properly.
The set of prophecies, some thousands years old, shows that ancient
Greeks noticed the 'complexification'. They realized that human
evolution has 'an arrow', and were able to extrapolate a
trend toward the formation larger and larger structures. One day, they
realized, the size of these structures, kingdoms and empires, would have
to intersect the size of (flat, but finite) Earth. They already wondered
about the problem we are analysing about today, about the Global
Government or gg.
The Jesus factor
--------------
One scenario from the Pngg bundle (non-democratic gg) could be
called 'Kingdom of God'
(I did not understand your reference to ' a movie called "The Return of
Jesus Christ"' Is that a real movie 'coming to a theatre near me near
me' or a parable?)
I also think that commenter pugwashjw65-ga is mistaken when he says
"the individual who they have completely forgotten" ...
We did not forget about Jesus, Mohammed, and a new guy which may
come to save us all (oops, not all, just the righteous ones). However, we
do have a problem figuring out which one is which, which one (and his Earthly
embodiment) is the false prophet, which the Lord supreme, and which the beast.
All major Western religions, Judeo-Christian, Muslim,.. have remarkably
similar stories about the Last Days. They differ in who will be the king, who
will be his assistant, and who will be the Beast.
http://www.pbc.org/dp/stedman/revelation/4203.html
The terrorist Bin laden has been called 'the Koresh of the Muslim world'.
Like Koresh (a name which I am told means Death) he believes
we live in the Last Days. Each major religion has moderates, believers, and
fundamentalists who think with their hearts. The Iranian leader Khomeini was
probably sincere when it dawned on him (perhaps in mediation) that
US is a Great Satan. And the current leader of the US, is I think, sincere
and listens to 'his God' and tell us what he believes.
And they agree on many things:
There is only one God, ours. The other gods are devils.
This is old hat and which already lead to many wars.
(See Bob Dylan's view in "With God on Our Side.")
That war, Armageddon, will be nuclear, of course. Wormwood, which in
the Apocalypse makes waters bitter in the Last Days, actually does
translate into the Russian as Chernobyl. Some coincidences are remarkable:
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/chernobyl_wormwood.htm
This scenario is included (above) in our branches: Nuclear war, very
few people survive, a nondemocratic GG will be formed, which will last at least
1000 years. We give it a probability .001 because of the necessity of the
miracle that "most people perish in the war but some will be saved,"
some survive and
will live happily for thousands of years.
Such a pattern of survival may happen with global epidemics, like Bird flu
or AIDS, which are organic, propagated by living agents. Such a disaster
our DNA and immune system have learned how to deal with, this is a type
of disaster it knows. There is, however, no immunity to radiation, to gamma rays.
They are not organic, and there is no immunity to hard photons, which kill
like bullets do.
Still 'the Last Days scenario would be "interesting" to watch since it will
give us a clue who the 'real Beast' is: Gog, Magog .... ?
That would be a scenario where strife between Israel and Iran leads to
nuclear war. We know that Beast will followed by many and will ultimately be
the cause of the destruction of Israel and the Temple of the Dome and all
people will finally see the truth.
It will be too late, of course: Armageddon will have just started!
Of course, that attack will probably be a secret operation,
and anybody left will argue whose fault it was, who gave the orders, etc.
Jesus of anger and Jesus of love "
-------------------------------------
http://markmaynard.com/index.php/2005/06/21/title_1255
There is no conflict between Jesus and Caesar in our thoughts.
In Hawaii, they have this saying about missionaries:
They came to do good, and did well.
It applies to most missionaries, including the 'very religious and
non-violent' Moravian Brethren who when expelled from Moravia in the
counter-reformation developed a missionary zeal while in Germany
to carry Christianity to the American Indians
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-1595
http://www.everydaycounselor.com/archives/sh/shistory.htm
As with the Congregational missionaries in Hawaii, most of them ended up with
more land those they converted. That has happened many times throughout
history. Depending on your perspective, was it the meek who inherited the
land, or the meek who gave it up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolence
Either way, Jesus and Mohamed are not forgotten:
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j041502.html
Other scenarios
____________________
..a comet will strike and this time the mammals, rather than dinosaurs will
became extinct,
or
.. humans will suddenly start using their brains instead of hearts
to make fight-vs-flight and dominate-submit-tolerate decisions
thus relying more on those 2% of genes in which they differ from chimpanzees
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=540280
These scenarios are so unlikely, that we may disregard them, to keep it
simple and short.
Genes, Decision-Making, and Survival
======================================
Consider the problem from the scientific perspective of genes. Darwin's
concept of evolution is just a theory, but a theory which explains many
facts:
For many generations, people have encountered the necessary decision 'to fight
or to flee or submit'. Both the meek and the very aggressive ones were killed,
de-selected from thegene pool. That's how our current gene distribution on the
planet evolved and how it surreptitiously influences our 'moral imperative' of
good and right.
The probability of mankind surviving, of forming a gg as a tool for securing
that survival depends in part on the balance of those genes which tells us
'to forgive' and those genes telling us 'to fight, to avoid 'fate worse than
death' - like Washington in your example.
US neo-con Kagan in his 'Power and Paradise' describes with certain contempt
the Kantian approach, which he says the Europeans favor and
contrasts it with the more efficient and agressive Hobessian approach.
European may have some problems with having 'too many philosophers' but
they are neither nicer nor more naive than Americans. The gene pool is almost
identical; they have just had different experiences, and so the two cultures
differ.
While the U.S. was formed by a successful revolution and a series of
successful acquisitions and wars, Europe was experiencing a series of
deadly and exhausting wars fought in their homelands. They learned the
hard way that fast methods, which Napoleon, or Hitler, or Trotsky attempted,
do not work. If they are now locked in what seem like endless, toothless
debates, making glacial progress toward unity, it is because of this
experience. Experience has selected the philosophy. Philosophy itself does not
determine their actions. Kagan knows his philosphers, but is a poor
historian.
At this point, while it is true that other global powers are beginning to
move toward alliances, it is primarily the US and EU who are making
decisions which will affect the future of mankind for a long time,
decisions which may bring Apocalypse now, or gg in 300 hundred years.
Looking for Sun
===============
Except for the neo-con's own sunny scenario for global government, all of
these scenarios are pretty pessimistic. Is there an alternate sunny
scenario? No single think tank or author has actually written one as
well-known as the neo-con plan.
Popular legend has it that an old Chinese curse is
"May you live in interesting times."
http://www.noblenet.org/reference/inter.htm
Chinese or not, we do, in fact, live in interestinf times.
The curse has been cast. Here are the details:
Analysis of the Chinese Curse Decision Point
____________________________________________
Almost every planet which develops inteligent life, will develop
technology capable of destroying all life on the planet.
For Earth that has just ahppened. At the same time ratio of population to
resources is increasibg and threatens livelihood of large segments of the
global population. We are at that "butterfly" point, that unstable
decision point, like the one illustrated by the Lorentz Attractor and the US
elections.
On a global scale, the chances are about 50/50 that we either form some
real gg, or nuke ourself to extinction - that's what makes it an unstable
decision point, like the one illustrated by the Lorentz Attractor and
US elections. The Butterfly in this case is the EU, or even just its
small new members:
If EU creates a new and strong EU constitution, with common border
controls, labor market and currency, it will become a major power,
comparable to US. It will likely still be an ally of the US, but will no
longer support the neo-con plan. EU neocons, Berlusoni, Blair, .. will lose
power. England may leave or be asked to leave the EU. This shift will
likely swing the probablity of gg without a nuclear war toward a more positive
scenario.
In such a case, at the next US election, being again a decision point.
neo-cons may lose. Their plan is discredited, there is new, more urgent,
more widespread, and more enlightened effort to form strong UN, a NUN.
Thingswill move slowly in that direction, ...in few hundres year
s we may have a democratic gg - Probability, about .7
What is the probability that this will happen 'in time', looking at the
local or EU scale. Despite hope springing eternally, it's small - about .2 .
The Answer
===========
In conclusion, I would distribute the chances as follows
Pdgg ~ .1 EU with strong integration and US abandoning the neo-con plan
Pngg ~ .05 Neocon plan succeeding without a major war, or 'Kingdom of God'
(script of one of the major religions but without nuclear
Armageddon).
The rest ~ the extinction or stone age -- is the remaining : 1-.1 -.05
Note:The value of the probability of different branches taken it 'the Chinese
Curse Decision Point" do not completely determine the values of the major
branch bundles, described at the beginning. For this reason, values do not
match excatly. Rather then calculating the probabilities formally, I am making an
intuitive estimate. We would need a computer program to handle the numerical
chores if we would want to be more acurate.
Thank you for your patience. I am interested in your thoughts,
or at least a rating.
Hedgie. | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
humangoodorevil-ga
rated this answer:
and gave an additional tip of:
$40.00
I am very pleased that I used this service. |
| ||
|
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: ansel001-ga on 03 Feb 2006 22:39 PST |
The probability of a global government in the future is 100%. In the future, Jesus Christ will set up His kingdom on the earth and reign for 1,000 years. Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: pugwashjw65-ga on 04 Feb 2006 01:11 PST |
There WILL eventually be a global government, headed by the United Nations. They will look at what is going on in the world and realize that organised religion is the base cause of all our troubles. They will BAN religion and demand that all people have an Identification number. In this, Big Business will continue to function. Those not prepared to comply will be prevented from functioning in this society. They will succeed with EVERY religion except one. And when they act to eliminate that one, the individual who they have completely forgotten, Almighty God, will step in and eliminate them. That last one, the one doing all the right things, is approved of God and it will be as though they have touched God's eyeball. Seems preposterous? Just read Revelation. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: frde-ga on 04 Feb 2006 06:53 PST |
I would put the probability at: 1 - x Where x is the probability that we (or something else) slings us back into the dark ages or perfuses us. The reasoning is that, there is a long term historical tendencies for adjacent states (countries) to unite, which is only partially offset by fragmentation. I reckon that this is down to improved communication, migration and the benefits from being part of a geographically more widely distributed 'entity'. On the other hand, I do not buy your 'super computer' theory, that would involve 100% perfect communications links - any breakdown would result in chaos. To be successful a largish organism needs to be slightly decentralized, - think about yourself, a blow on the head would (probably) not stop you breathing, or your heart functioning, your liver and pancreas and lungs would continue the fuel supplies. Yet 'brainless' or rather 'non-sentient' you could survive for some time. Without a fully functioning central brain your body would be a lot less efficient than with one, but if one had a de-centralized setup (as we do) one can survive shocks to the system. Another way of looking at it is how the www is designed to run, although there is a central set of protocols, it is (in the short term) decentralized. A form of Federation, formed and run in the long run by a Central committee. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government (Jesus, Caesar, Galileo, and Pieces of Dirt)
From: humangoodorevil-ga on 08 Feb 2006 23:54 PST |
Hello, and thank you for your comments! I apologize for the following in advance, I really do. I will address the Jesus issue at this time: for the love of God, stop confusing Jesus and Caesar. Jesus Christ made painfully clear that he was not and never will be Caesar. Caesar is just a dirt-master. No Caesar of any kind whatsoever would voluntarilly allow himself to be tortured to death to help other people. George Washington, aka American Caesar, knew he would have been tortured to death for high treason if he failed, which is why George Washington had no intention of letting the British defeat him by force of arms. So he was smarter than them and made them feel pain, and beat them, but they didn't give up exactly, because Caesar never does. And now the United States and Great Britain are the best of friends! Right, love? We're not talking about Jesus here, we're talking about Caesar. Matthew 16:28: Jesus says: "Assuredly, I say unto you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom." Unless Jesus Christ, son of God, is a liar, which he isn't, then he quietly established his Kingdom on Earth without fanfare sometime before the 3rd Century AD. And indeed those that kept the faith saw him come and it was so. He controls the calendar, regulates the sex lives of countless millions, etc., etc. Unless of course, those people are still around, probably kept safely in the Andromeda Galaxay while Jesus gets his invasion plans together. Look, Jesus Christ is not going to come flying back to earth in a divine attack vehicle built by Halliburton to defeat the European Union or China or the Anti-Christ's physical army, and start regulating global affairs from Jurusalem. It's a Spiritual Kingdom, and you will find Jesus Christ in Virtual Reality and through random acts of kindness, and decency to the poor, the weak, the fatherless, and the widow. And that whole calendar thing. But I can assure you that Jesus Christ is never, ever, ever going to launch a cruise missile at anybody. Although his alleged followers certainly have. The events depicted in Revelation will occur precisely as described in a movie called "The Return of Jesus Christ," which will be pretty popluar, but much maligned. And true believers can't add to the Bible, but if they are divinely inspired they can always write "The Second Bible." Of course, in the 17th Century Galileo postulated a real unobservable mathematical physical world of primary qualities like mass, shape, and size, which inhere in real physical objects, and declared the "world of appearance" to be an unreal consequence of the action of the real physical world. The unobservable primary qualities of physical objects are real even if no one ever observes them, which of course they can't. Secondary qualities exist only in our minds as a consequence of the existence of primary qualities. As real physical objects exist independently of observation, even observed primary quality objects merely represent real physical objects which have only primary qualities and obey the laws of the most up-to-date physics. Newton and Einstein and countless others followed Galileo, and it's gotten very complex, but the idea of the real, independently existing physical world has been by no means abandoned, quantum mechanics notwithstanding. Galilean metaphysics edited the spiritual, and indeed reality out of reality, which is why now you're really a brain and not a person or a soul, and why people no longer have genuinely spiritual experiences. Although they do have mental illnesses, which are really brain diseases, and if such people take their mind-altering medications which aren't really good for them, then they can control their defective brains, and live more productive lives. If you follow Galileo, you will of course be speculating about the divine perfection of Jesus's brain, and how he actually had a trillion neurons, and so forth. What does all of this have to do with Global Government? Why, everything, and nothing, of course. Locke followed Galileo, declaring the world of appearance to be a consequence of the action of the physical world upon the mental substance of the soul. Locke was very popular among the founders, and American government was based to a greater or lesser extent upon his theories, although of course pragmatism had the last word. I am told that the term "men" in the Declaration actually refers to Lockean mental substances. But fortunately, or unfortunately, Caesar does not take orders from Jesus or Galileo. He crucifies or controls Jesus whenever he can find him, and he doesn't give a fig about Galileo's theories. He simply uses Galileo to build weapons of mass destruction. And as for our Paper Caesar, the United States Constitution, it is followed to a great extent by most Americans, but a lot of them violate it if they can get away with it or even if they can't. Do any speeding recently? And hordes of centurions - lawyers, police, various agencies, are very serious (and sometimes not so serious) about enforcing the Constitution, and I deeply respect them for that, but I really wish that they would let me do crack, purchase sex for money, kill people that I don't like, and own as many slaves as I can afford. Well, I don't actually wish that, but there sure are a lot of other people that do. Although I'm sure they would change their ways if they read more Enlightenment philosophy. George W. Bush swore to protect, preserve, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, which of course is the United States of America, but George Bush protects it by violating it, and he takes orders from Jesus. Why is the United States of America so important when it comes to the topic of global government? Because it confirms that global government is entirely possible! We've already got people of every ethnicity here, with the sole exception of the remote Brazilian tribe of Kukamongo, living together in freedom, and occasionally going to prison. Ah yes, the European Union! A club for Europeans! Sorry you didn't get in Turkey! You just aren't European enough yet! Try again soon! China! I really like Chinese culture and Chinese people, especially their European Marxist political philosophy! You'll get Taiwan back eventually. Just keep trying! What is it about pieces of dirt that so motivates the human animal? All you have to do is change that United States of America thing to the United States of Earth or just leave off that "of America" part and you've got a global government. Oh sure, there might have to be a new constitutional convention, but it's about time for one. Why don't we just offer Iraq statehood? Oh, they probably won't want to join, but I'm sure that Mexico would! All the Mexicans are already coming here anyway! Sure Mexico is poor, but then so is Arkansas! You don't hate poor people do you? Well, if you're not a billionaire, then you're poor so you must really hate yourself! You know, I just quickly read the Constitution and it doesn't make any mention of territory at all. That's why the U.S. just kept adding states. Why don't we add some more! Oh they might have to be territories first, before they get their act together. Come on Puerto Rico, try harder! Oh sure, there's no more territory to colonize, but once the Canadians realize the superior logic of our health-system, I'm sure they'll want to join. I hope that clarifies the issue. Have a nice day! -humangoodorevil |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: myoarin-ga on 11 Feb 2006 10:21 PST |
I am very sceptical of the prospects for a global government, thinking that George Orwell got it right in "1984", recognizing that his Oceania needed a counterforce to keep itself together, first Eurasia and then later Eastasia. If you will, rather as the Communist Bloc kept NATO cohesive. Peoples and cultures are too diverse to expect that they will freely join under a global government. The minute the threat of a counterforce disappears, fragmentation will begin, as it has to some extent among the NATO partners. Any Global Government will have a "homeland", as did the Roman and Ottoman Empires and Chinese regimes in various dynasties. Let that homeland be USA, Russia, China (I don't give the European Union a chance), no super power will be able to keep the whole world in line; it won't be able to afford to, and will discover that dealing with internal opposition in its homeland will force it to forego control of fringe areas. That is the way it has always happened. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: myoarin-ga on 11 Feb 2006 18:22 PST |
Hedgie, That was a fantastic all encompassing answer of a very sweeping question! Obviously a great deal of work went into it. I have been very curious, waiting for it. Regards, Myoarin |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: hedgie-ga on 13 Feb 2006 02:57 PST |
ansel001-ga
thank your for your comment.
Miracles, per definition, are low probability events.
However, not all scenarios of the Last Days are dismissed with .001
I also consider a non-nuclear Armageddon scenario
Knowing people, it has a low probability, and conflicts with
interpretation of 'Wormwood' in the prophecy as 'Chernobyl'
The more 'coincidences' you have in a scenario, the less likely it is.
The other branch, nuclear Armageddon, is more likely (Pna=.9) but the
unlikely miracle is 'most perish from radiation, but few will survive'.
We have quite a bit about the long terms effects od radiation (from
Hiroshima and some communistic Gulag data) and so we know it does not
work that way - according to today's science.
I include scenarios where the laws of physics, as we know them, may
suddenly change or can be disregarded in this section:
Some pretty wild scenarios have been considered by (at least half serious)
scientists, such as "does this giant computer of a universe exist?"
(also called Lem's hypothesis), see e.g.
http://ryskamp.org/brain/books/notes-from-three-scientists-and-their-gods
Those include ID theories, I suggest you read the referenced book.
If we stay with current science, with scenarios which accept:
"evolution is just a theory, but a theory which explains many facts"
"most people perish [from radiation] but some ..will live happily for
thousands of years" is not compatible with what we know about long term
exposure to radiation.
We have only anecdotal evidence about resurrection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
In these branches it is reported as an event, not a fact.
Still 'the Last Days scenario would be "interesting" to watch since it will
give us a clue who the 'real Beast' is: Gog, Magog .... ?
Remember: Many will be mislead by false prophets.
Do not just think about this. Pray, and you may be enlightened. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: ansel001-ga on 13 Feb 2006 12:31 PST |
Hedgie, I am confident that I have not been mislead by false prophets. I know the Savior and His word. One thing you mention is true. Once the carnage in prophesied in the Book of Revelation is unleased, it would be unlikely anyone would survive...absent God's intervention. But Jesus said this: Matthew 24:21 For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will. Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. When I read about wars and crimes that are committed, I can't help but notice how often the number of casualties is lower than you would expect given the lethality of the attack. I do not mean to diminish the evil of the actions taken, but only to make the observation about it. I believe that very often God limits the full extent of the natural consequences of evil actions from what they otherwise would have been. He does not eliminate them entirely. He allows our actions to have real consequences. The good actions He allows to have their full beneficial consequences, but He often limits the full natural consequences of evil actions. And we see this in the passage above. The days of the tribulation will be cut short so that some survive. |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: hedgie-ga on 14 Feb 2006 20:57 PST |
Ansel
Mercy of God may mitigate consequences of man's decisions, but
that does not relieve us of moral responsibility for our actions.
We should not act and vote recklessly, and expect that a
supreme being will come and fixes mess we do.
Like
" James G. Watt, Ronald Reagan's Secretary of the Interior, [who] once
remarked that
"my responsibility is to follow the Scriptures which call upon us to occupy
the land until Jesus returns;"
this was interpreted by political foes as
meaning that we did not need to take care of the environment because Jesus
was returning soon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_times
Many people believed that they understand the prophecy,and many were wrong.
Here is a whole list of predictions. Next End will be July 6th, this year
http://www.religioustolerance.org/end_wrl1.htm
That does not mean that you are wrong. However, it is important to know that
many people, many other religions know about the Lats Days and have some
understanding thereof. We should be be tolerant and respectfully of their
beliefs, at least until the Armageddon starts.
" The state is a secular construct.
The Brotherhood of Islam, the Church of
Rome, All the World Under One Japanese Roof, world communism, all in their
different ways have had religious or millenarian goals. Such goals are not
unknown in the supposedly secular states of the West either. Especially in
the US, right-wing Christian organizations and other religious pressure
groups have sought to inject their religious values and agendas into national
politics in ways that would have shocked the Founding Fathers..."
https://www.math.rutgers.edu/~sussmann/papers/occidentalism.html |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government (The Orwell Factor and "2006")
From: humangoodorevil-ga on 16 Feb 2006 05:54 PST |
The Orwell Factor I am very glad that myoarin-ga mentioned George Orwell and "1984." In the novel, Mr. Winston Smith works as an agent for the Ministry of Truth in Oceania (one of the three governments existing on Earth in 1984). In his secret diary Winston writes "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." He apparently falls in love with a younger woman, Julia. O'Brien, is ostensibly a member of the Inner Party that works for Big Brother, the apparent ruler of Oceania. He inducts them into the apparent conspiracy, "the Brotherhood," which is said to work against the Party. The Thought Police then imprison Mr. Smith, torture him, and in essence get him to believe that 2 + 2 = 5. Winston begs O'Brien not to inflict Winston's worst fear upon him (having his head eaten by rats), but to instead inflict Julia's worst fear upon her. In the end, Winston does not have his head eaten by rats, learns to love Big Brother, and apparently lives happily ever after. Now "O'Brien" makes some ingenious arguments, but I take his central contention to be that "truth" and "reality" are purely a function of power. I am perfectly free to say 2 + 2 = 4. I am interested in whether 2 plus 2 actually does equal four. If 2 + 2 = 4, then I will accept your answer, give or take a few particulars. If not, then the correct answer is: "In the year 2008 Luke Skywalker will addition for 'American Idol,' become the world's most popular singer, and unite the Earth as a Jedi Republic. In 2010, a Superhuman reality hacker named Neo will break into the Universal Mainframe, and find out where Alien Hitler is holding Jesus, who as the 'Urantia Book' tells us, is really a good alien. The Forces of Good will rush all its vessels at trans-infinite warp speed to Galaxy ESO269 to set up a 52-dimensional blockcade. Evil God and Good God, the existence of whom has been confirmed by scientists who have empirically tested the "God hypothesis," and who are both technically omnipotent, but hold different political views, will then begin the ultimate struggle which they have carefully avoided all this time. Neutral God will withdraw all His forces to metaphysical Switzerland, and adopt an absolutely defensive strategy. If either Good God or Evil God knows that they will be defeated by the other, then the one that will be defeated will attempt to implement the Reality Destruction Protocol, in the ultimate "Scorched Earth Policy." The other two Gods will then form an alliance of convenience to stop this from happening. If the "Convenience Alliance" fails, then Reality will be destroyed. If the Convenience Alliance succeeds, then the remaining two Gods will then have to fight it out. So it all comes down to which is intrinsically more powerful, Good, Evil, or Neutral. The answer to this is constantly debated, but the answer can be determined only by The Final Conflict. In any case, the creation of a global government on Earth is certain. If Evil God wins, then He will torture everyone but himself forever and ever, and his evil son Satan, or Hosea, will rule the Earth. If Neutral God wins, then He will implement a global government ruled by Adam Smith, and we'll have the choice of either working for Him in exchange for "money" or starving to death. If Good God wins, then His Son Jesus Christ will rule the Earth forever and every person without exception will enjoy immortality and happiness at no cost to him, her, or it. Or the correct answer is a two-terabyte digitally-altered picture of Paris Hilton and Sean Connery holding hands. Or the correct answer is "I have no idea whatsoever! Would you like a piece of toast?" Or in abstract terms, the correct answer is "w," where "w" stands for "anything whatsoever." Now 2 + 2 = 4 is true by definition if you say "I define 'four' as that which two plus two is equal to." But then the statement "Jesus Christ will return to Earth" is true by definition if you say "I define Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God who will return to earth." So I wonder if "2 + 2 = 4" is true in a trans-definitional sense. Instead of trying to prove that 2 + 2 = 4 in a trans-definitional sense, I'll tell a story! The name of the story is "2006" by humangoodorevil-ga, and a ?story? is of course a ?comment.? And if the following isn?t fiction, I don?t know what fiction would be! 2006 by humangoodorevil Some years back I was tired of living in the United States, so I moved to Iraq to work for Saddam Hussein. He employed me in his secret "City-Killing Supergun" Program. I knew that such a weapon was theoretically possible, but also that Saddam probably did not have the resources to build one, even assuming that my colleagues and I could solve the various technical problems related to its construction. But the pay was good and I minded my manners and life was good. Until of course, I verbally made a foolish meta-mathematical statement to a co-worker. Once I saw him smile I realized what I had done. Without saying another word, I left my "office" and went for a walk in peaceful downtown Baghdad. It was peaceful then. Of course, knowing that my time was short, I spent all the money that I could, and soon darkness fell. At exactly midnight, Baghdad time, I was surrounded by several vehicles, and then some hired goons poured out of them. They shot me, called me lots of names in several different languages, and beat me into unconsciousness. I awoke in a tastefully decorated, windowless room, and there stood before me a large, youngish man of apparently Caucasian descent, wearing what I would characterize as a garish but fashionable Western business suit. He said: "Hello, I am O'Brien Jr. Right now we're both inside virtual reality! I am accussing you of believing that 2 + 2 = 4 in a non-trivial sense. In reality, 2 + 2 = 5, and I am going to cure you of your mental malfunction by torturing you, making your worst nightmare and/or your greatest wish come true, informing you of the latest research, and subjecting you to the world's most advanced medical treatments! I assure you, I'm acting purely selflessly and am doing this all for your own good. Of course, I may or may not be telling the truth, and of course, I don't exist, but then I am thinking perfectly rationally, and you are not, because I have superior power." Well, I found all of this terribly boring. I thought, "Oh boy, here we go again." For a while I had actually been O'Brien Jr., and so I knew what he was talking about. I had been tortured by the Americans for my various criminal activities, and then released, as is their way, and so my resistance to torture was good. And I actually did believe that 2 + 2 = 4 at the time. So I responded: "Torture is not an argument. I am unwilling to change my intellectual judgments because of pain or pleasure alone. I actually do believe that 2 + 2 = 4 - unless I'm lying about my belief. You can of course reduce me to a mindless, limbless, impotent idiot, but then you will not cure my alleged disease. You will simply destroy me, and I will be incapable of believing that 2 + 2 = 5. My worst nightmare has already come true, and I don't believe that you have the power to make my greatest wish come true. So if your true intention is to get me to believe that 2 + 2 = 5, then you will have to restrict your efforts to argumentation alone." O'Brien Jr. - or his avatar - looked displeased for an instant and said: "Our brain scans have confirmed that you actually do believe that 2 + 2 = 4. The latest research has determined that 2 + 2 = 5! You must believe this for your own good!" I sighed and said: "If you don't exist then you certainly can't have any power. And you certainly can't be reading any brain scans. And assuming that you do exist, how do you know that your brain scans exist? And if your brain scans exist, how do you know that you're interpreting them correctly? You've been reading too much Orwell! 2 + 2 = 4 follows logically from 1 + 1 = 2, assuming that 1 + 1 does equal 2 and that you're using the right logic. Of course, you must first establish that one exists in order to begin the equation." O'Brien Jr. said nothing and continued to smile. I continued: "You claim that 2 + 2 = 5. If the first '2' refers to one heterosexual couple, and the second '2' refers to another heterosexual couple, and '5' refers to the number of children that they have collectively, and they actually do have 5 children collectively, then 2 + 2 = 5, in a particular sense. You claim to be rational. If by rational you mean you mean the dictionary definition of "right thinking," and you define 'right thinking' as 'power,' or 'powerful thinking,' then I find your definition of 'rationality' or 'right thinking' as circular and as arbitrary as any definition of 'right thinking' that has ever been given." O'Brien Jr. became absolutely enraged and yelled at me: "That is not what I meant! I can tell that we have severely underestimated your level of mental dysfunction!" I guess I must have been in virtual reality because O'Brien Jr. disappeared and then the pain, the terrible pain began. Many unhappy memories appeared in my mind, I became very confused, completely unhappy, and terribly afraid. Many horrible thoughts occurred to me, I felt horrible emotions flooding through me, and I forgot all about arithmetic for awhile. My behavior became statistically abnormal, and then I began to perceive a great many phenomena that I had never perceived before. Terrible, horrible things. I had a virtual watch, and I did keep looking at it at first. As time went on, one horrible thing after another happened to me. My capacity to think was greatly reduced, and much of the time, I was unable to think at all. But I could "think" every once and awhile, and given that this lasted for quite awhile, a great many things occurred to me. Interestingly enough, the virtual watch seemed to keep linear time, and after 20 years of virtual watch time, I began to "stabilize." In a moment of clarity, I concluded that it was all very funny, and I started to laugh hysterically. Then I lost the capacity to laugh, but I still had the capacity to speak, and so I said: "Man behind the curtain, this is really boring. Could we try something else?" Instantly I was returned to the tastefully decorated room, and I felt perfectly fine, and in front of me again was "O'Brien Jr." He said: "I can see that didn't work. We will have to try something else. You are the most difficult case I have ever encountered. So we'll try it your way. First of all, the burden of proof is upon those that assert. I challenge you to prove that anything exists, and for extra credit, prove that you yourself exist. Let's discuss it over coffee." A tasteful table appeared, complete with what appeared to be gourmet coffee, which it certainly tasted like. I knew that Descartes had tried to prove his existence with the "cogito," "I think, therefore I am." But I believed that "I think" is semantically equivalent to "I am" and I interpreted Descartes's statement as equivalent to "I think, therefore I think." That seemed inadequate to me. I was going to say something about this, and I managed to say "I" but O?Brien Jr. cut me off, and I intended to get into a shouting match, but I found myself quite incapable of speaking or indeed moving off of my chair! O'Brien Jr. then gave me a lecture. He went on and on about every imaginable topic, in a way that I found completely comprehensible, and I learned quite a lot, and it gave me some time to think. I was able to look at my watch. After 20 years of virtual time, the lecture ended and I was able to speak again! O'Brien Jr. looked at me placidly and asked me: "So have you now come to the proper conclusion?" I replied: "I've concluded that you're a very interesting lecturer!" O'Brien Jr. smiled, apparently sincerely, and said "Thank You." Again the tastefully decorated room disappeared, and I feared the worst, but I ended up in a room consisting of mirrors for walls and a mirrored revolving door. I looked at my image and I noticed that my appearance had improved significantly! And I soon learned that I had many capabilities that I had not had before! Deciding to forget about arithmetic for awhile, I flew out the door and had many pleasurable experiences, and effortlessly succeeded at everything I tried! Everybody agreed with me, loved me, and did everything that I said. It was great! I had a fantastic time! But I kept looking at my watch. I wanted to see what would happen after 20 virtual years. Twenty virtual years elapsed, and I was still in Disneyland! So I waited an additional virtual year and said, "This is a lot of fun, but it still won't answer your question!" Instantly I was back with O'Brien Jr., myself again, only this time I was in a room that appeared to be a dwelling on ancient Miletus. I felt a great sense of loss as I wasn't having any fun, but I had made my choice. O'Brien Jr. looked himself, only about 60 years older, extremely fat, his face worn with care. He sighed and said, "Very well, do I exist?" I didn't know, and I said so, so we discussed and researched the matter for several google virtual years. But I didn't have a single quantum of fun. Of course, O'Brien Jr. treated every argument I seriously made seriously, but it was clear that he was simply using me to help him find his answer. He offered me various "intelligence enhancements," most of which I rejected after he explained what they each entailed. And I "spoke" with many "people" with many different "appearances." Finally, I had a realization. I was counting "atoms" in a "non-entropic universe" when I had my realization. Instantly, O'Brien Jr. appeared, the way he appeared originally. He screamed at me in utter terror, "What in Power's name are you talking about?" I replied, "I didn't say anything, but I will, unless I become unable to speak." My new realization and "enhanced intelligence" allowed me to as they say, "Increase My Power Exponentially." I realized that O'Brien Jr. actually had many enemies and I of course contacted them and it got extremely game theoretical very fast, and there was a lot of fighting, and in the end I ended up in the "Reichstag" as "Hitler" addressing a bunch of "stark raving Nazis," who were all pointing their "guns" at me. After mocking me in every language they knew, which took a long time, in unison they all screamed "Antworten Sie! Fuenf Minuten!" which I'll translate as "You Will Answer in five minutes or you will die." I knew that I had to answer the question in five minutes, or they would terminate my existence. I thought "This is great! I get to be 'Hitler' for five minutes!" Suddenly two giant digital clocks appeared at the front and back of the "Reichstag" both of which I could see due to my multi-dimensional vision, and the countdown had begun! Finally, I "had the floor." I knew that I was on "TV" and other "nations" were watching with interest. Of course, I was also watching "TV" too. And chewing gum at the same time! I could have done a lot of things, but instead I simply repeated a lot of things that some of them had said. And then, just in time, I said in English with a perfect Cockney accent: "There is something that is here now. I refuse to answer any more questions. Kill me if you like." There was complete silence for a literal eternity. They were trying to comprehend what I had said. It didn?t make sense to them. It was too ?mystical.? And then somebody finally managed to assert: ?Incorrect answer!? Then a huge debate broke out, and they were discussing this issue ?at every level? as they say, and then some of them started shooting at each other, and some shot themselves. And they kept asking me what I meant, and if I could clarify my statement, and if I could demonstrate this empirically, and whether I could demonstrate this a priori, and all sorts of other things. But then some of them started shooting at me, but the bullets bounced off, leaving me unharmed. I thought, oh right, I?m ?Hitler.? I can?t be killed. I can only kill myself. Or be replaced with someone more ?powerful.? While the politicians were fighting amongst themselves, I teleported to the "war room" and ordered my military staff to report, which of course they did. They advised me of our strategic situation, and requested an order. I thought about it and ordered them to ?Use your own discretion indefinitely.? At first they were stunned, but then they all laughed hysterically, agreed that only I could have said something so funny, and followed my order. Initially, the "Wehrmacht," my personal military, suffered devastating losses, but this was only temporary. Soon, the ?Axis? was advancing all across the ?globe.? I was very powerful, but I was trying to think of a way to acquire ?absolute power.? I could think of only one way. I would have to eliminate everything but myself and remain alone forever. Only when I alone existed would I have truly absolute power. Logically, the only way to do this was to assimilate everything into myself. In essence, I would have to ?eat everything.? My ?ultimate weight gain program? would give me and me alone absolute power. My mind would then be able to create any object that it wanted to for itself, and I would have absolute power, at the cost of eternal solitude. I knew that I was capable of doing this, but would I actually choose to do so? I wondered what that would be like. I became very frustrated. I could run simulations, but I wouldn?t actually know what it would be like unless I actually did it. I had never myself eliminated my capacity for depression, because I deemed that unwise, and I became more depressed than I have ever been before. I realized that there were many people that I actually wanted to exist. However, I did a lot of meditation, and was finally cured of my attachment to other people. I decided to go ahead with my plan, but I didn?t get very far before I remembered something very important. All of this had occurred because I had been forcibly abducted against my will. I never wanted any of this to happen in the first place. I concluded with certainty that the first thing that I would see with my absolute power would be O?Brien Jr., smiling sadistically, saying ?At long last, I have proved my point and you are cured.? I was greatly relieved! I couldn?t take back what had happened, or undo what O?Brien did to me, so I decided to do the next best thing. I would return myself to Baghdad at midnight! Of course it wouldn?t be the same Baghdad and so forth, but it would be the next best thing! And then of course I did a lot of ?magic tricks? and so on, restored my capacity for sleep, put on Beethoven?s 9th Symphony, listened to it in its entirely, and fell asleep after precisely five minutes. Suddenly I found myself back in Baghdad at midnight! And this time the hired goons did not show up! I remembered what had happened to me in a general way, but of course once again I was only human. I was tired, so I got some sleep and then did not show up for work. But a lot has happened since then. Now it?s 2006, and . . . Oh no. I'm back in that tastefully decorated room. In front of me is a woman. I'll know if she's beautiful or not from what what she's going to say, and I do know what she's going to say. . . . "Hello, I'm O'Brien III and I'm your guardian angel!" Well, here we go again. Truthfully, all of this couldn't have happened to a nicer person. The End |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: myoarin-ga on 16 Feb 2006 09:53 PST |
Humangoodorevil, Maybe there is somewhere you can publish your story and recover your expenses for your (also) interesting question. Cheers, Myoarin |
| Subject:
Re: Global Government
From: humangoodorevil-ga on 16 Feb 2006 23:07 PST |
Thank You, myoarin-ga! Well, that was just a first draft, but perhaps with a lot of re-writing, additional research, and a George Orwell dedication, maybe I can recoup my expenditure. Writing fiction was my first love, but then I went to college and became interested in intellectual questions like whether saturated fat really is evil. They say that it's "bad," but is it really "evil?" If it's evil, then it has to be stopped. . . . Best Wishes, Human: good, or evil? |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
| Search Google Answers for |
| Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |