Your Views on a world Government

[Starhawk]

Alneyan said:

I don't know if that was your purpose, but the "France, at the moment, have communist power hungry leadership Groups" made me laugh quite well. I will only address this single point for lack of time: the communist party in France is... how shall we say? virtually dead (it had about 5% of the popular vote in the Last presidential elections, while it had as much as 20% votes in 1981 if memory serves.). The even more to the left, extreme left-wing parties, had a bigger share of the votes, but extreme votes should not be considered as simply being a vote for that party. one of these parties had an untypical candidate, 27-year-old, employed in the postal service, which helped give them their 7 or 8% share of the votes. Does it mean these people converted to the ideals of Trotsky? Not quite.

The closest France came to be under communist control was shortly after WW2, as a plot would have been likely in 1947 or 1949 (it is only one of these two, but I cannot remember the actual one. I will check once I get back from school). But that plot failed, and even if it succeeded, would have had a very tough time keeping power; they had little backing from the army, and the USSR would have had trouble sending help as far as France (there was Western Germany in the way). What you may argue is that marxist ideals are still present in the ways trade unions operate, but above all, in social representations. That would be, however, a different topic, and I should stop digressing.

Lastly, you might wish to know the biggest opponents to the United States (Charles de Gaulle, between 1958 and 1969, did pretty well) were often from the right-wing (as is our current government), and had nothing to do with the communisty party. And I would be very surprised if the words of France had that much impact, especially coming from an ancient colonial power that was reluctant, to say the least, to give up its Empire. I cannot speak of Russia and China, but I would feel the same about their foreign policy; when you are the leading power, it would be very odd if you didn't sprung the biggest amount of criticism from virtually everyone else.

Actually yes it was intended to make you laugh I guess I should have made that more clear eh? I have a warped sense of humor and sometimes forget that internet=not being able to carry over the "tone" of what I'm saying lol.

Though I did get a kick out of the rumor that France accidentally voted in a communist,it was almost as good as the
"Why does Michael Jackson like twenty eight year olds? Because there are twenty of them" joke.

But anyway back on to a serious topic China and Russia both have strong communist leaders (Though Puttin claims to be an ex KGB (ex-communist) he runs his government's foreign policy like the old Soviet Block.) China is less openly hostile to foreign policy but they are still rather "guarded" in their contacts.

[Fyron]

Starhawk said:
But anyway back on to a serious topic China and Russia both have strong communist leaders (Though Puttin claims to be an ex KGB (ex-communist) he runs his government's foreign policy like the old Soviet Block.) China is less openly hostile to foreign policy but they are still rather "guarded" in their contacts.

I was not aware that xenophobia and/or protection of your national interests equalled Communism.

China never reached a "Communist" state. Ever since Kissinger successfully opened their borders to trade with the US back in the 60s, they have moved more and more away from the Soviet form of "Communism" (which is in quotes because it was never actually Communism) to "merely" a military dictatorship.

[Nodachi]

I think it needs to be pointed out that there has never been (and probably never will be) a truly communist nation. What we refer to as "communism" is really socialism.

As someone pointed out earlier, all people being of equal value is a fallacy propagated by governments in order to maintain control over the population. All people are not of equal "value" but... should have equal rights and opportunities (value is a rotten word for this but it's the best I can think of). Government's purpose is to enforce laws and protect the populance from external threats not to babysit our children, not to tell us where we can and can not go, not to tell us what to believe in, and not to give handouts to those who are unwilling to help themselves (help those who can't, sure, help those who won't, hell no!)

The Star Trek vision of future Earth society is BS. It makes us feel good to think that we are working towards that kind of world but I don't see it ever coming to pass. Human nature is to want more than what we have. The trick is to maintain a society(note I did not say government) that allows for this.