Topic: Flag Burning: Freedom of Expression or Civil Disobedience

[Captain Leonidas]

And also what makes you think a unified world is a good thing?

No more wars, no more state. Full direct democracy and freedom of thought.

United under American rule?

Hell no! United under gift economy, liberal education and basis of trust society as well as direct democracy.

[Captain Hajime]

A good number of First Nation [Native Americans] have put for a lot of positive change in their comunities.

And how is that being nationalism ? They did not get a country on their own, nor can that be considered as nationalism.

My point still stands. Nationalism is preventing a united world and is the source of unnecessary wars as well as rhetorics.

Return to the idea of association/security in group and combine it with the association of greater world unity and you would have a much peaceful world rather than fractious 'nationals' fighting to estabilish states.

Nationalism is not always about having you own nation as in UN reconized government. you can have a nation without a state. North Irish, Scotland, England, Wales, for example just like you have States without nations The states of the Uninted States of America are a Fedral Republic therefor are States that agre to have a central Fedral Government. The states have no nationalism but are states. The two things are different. nationalism and nationhood are products of a common culture often langauge and belief system. States are governrments that run services in a geographical boundry.

[Captain Leonidas]

you can have a nation without a state.

Hmmm, we clearly have a very different idea of nationhood here. In my definition, nationhood is intertwined and inseparable from state.

Your definition of nationhood closely resembles my idea of non state group association. Association by political thinking, association by ethnic/common background, but NEVER as an excuse to antagonize other group for advantage.

[Abraxas]

And also what makes you think a unified world is a good thing?

No more wars, no more state. Full direct democracy and freedom of thought.

United under American rule?

Hell no! United under gift economy, liberal education and basis of trust society as well as direct democracy.

That is a UTOPIA.

They will NEVER EVER exist. The world is too big and too diverse. I assume it would have to be ruled under some christian doctrine... which not everyone agrees with. What about capitalism v. communism? Which would rule the group as a whole?

No... it's pointless to even discuss that.

[Captain Hajime]

you can have a nation without a state.

Hmmm, we clearly have a very different idea of nationhood here. In my definition, nationhood is intertwined and inseparable from state.

Your definition of nationhood closely resembles my idea of non state group association. Association by political thinking, association by ethnic/common background, but NEVER as an excuse to antagonize other group for advantage.

Hay it what my Professors Drilled into at University.

[TheOnlySpiral]

My Professors also drilled into me the same definition.  It's the one that appears to be most wildly accepted from scholars I talk to.

[Captain Leonidas]

They will NEVER EVER exist. The world is too big and too diverse. I assume it would have to be ruled under some christian doctrine... which not everyone agrees with. What about capitalism v. communism? Which would rule the group as a whole?

No... it's pointless to even discuss that.

Well I for one believe it could exist. And education is the key as well as liberal socialism. The impossibility of utopia is because people think humans are incapable of non agression co existence and consider it part of 'human nature', one I vigorously rejects. I invite you to Communism: A Tour thread if you wish to discuss and see this view.

Hay it what my Professors Drilled into at University.

Which definition ?

[Rasmus]

That is a UTOPIA.

They will NEVER EVER exist. The world is too big and too diverse. I assume it would have to be ruled under some christian doctrine... which not everyone agrees with. What about capitalism v. communism? Which would rule the group as a whole?

No... it's pointless to even discuss that.

   No it is not. Diversity is not a drawback to this; it is a strength. I am not going ot run the theory passed you, but read Red/Green/Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson and you will see how it works, and how it works rather well, too. It takes some enlightened self-interest, but it is far from impossible.

[Dark Exodus]

That is a UTOPIA.

They will NEVER EVER exist. The world is too big and too diverse. I assume it would have to be ruled under some christian doctrine... which not everyone agrees with. What about capitalism v. communism? Which would rule the group as a whole?

The inevitable loss of culture and race will eventually make this possible, eventually. We can speed it along.

Capitalism will eventually prohibit developement into space. Who wants to spend billions on a project that may only bring back rocks and information? So Communism is the choice political system.

[kurt922]

I agree with Rasmus. Also I ask you, how much blood is one such as yourself willing to spill/expend to ensure that everybody agrees and coexists cooperatively? Honestly dude.

Me:"I don't want to wake up in the morning."
Pantocrator:"But you were taught to."
Me:" Well I feel diferently, like sleeping in."
Pantocrator: "Off to the secret gulags with you then! Long live our peaceful society!"

Screw that man, I will fight to the death for my freedom of sleeping in(among other, much more important things) even if I've been taught differently by 'liberal socialism'. 'One way' will not work for the world, unless you are willing to clear the rest of the world out.

[Dark Exodus]

Me:"I don't want to wake up in the morning."
Pantocrator:"But you were taught to."
Me:" Well I feel diferently, like sleeping in."
Pantocrator: "Ok then, just don't expect any of the benefits of working"

(Edited for accuracy)

[Rasmus]

I agree with Rasmus. Also I ask you, how much blood is one such as yourself willing to spill/expend to ensure that everybody agrees and coexists cooperatively? Honestly dude.

  None. As long as it has to be forced it cannot work or be susteined. Only through conscious unified effort can this world be remade. I can just do my part, not force someone else to.

[Captain Leonidas]

I agree with Rasmus. Also I ask you, how much blood is one such as yourself willing to spill/expend to ensure that everybody agrees and coexists cooperatively? Honestly dude.

Dark Exodus had replied nicely. No liberal socialism doesnt do gulag. We do elections. That is why liberal education is the key. No force. All you have is options. Heck you can even opt not going to school and even scores in tests. Think it cannot work ? Tell that to Rontgen (in case you do not know him, he's the guy who did X ray)

It is not impossible to have a united society. It is very possible and in fact the collapse of the age of superpowers would speed these things up nicely.

[Captain Hajime]

They will NEVER EVER exist. The world is too big and too diverse. I assume it would have to be ruled under some christian doctrine... which not everyone agrees with. What about capitalism v. communism? Which would rule the group as a whole?

No... it's pointless to even discuss that.

Well I for one believe it could exist. And education is the key as well as liberal socialism. The impossibility of utopia is because people think humans are incapable of non agression co existence and consider it part of 'human nature', one I vigorously rejects. I invite you to Communism: A Tour thread if you wish to discuss and see this view.

Hay it what my Professors Drilled into at University.

Which definition ?

The one I used above, the one that was different from yours. Utopa will never happen, heck you can't even have it in Star Trek where basic needs are met. [Replcator technology]

[Captain Leonidas]

Utopa will never happen, heck you can't even have it in Star Trek where basic needs are met. [Replcator technology]

Which is why I see a united world is NOT a utopia but realistic goal. War as a political will extension CAN be stopped (not individual conflicts).

Now as for freedom of expression, I want to ask people reading this thread; does burning money or using money as an art object (art installation) prohibited in respective countries ? In Singapore here, it is a jail-able offence since it bears the 'likeness' of their 'heroes'.

[TheOnlySpiral]

No more wars, no more state. Full direct democracy and freedom of thought.

Less likely to happen than unified by a military power and kept in control with force of arms.  Human beings are at their core greedy self centered beings. 
Yes burning money is prohibited here.  I have no idea WHY but it is.

[Captain Leonidas]

Human beings are at their core greedy self centered beings. 

I very much disagree. If such, humans would be incapable to form society (or communism) and would become solitary hunters.

Yes burning money is prohibited here.  I have no idea WHY but it is.

Is your country Canada ?

[TheOnlySpiral]

I very much disagree. If such, humans would be incapable to form society (or communism) and would become solitary hunters.

Well we havn't suceeded at a true communist system yet...and I don't think we ever will.  We are greedy and selfcentered it's how we survived when we were evolving.  We are still animals.  We have a thin covering of civilisation but underneath we are even mre savage and bloodthirst as any animal.  We have come together to form society for protection.  It has grown from that...but it is still very much about keeping one's inner circle safe. 

And yes my country is Canada.

[Captain Leonidas]

Well we havn't suceeded at a true communist system yet...and I don't think we ever will. 

Yes we did (and still do). I mentioned it in Communism thread (if you are interested to see). Its in the form of rota leadership. They exist. Solentiname islands, etc etc. Come and discuss if you are interested 

Ok Canada prohibits burning money, but using money as INSTALLATIONS ? Like for example some artist wishes to built a statue out of Canadian dollars, would he be allowed ?

[Rasmus]

No more wars, no more state. Full direct democracy and freedom of thought.

Less likely to happen than unified by a military power and kept in control with force of arms.  Human beings are at their core greedy self centered beings. 

   THat sort of state is not self-perpetuating without an elite, and will corrupt and destroy itself in the end. It has happened before. It is not a sustainable sollution.