Poor, poor Gideon Rachman.
The Financial Times's chief foreign affairs columnist and blogger can't understand why people got so upset at him.
He responded to a volume of disagreeable e-mails reacting to his December 9 column on the idea of having one world government in two different blog posts (the photo at the top right is from his blog): "Covered in Internet Slime" (December 10) and "Final Thoughts on the world government row" (December 11). His bottom line is that he considered his original column a "dispassionate discussion of the possibility" of a world government.
I think there's genuine reason to question Mr. Rachman's "dispassion." Of course in the process, I run the risk of being criticized by Mr. Rachman (from his Dec. 10 "Internet Slime" piece) as:
- Someone who "can read, but .... cannot think."
- Someone who subscribes to "end days" theology.
- (heaven forbid) Someone who "believes that global warming not only is a hoax - but that it is actually a conspiracy."
- (oh my gosh) Someone "clinging to guns and religion. And clinging is the word."
Nonetheless, I'll plunge ahead into his original column with clear demonstrations that Mr. Rachman is more than a wee bit sympathetic to the one world government idea:
- The title is a not terribly objective "And now for a world government."
- He writes favorably of the European Union -- "A 'world government' would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model."
- His assertion that "climate change," aka "global warming," is among the things that "are pushing national governments towards global solutions, even in countries such as China and the US that are traditionally fierce guardians of national sovereignty." I would suggest that human-caused "global warming," to the extent that it even exists (there is tons of evidence that it doesn't), has indeed been hijacked a one-world government cause. In fact, Rachman's assertion is bald evidence of that.
- His "bad" reason why one world government might not arrive "is a lack of will and determination on the part of national, political leaders who – while they might like to talk about 'a planet in peril' – are ultimately still much more focused on their next election, at home." I would suggest that many of these politicians are quite properly focused on representing the interests of the people who elected them.
- His supposedly "good" reason doesn't really involve stopping one world government from happening. Instead, it's only seen as a "good" reason why it shouldn't be done all that hastily (bold is mine) -- "Even in the EU – the heartland of law-based international government – the idea remains unpopular. The EU has suffered a series of humiliating defeats in referendums, when plans for “ever closer union” have been referred to the voters. In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians – and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters. International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic." This would appear dangerously close to an endorsement of undemocratic means to a supposedly desirable end. I guess it depends on the meaning of the word "effective."
Sorry, Mr. Rachman. Your "dispassionate" pose doesn't fool me, and clearly didn't fool many other readers, quite a few of whom you clearly hold in open contempt. Suffice it to say that the feeling is mutual.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
What is more than sad about
December 11, 2008 - 15:35 ET by bigtimerWhat is more than sad about all of this is...this is the exact direction this country is going in with the leftist pols hand in hand with the msm being their spokesman.
It will be too late before the majority of people wake up...this country the way we knew it will never be the same after O, his machine, congress take the reins.
We've been moving this way incrementally for decades now...unfortunately we don't have much power to stop this for the next four and possibly eight years...thanks to the mindless public that vote, who don't even know who their own congress-critter is, let alone the VP of the USA.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Plan Slime From Outer Space
December 11, 2008 - 15:46 ET by SickofLibsI, for one, welcome our robot overlords.
Simpsons did it!
December 11, 2008 - 15:57 ET by arkansaszippersSimpsons did it!
Being an ignorant
December 11, 2008 - 15:56 ET by Ruths husband BenBeing an ignorant subscriber to the end times theology of Revelations, if a one world government will bring the rapture, I say, bring it on! Or, as it says in Revelations, "Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!"
But until den, I be a clingin' to dem guns, sur, iff'n you don' mind (or even iff'n youse do, cause after all, I gots dem guns an' youse don').
End times
December 12, 2008 - 00:05 ET by merlin61Ben: Its the book of Revelation, not plural.
Check your bible.
Futurama got it right.
December 11, 2008 - 16:17 ET by mizflame98On the cartoon show Futurama, the cryogenic head of Nixon is the president of Earth. Every now and then they prop his head upon a podium with the flag of Earth in the background and he proclaims one silly thing or another. It's quite funny.
I wonder if Mr. Rachman has gone on one too many late night Benders (pun intended) while watching a Futurama marathon? That's the only explaination for his asenine idea. Of course the alternate explaination is that he's a liberal, but that's too easy of a conclusion.
Perfect Demotivator for the Obama Administration
http://www.despair.com/government.html
Mr. Rachman, to say that we
December 11, 2008 - 16:20 ET by bradbenj5952Mr. Rachman, to say that we need to abandon the ideals of American government in favor of something else is to me the highest form of treason and void of any patriotism whatsoever. Were our Founding Fathers wrong in what they established here? If you really believe that, then do the rest of us, who still believe in America and the Constitution, a favor, find another country!
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." Acts 16:31
Atlas Shrugged
December 11, 2008 - 17:19 ET by iveseenitallAfter Barry's administration, it'll finally be time for Atlas Shrugged. But will it be too late by then? America is in deep soup.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Tom
December 11, 2008 - 17:37 ET by NorthCoasterI read the article and had the same opinion about the author. There is no question that the article supports World Governance and uses the EU as a prime example of a governance body similar to what the ideal world body could be.
He's a socialist.
December 11, 2008 - 17:46 ET by c5thenAll people in favor of a "One World Government" are socialists. The whole point of a world government is so the rich (democratic) countries can be robbed and their wealth used to pay off the poor (socialist/dictatorship) nations debt and re-distribute the wealth to the 'poor countries'. The useful fools see this as Utopian and egalitarian, but what the puppet masters really hope to achieve is the concentration of as much wealth as possible in the financial elite's hands.
Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!
Alan Keyes / Sarah Palin - 2012
Poor Rachman
December 11, 2008 - 17:54 ET by Skypilot4808If this gentleman thinks he got slimed...he ought to read "Crooks and Liars!"
For a guy who presents himself as a "thinker", implied by his "someone who can read but cannot think" comment, he embarrasses himself. Ad hominum attacks are the last refuge of people who no longer have any bullets in their intellectual armory. Whenever I begin reading attacks like this I dismiss the author as an intellectual lightweight.
And then...like a coward, he closes the comment section before he publishes his final comments on the subject...making them safe from rebuttal. I'm curious how he has managed to stay in this business for 15+ years.
At any rate, he is one more guy I don't have to take seriously.
Chaplain Lee M. Thompson
→ Gideon Rachman
December 11, 2008 - 18:02 ET by Cool ArrowLet's start with just one "for instance".
Rachman must necessarily believe women are second class humans, good only for breeding and cooking.
The majority of the world's inhabitants believe it, so it must be so. Right Rachman?
Hey Gideon Rachman! For your sake, you might want to change your name. The majority of humans on this planet think less of Jews than women.
I don't want to live in your silly idea of Utopia. Why you would entertain such hateful wishes for women and Jews, to name just two, I have no idea.
This guy needs to be knocked
December 11, 2008 - 20:19 ET by the strugglerThis guy needs to be knocked down in the mud.
Humm, One World Government.
December 12, 2008 - 00:25 ET by CobraManOne World Government. Humm. I wonder if this has been tried before? I believe it has! And I believe that every time it was tried, great masses of people died and the "One World Government" died soon after.
Here's just a short list of those who tried to create a One World Government:
Hitler and the Third Rich: both dead and the world is better off for that.
Stalin and International Socialism: Stalin is dead and his attempt to create a One World Socialist Government did not survive him very long. (although it must be said that there are a lot of people who both deny that international socialism is a failed dream and are doing everything they can to make it happen, Chavez comes to mind.)
Napoleon and his Empire: Waterloo, anyone?
The Roman Empire: Yes, they lasted for a thousand years, but the couldn't even achieve a One Continent Government. Whey they tried, they died.
These are just a few, off the top of my head, which show not only the futility but the insanity of trying to create a One World Government. Does Gideon Rachman really want hundreds of millions of people to die trying to create a One World Government that is doomed to failure, as history as proven again and again?
Obama: My job is above my pay grade
Don't forget
December 12, 2008 - 12:11 ET by mizflame98Mongol Empire: Xanadu is nothing but ruins now.
Egyptian Empire: Died with Cleopatra
Ottoman Empire: Went bankrupt
Spanish Empire: Dead
And of course the last great empire, The British Empire: Died officially in the 1980's.
Surely this twit realize that one-world governments never last.
Perfect Demotivator for the Obama Administration
http://www.despair.com/government.html
And when people like Bill
December 12, 2008 - 06:03 ET by RR GOPAnd when people like Bill Cooper tried to bring this issue up and popularize it decades ago, he was ignored as being a tinfoil hat-wearing nutcase.
OK, some of his stuff was probably nutty, but this shows that there are indeed many of those out there with this notion of a OWG.
Also, if memory serves me, the Leftists were complaining about Bush pushing for a OWG...now that their boy's about to 'rule' they seem to like the idea. I guess it just depends on whether Dear World Leader is a Leftist or a Conservative. Actually, a Conservative would have no interest in this.
A healthy mix of international cooperation, negotiation and competition, with each country negotiating for their best interests is how it works best. America wouldn't have had to fight any wars since 1865 if it weren't for those elsewhere resorting to violence to get what they wanted. Of course, the Left would spin it the other way, because Americans shed their blood in Korea, Vietnam and elsewhere to keep a One World Government from happening.
But, nationalism and Christianity are dying in Europe and they'd probably be quite happy to give up their sovereignty. The Patriots who marched with Napoleon and went over the top in the trenches for France for example are long gone. They were over it in 1918, the Germans in 1945 and so on.
One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
OWG and NWO
December 12, 2008 - 08:50 ET by TellurianIt's happening right before our eyes and people are too busy or blind to their inner cynicism to recognize, there are no conspiracy theorys anymore.
The only Euro country against the European Union is Ireland. At least their government composed a referendum detailing the facts of joining the Union and submitted it to their public during the last election. The people voted a resounding, "NO"... The Irish government have abided by the people's majority and not signed up via the Lisbon Treaty... the stealth mechanism by which the unaware feel a banality to the ramifications of that Treaty, giving up their sovereignty! Needless to say, Mr Brown is not amused. The UK gladly signed and promoted the OWG as a boon to trade and an alliace of strength against those who choose to remain sovereign.
We are faced with the same proposition and Obama is all for it... I have more here:
http://pumasunleashe...