The World Government Constitution, Part 2

By Antonia Feitz
web posted June 12, 2000

Read part 1 of Feitz's article here

What will the world government concern itself with? The short answer is - everything. Naturally it will require the creation of a massive bureaucracy, and indeed the Constitution calls for the World Parliament to establish "such departments, bureaus, commissions, institutes, corporations, administrations, or agencies as may be needed to carry out any and all of the functions and powers of the World Government."

You know what that means, don't you: a new level of taxation. And how. The world government has the power to raise revenue and funds by direct and/or indirect means through "taxes, licenses, fees, globally accounted social and public costs which must be added to the prices of goods and services ..."

With any luck, the prospect of increased taxation alone will surely result in the outright rejection of the proposed world government by the world's people. After all, taxation has been the final straw in many a revolution's genesis. The Boston Tea Party heralded the US's independence. And in Australia, nineteenth century gold miners staged a (failed) revolution at the Eureka Stockade over unjust license fees demanded by the government.

Article 4 spells out the world government's specific powers. Apart from preventing wars and armed conflicts as mentioned in part 1 of this series, the proposed government will supervise disarmament, prevent re-armament, and even prohibit "incitement to war", thereby making even a call for a justified uprising a criminal act.

As expected, the people who wrote the Constitution appealed to the witless utopians who signed it by planning to "prohibit and eliminate the design, testing, manufacture, sale, purchase, use and possession of weapons of mass destruction, and prohibit or regulate all lethal weapons which the World Parliament may decide." Human nature is suddenly going to change, you see, with the advent of world government. Perhaps the authors believed their own propaganda about the emerging global consciousness. It's a world where docile and brain-washed world citizens value group welfare higher than hard-won individual freedoms.

While it's admirable to work towards peace, only fools or ideologues deny the reality of human nature. As if the various nations will acquiesce for a start. As if the Mafia, the Triads and other criminal organizations are going to cease existing. The only way to attain the Pollyanna world these utopian socialists desire is to drug people, as described in Huxley's Brave New World. Such a 'peace', achieved at the cost of dehumanizing people, is not only worthless but satanically evil because it denies man's right to freely make moral choices - the essence of his humanity.

Echoing the failed UN's charter, the world government will "provide the means of peaceful and just solutions of disputes and conflicts". How, they don't say. Such vacuous committee-speak permeates the entire document and illuminates the socialist mentality of the authors. Over the fifty years of its existence, the UN has failed virtually everywhere in the world. Why would the IRA, the Somali war lords, or Hezbollah take any more notice of the proposed world government than they do of the UN? Supervising boundaries and conducting plebiscites is also one of the world government's powers; they'll have as much success as the UN in the Balkans and Indonesia, no doubt.

Here's one of life's little mysteries: why do socialists always design such unutterably drab utopias? True to form, the authors of this Constitution plan to establish universal standards for weights, measures, accounting and records. Why? For most people, variety is the spice of life. The Constitution guarantees national sovereignty, so what business is it of the world government to concern itself with codifying world laws , designating a world language or languages, and even defining standards in "working conditions, nutrition, health, housing, human settlements, environmental conditions, education, economic security and other conditions." It's a hellish picture of drab conformity. They even want to regulate postal services, for Pete's sake.

Free enterprise doesn't get a look-in in this ridiculous document. Our globalist would-be masters propose to own the world's water, as well as the oceans and sea-beds and even their resources. And the global tax burden is looking very burdensome indeed when you consider they plan to conduct inter-planetary and even "cosmic" explorations, if you please. They've also claimed "exclusive jurisdiction" over the Moon. Well, we can't go sharing it with the Martians I suppose. They think they're going to control the mining of fossil fuels too, along with nuclear energy and research, and essential natural resources . Control, control, control; the word is a mantra throughout the document.

You thought the communist USSR's Aeroflot airline was bad? Well global citizens intending to travel would be well-advised to wear St Christopher medals for protection because the world government plans to "establish and operate and/or co-ordinate global airlines, ocean transport systems, international railways and highways, global communications, and means for interplanetary travel and communications" . Just what the world needs: transport and communications run by one world government. Visitors to the former USSR often commented that their every query was met by a sullen "No"; or "I don't know"; or "It doesn't work." Well, we won't have to go to Russia for such exotic experiences: welcome to the NWO.

And freedom of speech? Forget it. As mentioned previously, the world university system will brook no dissent from political correctness. Now let's be fair: there WILL be procedures for initiating referenda, but only on "matters of supra-national legislation not prohibited by this World Constitution". If the right is so limited, why even bother to include it in the Constitution?

The Constitution guarantees and enforces civil liberties and human rights as defined in a Bill of Rights which is Article 12 of the document. It's clear the framers of this Constitution have no conception that among free people, governments don't grant rights to their citizens; they uphold and protect them. It's more evidence of the socialist nature of world government. By its very nature let alone structure, world government can't be anything other than socialist.

In any case, the guarantee is worthless. How can the imposition of political correctness in universities be reconciled with Article 12.3 of the Bill of Rights which is the inalienable right to "freedom of thought and conscience, speech, press, writing, communication, expression, publication, broadcasting, telecasting, and cinema, except as an overt part of or incitement to violence, armed riot or insurrection." Why the "except"? What if insurrection is a legitimate response to tyranny? Who decides what writings or speech etc constitute incitement to violence? As another example, since when has there been an inalienable right to travel without passports or visas which included in the Bill of Rights? Such a 'right' cannot be reconciled with national sovereignty.

The Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China both have wonderful constitutions guaranteeing all sorts of rights, but they're useless. This ludicrous Constitution will be the same.

The deluded souls who ratified it seem to think big business is actually going to let the rubber-stamp organs of world government "regulate and supervise" - how they love that phrase - "supra-national trade, industry, corporations, business, cartels, professional services, labor supply, finances, investments and insurance." Clearly they're clueless that corporations are already running the world with little democratic accountability, and plan to shed the last of it as soon as the world government stooges are in place.

As expected, controlling the environment - the Trojan horse of world government - features prominently in the world government's list of powers.

The language used is a giveaway to the socialist nature of the proposed world government: they plan to regulate "the development, use, conservation and re-cycling of the natural resources of the Earth as the common heritage of humanity ..." Private property rights don't look too secure alongside the notion of earth as the common heritage of humanity.

And yes, there'll be more "world" parks, wildlife preserves, natural places and wilderness areas established - in short, a massive government land grab. Tied in with the land grab, the world government will not only control population growth, but population "distribution" and migration.

The world government's stated aim is to "serve the needs of humanity in any and all ways which are now, or may prove in the future to be, beyond the capacity of national and local governments". That sentence exposes the fundamental flaw in all socialist thinking: that people are incapable of looking after themselves.

The English-speaking countries of the New World - such as the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada - were the world's best practice societies as far as freedom, opportunity and prosperity go. They achieved it through maximising individual freedom and limiting government. In the now-derided post war period, the majority of people in those countries could spend their entire lives with hardly any contact with their governments.

The fact that the words 'control', 'supervise' and 'regulate' are so frequently used in this Constitution is eloquent testimony to its authoritarian and socialist nature. If its signatories had benign intentions, they've shown themselves to be fools who have failed to note the main lesson of history: people yearn for freedom. No world government will extinguish that desire. On the contrary, it will inflame it.

To be continued.

Antonia Feitz is a senior writer for Enter Stage Right.

Current Issue

Archive Main | 2000

E-mail ESR



1996-2019, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.