Thread: How to obtain world peace?

I mean, we do eat bananas...

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

I mean, we do eat bananas...

Yes, the atheist's worst nightmare.

I agree if we every do obtain world peace, we would together make technology beyond imagination. But wouldn't that lead to more battles across the galactic? I mean we worked together to make technology....we could easily work together to destroy.

You still have to take into account of having to develope a whole new system of economics, and the fact that not evrybody wants to be united together. It is a near impossible idea that would take MANY years to achieve.

Atras, if you want to obtain world peace you will need to:
1. Fill every person's needs. Every person on earth.
2. Educate every person on earth so we'll learn that we are equal, and we don't have to be better that anyone.
3. DESTROY ALL MONEY! The elders call it "the eye of devil" for a reason...
4. perfect parenting and school.
to better understand me watch this awsome movie: ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD | OFFICIAL RELEASE | 2011 - YouTube

Originally Posted by pichulick

Atras, if you want to obtain world peace you will need to:
4. perfect parenting and school.

Define "perfect". Your definition will not be the same as mine, I bet

perfect parentin- teaching kids the true human nature, not bloking their progress with:"it's meant to be like that" or "because this is normal" or " you can't do that". to teach the kids not to be egoists, and greedy, etc. not to speak of child abuse...
And schools must invest a lot in education, they need to teach kids DISCIPLINE, because a kid cannot learn if he is threatened by other mean kids, and so on... you know the stuff...

Originally Posted by pichulick

Atras, if you want to obtain world peace you will need to:
1. Fill every person's needs. Every person on earth.

What if someones need is to kill and hurt other people?

There are varying opinions on "true human nature" though. Some say it was God, some say man is here after a series of events that brought rise to life on earth.

I think first we should strive for a sustainable world before a peaceful one, though. We have far greater need to achieve sustainability than peace at the moment!

Originally Posted by Unelias

What if someones need is to kill and hurt other people?

I think he means needs as in basic necessities; food, water, shelter, sanitation, healthcare, etc.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

There are varying opinions on "true human nature" though. Some say it was God, some say man is here after a series of events that brought rise to life on earth.

I think first we should strive for a sustainable world before a peaceful one, though. We have far greater need to achieve sustainability than peace at the moment!

I think sustainability will bring some level of peace. But I agree, one step at a time.

Originally Posted by pichulick

perfect parentin- teaching kids the true human nature, not bloking their progress with:"it's meant to be like that" or "because this is normal" or " you can't do that". to teach the kids not to be egoists, and greedy, etc. not to speak of child abuse...
And schools must invest a lot in education, they need to teach kids DISCIPLINE, because a kid cannot learn if he is threatened by other mean kids, and so on... you know the stuff...

I agree. But parenting needs to be completely reformed. Parents shouldn't just teach kids whats right and wrong, but they need to teach them to understand it. Saying, don't do this or you will be punished may make the kids not do it, but they still may think its ok. You can't destroy ideas with threats, you can only temporarily suppress them. Also parents need to not be afraid of letting kids experience the world as it is. Parents like to trap their kids in a little bubble because they wan't to protect them, but that's a mistake. The kids are gonna face the real world eventualy, better they face it while they have someone to look after them and be there for them then when they're their on their own. Also, parents shouldn't be afraid of letting their kids make mistakes. Mistakes are what create progress. WE learn from our mistakes and do better the next time. Kids need to learn the real consequences of their mistakes, not the fake ones where parents say "if you do this you're grounded". Parents need to stop being so authoritarian and act more as a mentor who helps kids grow, not just tells them what to do.

Also, the typical thing parents say is "you may not understand or like it now, but later on when you're an adult you will understand why I'm doing this" is not always a good argument. Kids need to understand, and I know its very hard to get kids to understand, but you have to try. Just saying I can do whatever I want because they're not gonna understand anyways isn't good. It should be a goal to help kids learn to understand, not just blindly accept. And also I think religion shouldn't be shoved down kids throats. Parents can teach their kids about religion and tell them about their religion, but nothing should be shoved down their throats and kids should have as much as a choice and opinion about religion as their parents do. They shouldn't be forced into believing a religion. That only makes kids accept things more blindly which is what causes a lot of ignorance in the world.

I agree with all what you say Atras.

I have read most of these posts, but not all...

Put simply, my view would be: create a society built to improve itself.

To explain that further: an idea similar to pichulick's where from a young age, people are brought up with Buddhist-like beliefs of self improvement and inner peace and also taught the importance of 'do unto others...'
Not to put myself on a pedestal, but I like to think that I do what's right, because it's right.

A society needs to be created where everyone did what they knew was right, because they wanted to, and not because they'd be punished if they didn't.

Originally Posted by TheSkies

I have read most of these posts, but not all...

Put simply, my view would be: create a society built to improve itself.

To explain that further: an idea similar to pichulick's where from a young age, people are brought up with Buddhist-like beliefs of self improvement and inner peace and also taught the importance of 'do unto others...'
Not to put myself on a pedestal, but I like to think that I do what's right, because it's right.

A society needs to be created where everyone did what they knew was right, because they wanted to, and not because they'd be punished if they didn't.

Completely agree. And just as you said, not to be arrogant or anything, but I always try to do whats right because its right. And people from a young age need to not only learn that, but understand it.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

I'd say destroy all humans, but then the monkeys would probably develop politics...

They already have war in parental primates.

You got two kinds of primates, tournament and parental. Humans are inbetween. Tournament species have large males that migrate between groups of females. They females raise the children of the best mate they can find, the male has indiscriminate sex with anything that moves. Parental primates have the females migrating between groups while the males raise the babies. Because the males are all related, they're less competitive with each other and more competitive with other groups of males.

The only way for world peace is for every single government in the world to be a Nationalist government, there would be peace both within and between nations.

Originally Posted by Thatperson

The only way for world peace is for every single government in the world to be a Nationalist government, there would be peace both within and between nations.

People will stop waging war against people who are strongly different from themselves and promote it with pride? Like Nazi Germany did. As did most of the other civilizations before it?

EDIT : There could most likely never be a single government. There are too much of people and too much of differences between them. Also, scars of history run deep. Beside, I doubt that kind of goverment would not last long. If all the people of the world would be its citizens... I can imagine the bureucrachy...

Germany wasn't Nationalist, it was national socialist.

Why would a nationalist government invade another country? It would be a waste of money that could be used to improve their own nation. Plus it would be against the principle of interfering with other nations affairs.

We need a dictator and thats me!! FORWARD FELLOW SOLDIERS OF THE SWEDISH EMPIRE!!!!!

Appe96 : You are couple hundred years late.

Thatperson : Of nationalism

It can also include the belief that the state is of primary importance, or the belief that one state is naturally superior to all other states. It is also used to describe a movement to establish or protect a 'homeland' (usually an autonomous state) for an ethnic group. In some cases the identification of a national culture is combined with a negative view of other races or cultures

Too bad this is how it usually works.
For Nazi Germany, the main tool of Hitler and the leading organs of the nation was to use German heritage and ancestry to fuel the nation. Hatred was focused on non-German races. Nationalism was the main propaganda for both WW1 and WW2 and many wars before that.

Why would a nationalist government invade another country? It would be a waste of money that could be used to improve their own nation. Plus it would be against the principle of interfering with other nations affairs.

Wars are essentially always waste of money, if you look it that way. People have waged bigger wars for less and for longer periods. Besides, what if wars are started to ensure the greatness of nation? I have doubts that principle of interfering would stop that. People who ride on the high horse have seldom patience or understanding for those who are trampled below.

If all nations were heavy nationalistic then conflict were sure to arise. "We" are superior but "you" are not.

Originally Posted by Thatperson

Germany wasn't Nationalist, it was national socialist.

Why would a nationalist government invade another country? It would be a waste of money that could be used to improve their own nation. Plus it would be against the principle of interfering with other nations affairs.

Nationalism does not equal peace. I don't think you completely understand what nationalism is if you think it will lead to peace. It was Germany's nationalism that lead to the holocaust. It's the US's nationalism that is keeping us in a never ending war and has caused us to engage in so many wars in the past. It's North Koreas nationalism that makes them constantly threatening other countries with nuclear war. It's the intense nationalism in the middle east, especially in Iran, that fuels their hate for Israel. Nationalism involves a superiority complex. IT does not mean that a country just concerns itself with itself and ignores everyone else. Nationalism doesn't necessarily guarantee war, but it DEFINITELY does not guarantee peace. One of the most important uses of history is to learn from our mistakes so that we don't make them again. Well, from looking at history, more times than not nationalism has lead to violence, not peace.

The US is hardly nationalist. If it was it wouldn't give billions in foreign aid to Israel and others. A nationalist country wouldn't bow down to the Israeli lobby. In the UK for instance, it was the non-nationalist parties that took us into, and continue to maintain our position in foreign wars, whereas the Nationalist party (BNP) would withdraw us. Interference into other countries is a threat to peace, so not interfering with other countries is what will bring world peace.

Originally Posted by Thatperson

The US is hardly nationalist. If it was it wouldn't give billions in foreign aid to Israel and others. A nationalist country wouldn't bow down to the Israeli lobby. In the UK for instance, it was the non-nationalist parties that took us into, and continue to maintain our position in foreign wars, whereas the Nationalist party (BNP) would withdraw us. Interference into other countries is a threat to peace, so not interfering with other countries is what will bring world peace.

Are you kidding, the US is very nationalist. I live there, I would know. The only reason we give foreign aid to Israel is to protect our interests in the middle east, considering that Israel is one of the only non-Arab countries there. The US never gives foreign aid because of the kindness of their hearts, there is always something in it for them. And just because a country gives foreign aid does not mean at all that it isn't nationalistic. Nationalistic countries are allowed to have allies also. Speaking of Israel, Israel is also a very nationalistic nation, a nation that is constantly fighting with the Palestinians. And thats great that the BNP wants to withdraw from war, but things become a lot different when a country actually BECOMES a nationalist state. Obviously no political party is going to say that they wanna be warlike. But alot of times it does happen when countries become too nationalistic. And like I said before, nationalism doesn't guarantee war, but it definetely does not guarantee peace.