TED Conversations

David Hubbard

This conversation is closed.

Does anyone think that we can have an efficient, peaceful world?

I think it is possible for the population of the internet, which is over 38% of the population of planet Earth, to collectively design and demand a change in the manner that we are governed. We now have the ability to create a new system, by the people, for the people, worldwide.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jul 26 2013: I think, we can. But not before we are very seriously threatened for extinction. And I think this new efficient and peaceful model will not be one huge community, driven by one huge network, controlled by one huge corporation or guided by one 'son of man'. Rather it will be self sufficient city-villages, numerous in number and connected to each other through physical and virtual networks of all kinds. There will be no countries or geo-political boundaries.
    • thumb
      Jul 26 2013: Hello Pabitra. We are very seriously threatened with extinction. I agree. an effective global community can not be under any controls other than the specific and expressed will of the people. Perhaps one world order is inevitable if we are to survive. Let's get together and vote it in .
      • thumb
        Jul 26 2013: I am all for it David. You have my vote. But our evolutionary race is like a kayaking expedition through the fiercest of rapids. I don't think, when we go off the cliff, we cannot have the time to vote to decide the life saving decisions.
    • thumb
      Jul 27 2013: Well Pabitra with your statement...............'There will be no countries or geo-political boundaries.' would one be correct to assume you are an advocate of the 'New World Order' that many fear?

      Btw I can't see any 'One World' without the destruction/removal of most of the existing third world cultural practices and all the planets religions.

      Somewhat like in Lennon;s drug stupor inspired 'Imagine'.

      And I can't see that happening anytime soon.

      Show me a politician that is going to advocate giving up his countries sovereignty and you have a ousted politician.

      ie: after the fall of the USSR every country fought to have their own identity back and then look what happened after Tito died in Yugoslavia.

      How many of you Guys still have the 'Free Tibet' stickers on your Suby?
      • thumb
        Jul 28 2013: No it will be wrong to assume that I am an advocate of of the New World Order fluff, particularly of the Rockefeller kind. I think that's a petty conspiracy theory.
        What I said is what I think the world will evolve into politically, socially and economically as we deplete our resource pool, consume and waste without a limit and what can happen as Rockstrom's planetary boundaries for life support systems of earth are irreversibly transgressed.
        I think it is only a matter of time before the infinite growth bubble bursts. Countries that have lost controls to corporations and profit machines are already in the death throes, economically. This economic model will die a petri dish death eventually. I don't believe in infinite squeezing of earth's resources through technological innovation.
        The ultimate possibilities are two:
        1. An environmental collapse.
        2. A new order of living and survival where geo-political boundaries will melt as of a necessity.
        My estimate is 100 years from now, which can be wrong of course.
        [This comment was posted inadvertently in the name of my son who was logged on in facebook and I did not check before posting.]

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.