TED Conversations

russell lester

Orchardist, Grange

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

To organize Global voting districts by watersheds

The Issues of climate change, sustainable agriculture, and environmental

hazards and habitat destruction from water pollution are all issues of great

importance. In fact potable water is a diminishing resource which has already

given rise to armed conflict.

The rise of a Global Governing body is also seen by many as a

desirable step in pursuit of Global change. How to generate or create such a

governing body without meeting fierce resistance from the existing systems is

a dilemma. We and our world cannot afford to waste time and resources in

struggles for dominance.

The creation of watershed based districts which would then elect and send

to conventions delegates where resolutions would be voted up or down rules

and penalties set enforcement arms established, representation to the higher

level of global government nominated for general election in their districts..

The fact that many of the large drainage's on the planet drain territory that

crosses state and international boundaries, would make the actions of these

watershed districts naturally weaken the perceived dependence on the nation

states.

Additionally, people who have nothing but hostility to the idea of a transnational

government or a government over powering their own,would have little or no

complaint a bout a meeting of neighbors to resolve communal issues like water

use pollution flood control and such. Even if those neighbors were from other

counties, states ,or countries. This would also link very well with the proposal

to begin widespread flood mitigation projects which I proposed elsewhere.

0
Share:

Closing Statement from russell lester

The best government would be one that was as light as the government that was in place in Amerind tribes like the Sioux, where people followed who they liked, but in a world where technology and industry have created the means of global disaster and individuals , or small groups can create WMD I think that some sensible method of dividing the world into regions and having the people in those regions represented is vital, sense we are all of one earth and all our waters join or come from the seas and the sky I think grouping by watersheds is a rapidly evolving reality that the progressive futurist literate edge should invest time in. Speaking from the lake Chelan sub district of the Columbia river watershed I wish you well

progress indicator
  • thumb

    russell lester

    • 0
    Jan 20 2012: Is there effective software to translate any post in any language to any other language?

    I would love to have a site where everything was readable by anyone.
  • thumb

    Walter Radtke

    • 0
    Jan 20 2012: Watersheds are natural boundaries and as a demographic demarcation could work in a fully conscious society but it will be an uphill struggle against the demographic demarcation created by a common language. Language is a powerful organizing tool; you want to hang out with the people you can converse with. My take is that Marx's "withering away of the state" won't come via any struggle for justice, but because of information technology. Marshal McLuhan said sixty years ago that electronic communications will create a "global village" and that village's nervous system will be the communication media. Today's Internet is doing more to break down national boundaries than any ideology ever has or could. It's instructive to note which nations are censoring the Internet. If you want a global government, give every human a laptop and a high speed connection and let it evolve according to its inherent potential rather than by the artifice of propaganda.
  • thumb

    russell lester

    • 0
    Jan 20 2012: There already exist in Montana and Oregon, sub districts organized by watershed, why not just use this existing natural and verifiable geographic boundary as the means of separating the world into districts?
  • thumb

    Walter Radtke

    • 0
    Jan 18 2012: I fear a global governing body at this stage of history because we are still experimenting with governance in the age of computer communications. Traditional governmental models are not able to keep up with the inundation of data we currently experience and are easily corrupted by those specialists and their think tank handlers who can keep up and manipulate politicians in many subtle ways. Computer communication also has the potential to eliminate the need for a republican representational form of government in favor of pure democracy where the citizens vote, not for representatives, but for policies directly. This would require a raising of education levels, but this could also come about quickly due to computer technology.

    Humanity is still in its laboratory or petri dish phase and needs room to experiment in autonomous ways. If country A fails in its policy to handle immigrants, for example, the other countries learn from this and don't follow suit. With a global governance, we face the risk of a seemingly workable policy being globally instituted and if it proves harmful, the entire planet suffers. There are no checks and balances. Try to imagine a global government run by Nazis.
    • thumb

      russell lester

      • 0
      Jan 20 2012: I think that the best of both worlds, the existing National Governments and a step towards global government can be served with my idea, if the Watershed district was above the level of the state but not as powerful as a nation. I trust in people more than I once did , and so I am ready to see what comes of a global organization. I hope that you and I can talk more.
Showing all 5 comments