The Long Term Goal of Collectivists

The longer term goal of collectivist voters, whether they've thought it through or not: If the group is more important than the individual, then groups of countries are more important than a sovereign country. Anything less than the largest possible group is an individualist (read: greedy, evil) construct. So, as they vote in collectivism, they are moving closer towards a world society where they will have no country to vote in. Just one mass of people.

How do you manage an entity the size of the entire population of the planet? With a government strong enough, and pervasive enough, to put down any rebellion, any faction. Why is this inevitable? Because there would be no alternative country/place to go. They would have to stop any discontent quickly and brutally, lest it become a movement. With separate countries and governments, they can always invite you to leave, and if you hate your current country enough you will. But when there is one world government...doomsday, or at the least every soul on the planet will give up hopes of really being free, rather than fight a system they cannot flee or defeat. Some good reading below from: http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/736969.html

www.kansascity.com | 08/06/2008 | GOLDBERG: Capitalism is the cure for what ails the world: "People ask, “Why is there poverty in the world?” It’s a silly question. Poverty is the default human condition. It is the factory preset of this mortal coil.
The interesting question isn’t “Why is there poverty?” It’s “Why is there wealth?” Or: “Why is there prosperity here but not there?”
At the end of the day, the first answer is capitalism, rightly understood. That is to say: free markets, private property, the spirit of entrepreneurialism and the conviction that the fruits of your labors are your own.
In large measure our wealth isn’t the product of capitalism, it is capitalism.
And yet we hate it. Leaving religion out of it, no idea has given more to humanity. The average working-class person today is richer, in real terms, than the average prince or potentate of 300 years ago."

Champion of the Peasants and Workers

He was champion of the peasants and workers

Brought a change of direction for his country

Denegrated the USA and called on the people to "stand up"!

I wonder if Barack will be as influential as Mao?



Of course, he did have a few extreme ideas once he was in charge, and I don't think Barack is willing to be this direct with societal changes...

Mao’s first political campaigns after founding the People’s Republic were land reform and the suppression of counter-revolutionaries, which centered on mass executions, often before organized crowds. These campaigns of mass repression targeted former KMT officials, businessmen, former employees of Western companies, intellectuals whose loyalty was suspect, and significant numbers of rural gentry. The U.S. State department in 1976 estimated that there may have been a million killed in the land reform, 800,000 killed in the counterrevolutionary campaign. Mao himself claimed a total of 700,000 killed during the years 1949–53. However, because there was a policy to select "at least one landlord, and usually several, in virtually every village for public execution", 1 million deaths seems to be an absolute minimum, and many authors agree on a figure of between 2 million and 5 million dead. In addition, at least 1.5 million people were sent to "reform through labour" camps. Mao’s personal role in ordering mass executions is undeniable. He defended these killings as necessary for the securing of power. -- source