Does he actually think it's a good idea to have a borderless world why the fuck is he doing this?

Does he actually think it's a good idea to have a borderless world why the fuck is he doing this?

He wants the IMF to be the world government. National independence and identity get in the way of that, that's why both he and Madeleine Ablright work to destroy Russia (thankfully, both their foundations were recently banned in Russia, which is also considering the Orthodox Financial System, an alternative to the IMF).

He wants people to be stupid and hedonistic, he literally wants nothing more than Idiocracy, because that is good for markets.

No borders anywhere means they can sell their products to everyone everywhere without a hassle.

Don't forget, it's racist to not allow Israel to still have its own borders!

hes just some senile delusion mega rich guy

hes gonna die real soon so who cares about him

He looks like death but his 85 given his large amounts of wealth he could live quite a bit longer but I hope not.

>666

and yeah it's pretty fucked he'd want this all for business even though he will die soon enough and could have all the money he ever needs.

>he's gonna die real soon

>implying all these fuckers don't get their brains preserved to be revived by their allies once the technology exists whereas we are all erased forever when we die

also what if his children carry on what he is trying to do as long as these bastards can have kids this will never end.

>and yeah it's pretty fucked he'd want this all for business even though he will die soon enough and could have all the money he ever needs.
You don't understand his mentality. He's not just some greedy scoundrel, he's like Iago. He carries grudges against countries that don't kowtow to neoliberal hegemony, and he does what he does for spite perhaps even more than profit.

>the I'm too poor to sign up for cryonics meme
Just do it. Sign up with Alcor and pay for it with Life Insurance. Only $30 per month.

He's son will carry on his work, so will his "foundation" which has spent several billion dollars furthering his goals.

He wants a borderless world for every white country. And never would want it for Israel.

>pay a bunch of money
>get revived in 100 years
>wake up to 500,000 population and become a slave for the globalist elites

Sure, sounds like a great time!

Rockefeller is 100. Old George has another decade at least.

>not becoming a male succubus for the throngs of God's chosen
>not being paraded through their harem as a pleasure object
Or idk, just get a boat and live on the seas.

A borderless world will be great when it happens

>destroying all non-globalist culture would be great
Come again?

soros and albright just happen to be jewish

We are one species coming together to advance our collective goals

>Madeleine Albright is a co-investor with Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild and George Soros, in a $350 million investment vehicle called Helios Towers Africa, which intends to buy or build thousands of mobile phone towers in Africa.[92][93]

>In late October 2012, during a book signing in the Prague bookstore Palác Knih Luxor, Albright was visited by a group of activists from the Czech organization "Přátelé Srbů na Kosovu". She was filmed saying "Disgusting Serbs, get out!" to the Czech group, which had brought war photos to the signing, some of which showed Serbian victims of the Kosovo War in 1999. The protesters were expelled from the event when police arrived. Two videos of the incident were later posted by the group on their YouTube channel.[103][104]

>borderless world
>no nation
>one culture
>one language
>one race
>no war
It's objectively the best world but I definitely don't want to live in that world

We're not, however, the Borg,

He's doing it because he regrets helping the Nazi's and thinks the only way to combat radical nationalism and prevent another Holohox is to create s globalist world.

Except for Israel. They can stay a nation state.

Basically he's punishing Germany, Russia, and the World for his greedy choices as a teenager.

>the Last Man is objectively the best of all possible worlds
Read Notes from Underground

What are you trying to say with that overquoting ? Can't you make your point without acting like a pretentious scrub ?

I don't think he has any political stake in any of this to be honest, like I think he uses neoliberalism as a means to an ends, but those ends I don't doubt go beyond profit.
also Russia is so red-pilled that it's hilarious, hopefully anti-Russian propaganda will stop working within the next few years, considering they're reaching out to all of us.

Honestly I've beginning to wonder: what is the inevitable fate of humanity now that we have planes, the internet, etc.? It seems more and more likely that we are destined to become a global society, with some sort of homogenous culture at some point, whether or not the globalists push for it. Just look at Sup Forums: we have people all over the world generally spouting the same bullshit, crossing so many borders.

I'm not sure the average person sees a one-culture world as an inherent disadvantage, despite their ironic praise of diversity.

Hippie, but even if you were right it wouldn't work long-term for a number of reasons, unless your thinking of a minimal state, which would be fine

It's objectively the worst possible world. Rather live in total anarchy where I have to defend myself with guns from raiders than that fucking nightmare.

It's like in an episode of the X files where Mulder wishes for peace on Earth and a genie just gets rid of all people.

What kind of horrible overreach will be required to make us all into one compliant blob?

I'm not trying to be pretentious, I told you to read it because I think you would like it

People like Trump and Putin and Assad are working against it. People in Europe are growing more and more angry at globalists. It's not unstoppable.

David Rockefeller openly admires Mao Zedong's vision of society. I don't know about you, but that isn't the world I want to live in. Especially since we aren't in the banking cartel club which gets to rule over the unwashed masses. Everybody will be *equal, equal in slavery (*some animals are more equal than others, especially the ones with dynastic bloodlines).

Protip; this is how these guys think.

Who the fuck knows, I think Soros-esque globalization only started once everything was discovered.

Because anyone who wants to rule over the entire world that isn't God is probably a satanic bloodsucker

Onnhh

The world would just become like India where the lighter people rule and the darker people shit in the streets.

He doesn't care. Watch the world burn from an ivory tower, you're still in an ivory tower. These people will never feel the repercussions of their ideas, just the profits.
And they do it all through banking systems, did you ever wonder why presidential candidates and political figures that stand up to central banks get killed or laughed off as crazy assholes by the media?

Soros really doesn't look that bad for his age, most people's faces look like they're melting by that age, his is just kind of saggy and his eyes are red.

I'm Jewish and I can't figure out why Jews want to destroy European civilization. It doesn't make any sense, Muslims want us all dead.

>We're not, however, the Borg,
Not yet, but I'm sure we can fix that in the future.

Jews have a much greater anxiety toward (non-Jewish) nationalism than Islam. That is why Israel has strict laws about immigration, but the ADL will lobby relentlessly for open boarders everywhere else without criticizing Israel.

>People like Trump and Putin and Assad are working against it.
>People like Trump
Trump didn't say shit about central banking until the audit the fed vote got media attention. I think Trump has done a good job of opposing globalists but let's not fantasize about him being against central banking.

No, the world will be like one giant USSR or North Korea. Maybe you might get arrested, for pointing out holy water is actually poo, like you do in India though. But India doesn't have the kind of total domination over its people a globalist system requires.

Im a far right winger against borders
You dont need borders to protect against immigration
Just dont accept, shoot and banish ones that come,
Why would you let the jew divide you

>It's objectively the worst possible world
With our point of view of course it's a shitty world. But wouldn't it be better for humanity in long term ? Wouldn't it prevent conflicts ? Why would people be angry about ? They have nothing to be angry about since everybody it's pretty much like them.
I might take a look but I can't get what you mean right now then.
>I don't know about you, but that isn't the world I want to live in
Neither do I but I try to understand the globalist point of view and as I said higher it might be better for humanity in a whole.

How does that make you feel that there are special interests groups bent on your destruction while preserving theirs the best they can?

Georgia!

I'm just talking about who would rule. It seems that the lighter skin races rule every country they're in.

That's the end game.

>He wants people to be stupid and hedonistic, he literally wants nothing more than Idiocracy, because that is good for markets.
This. It's as obvious as hell that most of the worlds population isn't up to speed with the demands of a first world workforce, they just wan't a flood of idiots to bring everything down a peg or two.

#notalljews

Honestly though it's just some elite zionists that favor each other, I don't suspect some Jews from Brooklyn with conspiring to corrupt civilization.

I always assumed that the Holocaust protected them, since they could pull the anti-semitism card whenever they were criticized.

>But wouldn't it be better for humanity in long term
No, resisting globalism doesn't mean choosing ridiculous jingoism

"the nation state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony"

But is it really because of purposely pushing them down, or are people inherently too stupid to adapt fast enough to the modern technological workplace?

A small elite band of oligarchs rule the world in a globalist system. But you're right, most of them would be ((((white))))

He prepares the world stage for a race war. Funds insurgents and rebellious NGOs

Like that's how the world has always been. I'm a Christian, and I think that's wrong, but the world is in a fallen state and that is how it will always operate until Kingdom Come.

A borderless world means the largest possible employee base for the lowest possible wages.

What else would you expect from a Jew?

>conflict is (((our))) brand

Nothing is inevitable. Globalisation happens because we allow it.

its his interpretation of the boss' will

100 years of constant war even if its proxy wars and false flags or state sponsored funded and planned terrorism and keeping people stupid doing stupid things, or when they get a clue, utterly chained (to a job) and / or useless socially and physically (disabled)

But what would the world look like if we try to stave off globalization after we've reached this point of everyday international communication? It would feel almost artificial to me to pretend that people all around the world don't connect in cultural experience that now supersede our borders.

I like the idea of so many different cultures, but I wonder how many of them can be preserved at this point. It's like introducing a super efficient organism into an ecosystem filled with creatures that don't adapt quickly. Through the internet, Western culture will eradicate those smaller cultures that cannot compete.

For the advancement of humans as a species, homogenization is inevitable. There are only conceivable paths than humans can take to attain what could be seen as long term progress.

>separation
Rapid globalization via forced migration and strong federal governments. The global elite separate into what could be seen as a modern man. A true form of humans that will go on to see genetic engineering and planetary colonization over the span of hundreds of thousands of years. While the common man, bred to be as simple and easy to control as possible, becomes a device. A modern mule in juxtaposition to the true human form. They will likely be abandoned once the rest take to the stars, or more likely the ocean before the stars.

>communization
Slowly, and boy do I mean slowly, humans progress naturally, likely through a very diminished population from wars, else resources become a specific issue. Homogenization occurs over time, giving man the base he needs to begin proper delves into genetic and other technological advances needed to progress. Not only is this method very slow compareatively, but it also involves completely dismantling our current system, inventing some new one that we have yet to even begin to conceive (not a single system we have now works, we'd need something like a committee based technocracy). This all seems very far from plausible.

The former however, obvious assumes the global elite have any end-game beyond "world domination". Yes, it's possibly as simple as the old school Bond-villain folley...but we can only hope otherwise.
This is how I realized the NWO is the only way for humans to reach the stars. I think I might write a book about it.

100 whit a new fresh young hearth

>Neither do I but I try to understand the globalist point of view and as I said higher it might be better for humanity in a whole.

I rather choose freedom and independence. In my opinion, the ideal global political system would be a decentralized one: Anarcho-syndicalism. A vast global network of localized unions bound together by contracts and trade negotiations.

Unfortunately, we're heading in the opposite direction with unelected bureaucrats in Brussels forcing authoritarian policies, drafted in the background by corporate lawyers and bankers, on the working class. They are trying the top-down, hierarchical, cultural revolutionary approach instead of allowing for a more organic integration. This is already proving to be inefficient and unwieldly, especially while it pretends to be democratic. It cannot sustain itself and will collapse in time.

He's Jewish

Of course he wants no borders and no nations he wants Jews to rule over a planet populated by their brown slave race

This is such a top notch thread but its 3:30 AM

In the long term it would be disastrous as the only natural selection would be against anyone intelligent or brave enough to fight back.

Look at the multigenerational families on welfare- what has that done to the fitness of their genes in just a few short generations?

There is another, third conceivable path but it is as unlikely as the second. Something along the lines of

>competitive rise
Strong national ideals lead individual nations towards advancements in technologies as quickly as humans can attain them. However, from experience and logical rhetoric, it can be assumed that most research will begin and end with weapons and defense systems before all else, with some minor regard in the private sector towards medical longevity for the highest-up of the respective nations.

1:30 AM faggot

>flyover country

I did it too bro. But I'm fat so it's $50/month. Still worth it.

He should start by stripping away his skin.

I've been thinking about this a lot too lately, and I think many people are beginning to realize that in order for humanity to "progress" in any sci-fiesque manner, being either genetic technology, sea/space exploration, massively extended lifespans, etc. the world needs to be reworked from the ground up. The way I see it, it could be done either through some huge people's revolution (the "good" way), or it can be done somewhat maliciously via a NWO controlled by the elites (the "bad" way). But regardless of how things unfold, it's become clear to me that humanity is due for a reset of sorts, intellectually, politically, philosophically, and (hopefully not) physically (which would be something like the 500k thing NWOers talk about).

Planetary expansion could be done with a status quo of nation, naturally, especially with an economic incentive.

There is no need to "unify humanity" to achieve this.

>They have nothing to be angry about since everybody it's pretty much like them.

And yet, violence is of all ages, even within borders, even within cultures, even within races, within provinces, within cities, within families.

People will always find a divide to fight over, unless you lobotomize the lot of them. And you are mad if you don't think some regions will not be vastly richer than others, and this will not lead to conflict. No, the only thing destroying nations and cultures will lead to is that people will not find a common cause to rally behind to fight opressive regimes when they will eventually rear their ugly heads.

>why the fuck is he doing this?

Satan.

We are at a point of establishment that has never yet even been conceived.

Until we become Earth, we are stuck with "The United States" and "China" and "Russia". It's not going to change from this apart from minor things like the Balkans. We are already heading down the path of separation, and I wouldn't doubt there are winds of discussion within very rich circles about offshore communities or things of the like.

Personally I'd almost rather humans advance as quickly as possible, as opposed to a "desirable" manner (all humans considered, slow and arduous process, almost a natural advancement). I don't see humans having the right sort of average nature to attain that. That's partially just my outlook on it though, molded by my perspective of the world. We are more likely to kill ourselves off, warring to figure out how to approach progression than to actually achieve any of it. A separation method sadly is so much more efficient, and would utilize all potential technological paths so well that it cannot be ignored.

The only potential advantage of a communization as opposed to separation would be an innate prevention of corruption and the sheer capacity for workload that comes with raw numbers.

Holy fuck is it a gene that makes these subhumans so ugly?

That is sincerely disagreeable; see I for one do not disagree that it is a desirable method of progression, but I cannot for one moment think that it would be efficient whatsoever. The nature of international competition is a very powerful driving force that yes, should never be ignored. But one cannot ignore for a single moment the outcomes of having so many separate nations on the planet causes. The amount of perspectives gained is valuable in and of itself, but that is not something that disappears when you eliminate the names of countries.

I have a very inherent desire to have pride in a country, a fellow man. But I am beginning to realize that feeling is something that needs to be so overwhelming in future man that we can actually achieve things. It needs to be a feeling to strive to advance humankind, not just your immediate family's kind. I certainly dislike most random people, but I know within my heart that the future of humans can be brighter than it seems to be approaching.

Well you had people arriving in Europe from Africa who didn't know how to use a toilet so they're hardly useful to any kind of manufacturer. I think the thing is Soros and his friends have proven that they're inept, inbred cunts who are not only useless but bloodthirsty as well.

All of your thought processes here are thinking about zero-sum solutions: I win or you lose, I survive or you die, either I am top predator/parasite or you are.

There are other solutions, nonzero ones: where I win and you win, and if you lose I lose as well. Nonzero mutual benefit is the basis of our civilization and species itself. It has roots in biology just as deep as predator/parasite: in symbiosis, in the structure of our own bodies.

The "end of history," the end of war comes when nonzero logic has beaten zerosum logic in the most important spheres of humanity. We have the means to do this, and have had it for more than a century. We haven't achieved it because old habits die hard, and some of our most basic thinking is still caught-up in the ancient logic of "I survive or you do."

Imagine a world in which a billion people all fulfill their potential as human beings. We've come so far with only a small fraction of humanity achieving such, what if it were a majority? The amount of innovation and production would make the current world seem like the stone age in comparison. Everyone, the whole sum of humanity would benefit. The cost is relative power: I can no longer rule over starving people scraping the Earth in desparation to survive, as they are now roughly equal in their ability to control their life as me.

This is the future we are headed towards now. al the conflict we see now culturally is a sign of us collectively hard at work trying to find the solutions to create this future.

Try to visualize a world where mutual benefit absolutely rules.

Very young organs transplanted into very old systems. Weakened, seventy year old capillaries receiving blood pressure from an eighteen-year old heart from a motorcycle accident will cause a lot of visibility of blood vessels and a lot of blushing / red corneas.

I'd bet their fingertips and toes are bright red as well as around their eyes and face.

I don't really disagree. To keep globalisation at bay would be to become Best Korea.
Still, though, this current globalisation brings with it a taste of malice

>You must accept useless fugees
>You must repent for sins of people 200 years in the past who share your skin colour

But far worse

>You must destroy this part of your culture that other cultures find offensive

This sort of thing should be fought.

No, I do not think in zero-sums or absolutes.

I think in the very long term. I don't question the logistics of the next thousand years, because that's something we can only focus on after we determine the paths that humanity has before it.

People like yourself are important for the logistics, and people like myself are important for the insight. Humans produce many different types of minds; one of it's most intrinsically amazing concepts.

Has anyone of you, rednecks, actually looked into the open society theory?

Soros does not want Israel to be an exception.

Soros does not want to have a world government and is far more antigovernment than yo ns ethatist fags

Actually countries who are against him are North Korea, Syria, Russia, Iran and other third world dictator shit holes where ppl have no rights.

>Imagine a world in which a billion people all fulfill their potential as human beings.

People don't do this in the West. Perhaps even contrary to it, in many cases. Your beliefs are built on a sheltered delusion that weed smokers and fat asses down the street are anything but.

>I think the thing is Soros and his friends have proven that they're inept, inbred cunts who are not only useless but bloodthirsty as well.
This is what concerns me.

Is it really a matter of simplistic greed and opportunism? Or do these people actually have a greater understanding of anthropology and workings of international interactions that could provide a basis for proper guidance of advancement?

It's doubtful that they are the right ones. It's very easy to think that we are at a point where nothing can be done about it. Discerning what can be done is the one part that needs true discourse.

Or maybe even just transparency? But I doubt it'd be easy for them to come out and say "yeah we are doing it for the future of man" without seeming unauthentic.

That's why he is running education programs in the third world. He never stated that we are currently ready for open borders.

Technically he's not anti-government.

He's anti-government intervention. Which means he just wants to be the governing body.

"Politicians will respect, rather than manipulate, reality only if the public cares about the truth and punishes politicians when it catches them in deliberate deception."
-George Soros on The Open Society Theory

It's obviously very difficult to discern the authenticity of this statement and viewpoint. There's many situations a person could allude to that could be seen as evidence of a hypocritical nature regarding Soros and this opinion of his. A part of me hopes he realizes the importance of being earnest...

If globalism were allowed to happen naturally from local communities upwards instead of being an act of coercion and exploitation from the top down, then this wouldn't be a problem. I don't think creating superstates should be the next goal of international unity, let alone a forced one. Some of these old Marxist Boomers are so idealistic that they want to see results before they die, but they're going to make things worse for everybody in the process by forcing through integration that is premature to say the least. What I'm suggesting would be slow, taking many lifetimes, but it would be stable.

Seeking political unity through multinational corporate agreements like TPP and financial practices by central banks is also deeply flawed. Corporations and finance houses should never have been allowed to get as powerful as they are.

That explains why the stupid cunts are doing their best to circumvent national borders everywhere then doesn't it, I think they're past it. Maybe they are in fact insane.

>why the fuck is he doing this?
Cause he's a piece-of-shit kike.

Many, many times there was vehement and violent opposition to privatized, unchecked banks and rampant taxation.

Things like the World Wars, you know?

The winners get to dictate perceptions though. So here we are.

$0.02 has been deposited into your Correct the Record account

>boarder-less World
But wouldn't that eliminate tax havens?

Not really related but I feel like we're already so connected that we will never see another 'conventional' war, what are the chances of another military conscription ever happening?

0, right? How could they justify training and sending mass people who don't want to go when there is so much technology they could utilise (and possibly coscript us to make). Back in the day they could justify not nuking because they didn't understand them but these days any country could wipe any other country off the face of the earth remotely if they really wanted to and had enough support.

I don't give a fuck what's in that twisted head of his -- I just want it off his neck.

For the super-rich, sure.

But the ultra-mega-rich who run the taxing, will be fine.

We are approaching an age which does not distinguish between corporations and governing bodies. They act in the same interest.

He wants slaves for Molech.

Actually, the Global Elite are the makers of a cult that involves the beheading of Moloch in a ritual bull-hunt.

I believe The endgame for The elites is to reduce global population to half A billion. They are going to do this because mist people on Earth serve no purpose and is merely a drain on resources, this will become abundantly clear when advanced automation of production gets going. There will still be a need for a servant class of humans though, Asians won't do since they are too smart, equal in intelligence to the Jewish elite, whites won't do either since they too are smart but more importantly we look too much like the "masters". The servants will need to look distinctly different from them so they never forget their place. Blacks unfortunately are too stupid and violent so a hybrid is needed, that's what they are trying to do in Europe and America, breed a hybrid servant class of people. How the culling of global population will occur is still unclear, one would think the elites would want to avoid all out war which would destroy important infrastructure etc, more plausible is that they will develop a genetically modified virus that will be able to target specific gene types, only the new interracial hybrids will be spared, and those who have already been vaccinated.