: Really excellent play on words, hobie! Thank you

(I can't take credit for originating it, but you're welcome. :)

: [Bond says] "...we must begin to plan for a global government
: that is DEMOCRATICALLY CONSTITUTED
: AND REPRESENTED BY ALL NATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF ALL PEOPLE, no
: matter what religion, race or color they are born into. Then
: and only then, with the over-control of a democratic global
: government, will our planet experience peace and good will
: among men and women - the brotherhood of man."

: To me, he sounds like he is advocating the global government

: which is even now being promoted under the dubious auspices
: of the communistic UN! And there is a difference in a
: democracy, which is majority rule..yes, majority rule by a
: small elite minority who rules the majority!

Yeah, I understand your concern - and possibly that _is_ what he's talking about - but he might be talking about something more along lines of what Exclarmondes suggesting, too.

That is, as a way to describe it:

Let's say all human beings had a functional, literal, conscious-mind-included, aware connection with the reality back of the word God.

If that were the case, those individual and aware connections would constitute a "unifying element" that hasn't been present in human beings for a very long time - and so everything would change on that basis.

What we're describing is a world situation in which both free will and individuality are present fully, but at the same time there's a unifying thread present in the world that human beings comprise, create, and manage - a world in which, for once, we're not "drones" or "cogs in the machine of State", but real people with our own thoughts and feelings and interests - but in which compassion is our first flush of feeling, instead of greed or corporatism; in which sanctity of life is in first position, instead of a profit imperative; in which cooperative co-creation is our first thought, rather than competition for presumed scarce slices of the pie.

In other words, the unifying thread would produce: agreement.

Maybe, as Esclarmonde points out, nothing even resembling "government" would be around at that point - and yet, it could as easily prove true that we'd find it _useful_ to have some sort of "oversight service agency", a place where things could find their focus and be coordinated to work out in most fitting fashion.

This sort of "government" could be as simple as having a few folks whose job it is to "see more broadly" while most of us have our heads down in the needed details of things - someone who could have the job of saying, "Oh, you know what? Charlie would be really useful on that project; you guys probably don't know Charlie since he lives quite a distance from you, but I know him - let me give him a call and see if he wants to 'play' on this."

I'm not saying this is what Mr. Bond is envisioning - I get a sense he has something a little more 'disciplined' in mind - but it might be what he's thinking of.

I do question whether the word "democracy" as we've come to view it today has any place in it - but if all he's intending by that word is "people matter and should have a voice and a way to provide input into the processes that affect their world", then I don't think I'd disagree with the sentiment.

However - we're talking about all this from a standpoint of doing our best to _imagine_ how it would be if each human being had an operational "direct line" to the same Divine Source. We can be pretty sure our imaginings are less than accurate versions of what it truly would be (will be?) like in fact. Regardless of the accuracy of our imaginings, "Reality bats last" and will prove itself out. :)