citizens of EU member states - what do you think of galileo GPS competitor?

[LittleGrizzly]

and while you may think that i fear you will find few people rallying behind your call for a post-sovereign world order.

I don't think many people do want one world goverment...

because it is MY government, formed from people with whom i have a shared history, which informs the many shared values and cultural norms, and ultimately leads to a similar world-view and thus decision
making process.

I don't see what's any majorly different about ours and europeans, of course there are slight differences but you can't tell me that someone living in london has more in common with some farmer loiving right at the top of scotland than someone living in paris...

because of this I consent to be governed by my peers, and most importantly i accept the consequences of the actions taken in my name.

Well the actions would be taken in your name regardless of you consenting or not...

what is wrong with the view that your government has betrayed you if it gives away the cratos which the demos bestowed upon it to an unrelated third party without seeking the consent of the people?

The people knew the goverment were pro eu and still they won all the seats if alot of people were that worried then surely they would show it with thier vote...

they are not all the same by any stretch of the imagination, and how is it logically possible for you to have more clout if you are veered away from your desired position by an enforced consensus dictat?!?!?

Imagine Liverpool withdrew from britian. Because Liverpools foriegn and domestic policy is now decided by only 100,000 people these people have much more say in thier goverments actions, but much less clout. Imagine if you will a goverment does something bad and various rich western goverments are threatening sanctions... and then comes the threat from liverpool... not much clout at all....

you already admitted you can't by wishing we were governed by the EU foriegn policy so that we could not invade iraq.

Well the main reason alot of mp's supported it was because of the drummed up threat Blair and various others created, they wouldn't have been able (or less likely) to get away with this in a european parlimentand thus the european parliment would have done what the majority of the public wanted...

how can you possible argue against devolution

Welsh parliment... huge waste of money, wales cannot stand on its own as an independent state so we have just elected a whole big new batch of politicians who can do a little bit of tinkering here and there but nothing major as an independent wales is unworkable for the forseeable future...

and for a centralising state

I want less goverment. I don't mind various levels of goverment to a point, you could for example in a one world goverment have 3 levels of goverment. Firstly local council, bin services and the like. Secondly 'state' goverments these have a certain amount of control to set regional policy. Lastly the world goverment, which undertakes things like major disaster relief, research research and more research, into every kind of medicene/surgery and new ways to extract energy and every ever thing which can advance the human race.

But in terms of goverment budgets, with a one world goverment it would be alot easier to lower the budget, no need for much of a military or missles (i suppose maybe keep a little) no need for immigration. Could have a tax system that the rich can't simply dodge, they will have to pay thier share like everyone else. In lots of other ways i personally would cut things of the budget but this is advantadges to one world goverment

what i'd like to know is if the one world government types even consider my reasoning a rational basis from which to accept governance

I don't agree on your shared values point, i think your wrong on it, but i guess i can see the viewpoint. If for example we were thinking of merging with a nation of cannibals.. i would be think thier way of life is just too different...