uh...I think I posted in the wrong topic earlier; please ignore my previous post.

:p:D
The 'Dying for what I believe in' way of thinking is instilled in pretty much everyone and as such the people who are about self-preservation inevitably go down when the retards decide to die for the cause. Humans as a species (and mostly as individuals) are stupid, simply because they believe that no matter their mistakes in life, they will be forgiven in death. WRONG.
LOL, very true; this is another common part of human nature.

lol, I don't think so actually. Just a qucik exemple: basques that want to split up with spain. corses that want to split up with france, the IRA, etc... the trend among people is not to get together, it's to settle on old fashioned ways of living, and the pride of belonging to an ethnic group which has no real foundation excepted geographical ones. I'll take the exemple of Corse coz I know that better. The corse have the benefits of lower taxes, are kindda allowed not to respect the law (they build stuff when and where they want. In fact they have about all the advantages of being french and volontary left the disavantages. But no, they're not happy, they kill people when someone takes the incredible decision of destroying a crappy cabin built on a beach, they keep assaulting the police, etc. Well, they want independance
( I would like to see how they would live on their own, with no economy, no industry, nothing excepted tourism, but that's another pb
).
So go and talk to them about a global gvt. I guess about all the countries in the world have this kind of independantist groups.
You need much more than good will and commercial bonds to makje up that kind of things: you need the people to change , and it's probably the hardest thing ever to achieve.
Yeah, there are a lot of these small groups trying to resist the globalist movement, but the difference between their efforts and those of the pro-world government people is that they aren't really getting anywhere, because for all practical purposes, their arguments will actually lead to the downfall of the nations they represent in comparison to the world government. For example, the EU is the only way that Europe will be able to match the US economically; the individual nations cannot quite match the US but united they can definitely compete.
I think one of the longer phases of the formation of this government will be when there are five or six independent blocks controlling the world : probably US/Canada/Mexico in one, all of Europe in another, most of Asia (including Australia and New Zealand), all of the South American nations, all of the African nations (including the middle east ones). The world will probably be in this state for quite some time, but these will eventually merge as well.
As you said, people resist change as a part of their nature, but they do not do so as readily when the change is very subtle and hard to notice. (it would have to happen over hundreds of years, as I said earlier) This can be seen in various places throughout history.

While I think that there will be a segment of the world's population that will resist a global state, they will basically become non-player's in human history and could be considered for all purposes insignificant. As I said earlier:
There will be nations who will refuse to join in order to preserve their "individuality," but they will not be able to economically and technologically compete with the massive nation and will be left behind in history as third-world nations, leaving only the big union to progress further.
The other possibility (not as probable IMHO, but still possible) is that the small nations will react violently to the establishment of a world government, particularly if anyone tries to push them into it. If this occurs, then the quote that LtNarol posted will unfortunately become a reality; there are the nuclear weapon ban treaties and such, but in full-out wartime the only law out there is survival of the fittest. I think that this is a somewhat remote possibility though.
