2007-01-23 04:14:28 · 12 answers · asked by chatter box 1 in Environment
Well... if we all had a big campfire and held hands and sung ***-by-ya I'm sure that the thousands of years of differences over religion, political philosophy, and national interest would just melt away.
NEWSFLASH: There are such things as irreconcilable differences, especially when religion, national interest, and security are involved. While it is true that we need to find ways to work together for our mutual global self interest there are always going to be regional conflicts of interest that sometimes result in physical struggle. It's a part of the human condition.
2007-01-23 04:22:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The what is easier than the how. Wealthy nations should share resources with poor nations. Poor nations need two things first: electricity and roads. Think of these as circulatory and neural systems. With electricity and roads, commerce and communication will follow. Commerce brings wealth for the next big thing - sanitary plumbing and sewage systems and potable water systems. From there all things are possible.
Cooperation can't be imposed at the point of a gun. A system of laws and enforcement must be devised to protect all segments of the population with equal attention. All authority should be derived from the citizens and subject to change by the citizens. Finally, the minorities must be protected for the tyranny of the majority.
2007-01-23 04:24:51 · answer #2 · answered by revart42 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the US today, there are two approaches to this question.
The majority of Americans, though they vary widely on specific policies, think we should set an example by helping those in need--and also by using our wealth to invest in building the economies and therefor the living staandards of people around the world. And to help--but not coerce--governments and societies to become more open, stable, and democratic.
The other view, espoused by the right-wing and their leader George Bush, is much more straightforward--just kill anyone who doesn't do as they're told.
2007-01-23 04:37:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Remove mankind......or at least most of us!!
We are the ones that are distroying this earth!! With only a few that really care,or willing to do anything about it. Our government would rather go to the moon than try to fix things here in our own world.
It is sad to know what our great grandchildren have to look forward too.
God help us all!
2007-01-23 04:21:15 · answer #4 · answered by ohdarnitsmeagain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the hardship with technological expertise is you may't %. and decide which parts to have self belief. there become the guy from Southern Baptist going for his PhD in evolutionary biology at the same time as at the same time refusing to renounce his conception in sensible layout. both beliefs are truly incompatible and the guy if truth be told both had an agenda or a screw free. Who would have self belief this human being? you may't be a conservationist and protector of the earth at the same time as at the same time ignoring the technological expertise that announces CO2 is one of our greatest issues. This leads to infinite inner conflicts and rationalizations which leads to inconsistent and irrational movements. i doesn't have self belief this human being. i'm sorry, yet to me that announces that this human being both has an agenda or some type of psychological difficulty. i do not propose a psychological illness like the evolutionary creationist guy; that is a miles more suitable diffused difficulty all of us have. It has to do with the scope, the size of the project. maximum human beings purely won't be able to truly conceive that issues are that undesirable. they're. they purely don't have adequate understanding and experience to procedure all of it, so as that they make rationalizations like - we've set it up so it is no longer feasible for me to operate interior the united states in 2008 with out a vehicle, so how ought to we've screwed up so undesirable? Naw, we couldn't have, AGW must be a scam. properly, i wager something is larger than no longer something; so when you're truthful, thanks on your efforts.
2016-10-15 23:56:51 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Get rid of governments, money, religion, possessions, disease and somehow make sure everyone has adequate food, clean water and health care and a comfortable place to live. . Should be pretty easy.
2007-01-23 04:18:50 · answer #6 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
By spreading love for all human beings.
2007-01-25 22:51:59 · answer #7 · answered by gupta_uncle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Eliminate religion. I'm not being racist but 99% of all conflicts are because of religion. (unless you're american and in which case its oil) lol.
2007-01-23 04:23:09 · answer #8 · answered by ukcufs 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Add matriarchy to the predominant patriarchy... level it out, balance it out.... harmony would result.
Too huge to ever happen in our lifetime.
2007-01-23 04:46:04 · answer #9 · answered by Gigi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It will never happen. We have people like Chavez in leadership positions.
2007-01-23 04:17:47 · answer #10 · answered by lifesajoy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋