# A Person To See A United World Is Alive Today
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [July 18, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396 "2009-07-18T00:40:23Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/1 "2009-07-18T00:40:23Z")
A person is alive today who will see the unification of the world at least as centralized as the EU. Discuss.
---
### Author:  [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/2 "2009-07-18T04:25:00Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#):
>
> … at least as centralized as the EU.
Every country included? No holdouts?
No way.
---
### Author:  [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/3 "2009-07-18T05:20:40Z")
Not for centuries, and possibly never. I suspect our own world would ever become united if there were other settled worlds to band against.
---
### Author:  [@Al\_B.Itt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Al_B.Itt)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/4 "2009-07-18T05:59:27Z")
A united world within 90-100 years??? In this millenium even?
Hogwash. Horsefeathers. Bilgewater. Balderdash.
The destiny of the world is entropy. Chaos. More division, not less. More heterogenous, not less.
The chances for agreement or consensus decrease every day.
Darfur. Bosnia. Rwanda. Xinjiang. Idi Amin. Pol Pot. Hitler. Stalin.
Deserts are expanding, and one of the next great world battles will be fought over potable water and arable land. The Drys against the Wets.
Maybe if the US either nuked the rest of the world senseless, or somehow drugged them into total apathy.
But sitting around a table talking? Like the resounding success seen so often at the United Nations?
Not IMHO. I feel your assertion is analagous to the poem “The Blind Men and the Elephant” by John Godfrey Saxe. It begins:
```
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind
```
They conclude that the elephant is like a wall, snake, spear, tree, fan or rope, depending upon where they touch. They have a heated debate that does not come to physical violence. But in Saxe’s version, the conflict is never resolved.
```
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen
```
> **[Blind men and an elephant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant)**
>
> The parable of the blind men and an elephant is a story of a group of blind men who have never come across an elephant before and who learn and imagine what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant's body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the elephant based on their limited experience and their descriptions of the elephant are different from each other. In some versions, they come to suspect that the other person...
Enjoyed your topic. Just can’t agree. Thanks.
---
### Author:  [@madmonk28](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madmonk28)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/5 "2009-07-18T06:26:03Z")
If anything, I think the trend is away from integration as the continuing economic crisis causes increased protectionism from governments. Also, nationalists tensions in China, the former Soviet Union, and the Middle East all seem to be underminding existing centralized power structures, not moving towards more central control.
A good rule of thumb is that every century is bloodier than the one that came before it. The 21st century will likely be a doozy and I think the political landscape is due for a pretty big shake up.
---
### Author:  [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/6 "2009-07-18T11:40:46Z")
Be careful what you wish for. The world might be “united” by one person . . . a Hitler or an Osama bin Laden . . . taking over the entire planet. Is that the kind of “unity” you want?
---
### Author:  [@NinetyWt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinetyWt)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/7 "2009-07-18T13:39:15Z")
I don’t mean this in a confrontational manner, but it really irks me for someone to start a thread like this. “Discuss”. It seems kind of - arrogant.
How about explaining yourself a bit? “at least as centralized as the EU” - what do you mean by that?
---
### Author:  [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/8 "2009-07-18T13:51:49Z")
> [@NinetyWt](#):
>
> How about explaining yourself a bit? “at least as centralized as the EU” - what do you mean by that?
Eh, IMHO, the OP, while short, says all it needs to say.
My answer? I am more optimistic than the previous posters, both in how soon we will have a world where nation-state boundaries are less important than they are today, and that the force behind this boundary-dissolving will not be some sort of fascist dictatorship.
But “alive today”? Not quite. I’d guess it will happen in about 100 years, meaning that, maybe, that person’s parents are babies now.
---
### Author:  [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/9 "2009-07-18T16:50:35Z")
> [@madmonk28](#):
>
> If anything, I think the trend is away from integration as the continuing economic crisis causes increased protectionism from governments. Also, nationalists tensions in China, the former Soviet Union, and the Middle East all seem to be underminding existing centralized power structures, not moving towards more central control.
>
> A good rule of thumb is that every century is bloodier than the one that came before it. The 21st century will likely be a doozy and I think the political landscape is due for a pretty big shake up.
If the 21st century is bloodier (in percentage terms) than the 20th then I would predict a remarkably quiet 22nd. having said that, i don’t think it will be bloodier. The only ways things can really go to hell are:
1.) Cheap nukes. At the moment, every country with nukes save pakistan and north korea has far too much to lose to ever actually use them (and a lot of resources are expended to keep those two cases in check). If private groups or truly desperate countries ever get a hold of them, then life could get awkward.
2.) Worldwide resource crunch. Global warming, total famine, oil running out, take your pick. If there isn’t enough to go around then we might fall on each other like wolves.
Keep in mind that great power to great power military conflict is now prohibitively expensive. Large portions of the world are actually safe, whereas a century ago even the capitals of the greatest powers were regularly threatened. Things have changed.
---
### Author:  [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2009, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/10 "2009-07-18T22:57:41Z")
> [@Telcontar](#):
>
> If the 21st century is bloodier (in percentage terms) than the 20th then I would predict a remarkably quiet 22nd. having said that, i don’t think it will be bloodier. The only ways things can really go to hell are:
>
> 1.) Cheap nukes. At the moment, every country with nukes save pakistan and north korea has far too much to lose to ever actually use them (and a lot of resources are expended to keep those two cases in check). If private groups or truly desperate countries ever get a hold of them, then life could get awkward.
> 2.) Worldwide resource crunch. Global warming, total famine, oil running out, take your pick. If there isn’t enough to go around then we might fall on each other like wolves.
>
> Keep in mind that great power to great power military conflict is now prohibitively expensive. Large portions of the world are actually safe, whereas a century ago even the capitals of the greatest powers were regularly threatened. Things have changed.
Pakistan has 150 million people to lose.
And 5000 years of history
---
### Author:  [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/11 "2009-07-19T01:14:25Z")
It’s not going to happen. Unless the world either embraces one religion or becomes totally athiest. I don’t see either of those occurring in our lifetimes. Instead we’ll continue to have even internal conflicts like that between the Sunnis and the Shiites.
---
### Author:  [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/12 "2009-07-19T02:28:53Z")
Would you settle for a moderate libertopia, in which national boundaries become less important as national governments (and governments in general) become less powerful? Or must the organizing principle for this united world be a state?
---
### Author:  [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/13 "2009-07-19T05:14:43Z")
I haven’t given up hope that I’ll see it in my own lifetime.
---
### Author:  [@Mr\_Shine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Shine)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/14 "2009-07-19T08:05:22Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#):
>
> But “alive today”? Not quite. I’d guess it will happen in about 100 years, meaning that, maybe, that person’s parents are babies now.
If it happens any time in the next 120 years, I would say it’s pretty ;ikely that _someone_ who is alive today will still be so.
---
### Author:  [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/15 "2009-07-19T10:10:27Z")
Another interesting question is this: who here \*wants \*a united world?
---
### Author:  [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/16 "2009-07-19T14:06:04Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#):
>
> A person is alive today who will see the unification of the world at least as centralized as the EU. Discuss.
A “united world” sounds awfully ambitious. Let’s start small- say, with Arabs and Jewas holding hands and singing “Kumbaya” together in Jerusalem.
Can you picture that in your lifetime? Me neither.
Here’s another thought: Belgium is a beautiful country where people enjoy peace, political freedom and a high standard of living. Guess what? The Felmings and the Walloons don’t want to be part of the same country!
If a united Belgium is too much to hope for, a united world is a silly dream.
---
### Author:  [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/17 "2009-07-19T15:25:07Z")
> [@Alessan](#):
>
> Another interesting question is this: who here \*wants \*a united world?
I do…but only if it’s under _me_, or one of my personally designated agents.
I just don’t trust anyone else to do it. Also, I want to use the Lincoln Memorial as a throne room.
---
### Author:  [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/18 "2009-07-19T16:18:10Z")
> [@Alessan](#):
>
> Another interesting question is this: who here \*wants \*a united world?
That is actually a good point and one that I have thought about often. I don’t because that means that the whole world would be under the extreme control of some dictatorial body. Different cultures, war, and conflict are a big part of what makes us human. You can’t force that away and expect people to remain people. At best, we would be virtually imprisoned slaves to so-called utopia.
It won’t ever happen anyway.
---
### Author:  [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/19 "2009-07-19T16:31:37Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#):
>
> That is actually a good point and one that I have thought about often. I don’t because that means that the whole world would be under the extreme control of some dictatorial body. Different cultures, war, and conflict are a big part of what makes us human. You can’t force that away and expect people to remain people. At best, we would be virtually imprisoned slaves to so-called utopia.
>
> It won’t ever happen anyway.
I never understand why people get so silly about this sort of thing. Is Europe under the extreme control of some dictatorial body? Do its citizens lack a big part of what makes them human?
---
### Author:  [@Anomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anomie)
#### Post date: [July 19, 2009, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396/20 "2009-07-19T16:35:24Z")
It is possible that with advancing technology, someone born today may last long enough to enjoy an indefinite lifespan. So, yes.
But in the next hundred years? No.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-person-to-see-a-united-world-is-alive-today/503396.md?page=2)