No, I believe that the most powerful person in the world would not need power for themself. Once that level of power is reached, it wouldn’t be a question of getting more power.
The most powerful person in the world (assuming there’s any realistic method of determining that) has lots and lots of limitations on what he or she can do. No one has the amount of power you keep talking about, and there’s no method of accumulating that power.
And furthermore, nobody *wants *there to be an individual with that much power.
Power comes from two sources. It can be the direct product of one’s skills and proficiencies, or it can be power lent from others by way of loyalty and compulsion.
Whence does this most powerful man derive his? By what means does he gain the loyalty of the Presidents of the World? What does he offer them in return? Nations have joined together when they feel the need, but most nations have presently stopped doing that - the expansion of the EU has slowed to a halt, and all other borders have remained pretty solid for years. If Portugal and Spain (for instance) felt that they really were one nation with one destiny, they wouldn’t wait for the whole Earth to submit to one Pantocrator; they’d just do it privately amongst themselves.
Why would the presidents of the world, and heads of government of the world, create a sovereign over themselves? Why do they want to, and what do they gain from it?
It’s also quite arguable that the present trend is away from supranationalism and towards even more parochialism and separatism - Scottish, Bavarian, Breton, Corsican, Catalonian independence movements indicate that it doesn’t matter if these people are present in the room together, they still don’t get on, and they don’t recognise the authority of their constitutional superiors.
No one except heads of government would know that there is an individual with that much power.
How?
At the first G-192 summit, the heads of government will enter a room situated very much like The House of Representatives Chamber.
-
The heads of government take their seats.
-
???
-
The heads of government exit the room and meet the press to presumably discuss what happened during the summit.
So, some person enters the room and says ‘by the way, I’m now the Universal Sovereign and you all have to do what I say.’
In a sane world, the heads of government would summon their private guards to have this man arrested and shot.
But if they don’t, he then begins to speak. He lays down a plan by which all of them surrender their power to him, and he will lead them to a bright, glorious future where the grass is greener, the sun shines brighter, and all things are made to wondrous fullness.
In a sane world, the heads of government would summon their private guards to have this man arrested. and shot.
But if they don’t, then they discuss this plan and weigh its pros and cons, and take some sort of quorum.
In a sane world, this plan would be immediately voted out, and the principles of national sovereignty would be maintained. The ‘good’ world leaders realize that they have a responsibility to their people that far supercedes any option to submit to an outside power without firing a shot. The ‘bad’ ones are resentful of anyone threatening to take their power and prestige.
But if they don’t, then they agree on some sort of common agenda, as presented by the Sovereign Inspector General or whoever the hell this guy is. They then return to their respective legislatures and convince their Thegns that during the course of this meeting, someone introduced a wonderful, spectacular idea involving closer international communication.
In a sane world, these ideas would be shouted down with prejudice, and churned through the bowels of national government before being unceremoniously shit out, as they would not be to anyone’s apparent interest.
In a sane world, the heads of government would then destroy the evidence of such a person having ever existed, as this Sovereign Inspector General. After all, he has to live somewhere, and any regime worth its salt can manage a few extra-judicial murders here and there.
So where does this go right? Why do the heads of government submit to this mystery man? Why do they want it, what do they get from it?
You and I have actually had this exact conversation before, but we never finished it. You mentioned how this would-be Pantocrator would have a web of influence and contacts who would obey his will, and thus allow him to use blackmail, espionage, and assassination against any person he pleased. But if it’s possible to acquire such power through conspiracy, then why don’t the legitimate authorities - the presidents, the premiers, and the prime ministers - have this power through their own, national conspiracies, aided as they are by limitless government funding?
And how does this would-be Pantocrator control his organization, doing as it does black and foul deeds, and how does he resist the assaults from legitimate powers? Does he have a secret police agency more powerful than the FBI? Than the FSB? Than the Guoanbu, for God’s sake? How did this organization acquire the billion-dollar payroll it would need to fund, staff, and equip such an agency?
In short: how the shit does this all work?
My offer stands, Kozmik. I will hash this out with you ala voco. Accept or deny.
Because why exactly?
No, he has so much power that he does not need them to surrender their power to him (even though he needs them - his only weakness if you can call it that).
Because each head of state already knows the limits of their power, i.e. “my power ends where another head of state’s power begins”. At the first G-192 summit, all heads of state will realize the limits of their power - and that is why they will also realize that they need him.
Why would they grant him any power?
What do they need him for?
And what’s their motive for keeping his existence secret?
They would not need to grant him any power. He needs them - his only weakness.
In order for me to answer this question, I need this question(s) answered:
Keeping their power.
Where does his power come from?
How can he take their power away?
Why does he need them? And why do they need him? Is it beyond the power of the assembled governments of the world to simply exterminate him? And if so, why? The governments of the world tug along just fine without a one-world government sending them pronunciamientos; why would they suddenly start needing this shadowy figure? How did they ever get by in the time before him, and what has changed?
And as for the limits of the powers of the governments of the world…
With the people behind them - with the powers of persuasion at their disposal - their power is limited only by what is feasible with technology and manpower. Two states - the United States and the Russian Federation - have the power to destroy the entire world. In the case of the Russian Federation, the only check on the President’s power is whether his officers really turn their keys and do it; there’s no remedy other than direct insubordination.
Probably half of the world’s population - certainly all of the developed world, most of South America, developed and developing East Asia, and the former CIs - have governments with the power to locate and vaporize any person in their country, if they turn their eye to it. For the other half, vaporization probably isn’t necessary - nobody will look funny if armed guards show up to a private house and kill everybody.
In the entire developed world, infrastructure exists in place to completely monitor a person’s correspondence, completely intercepting all their communications with others. And most countries have a cadre of people - large or small, depending on the country’s size, wealth, and culture - who are prepared to do dirty deeds in the name of the Flag. With the will of the people behind them, the governments of the world are basically omnipotent.
In the face of secret police, wiretapping, assassination, maximum security prisons, brain-peeling interrogations, massive surveillance, and nuclear bombs, what the hell can this would-be Pantocrator do? How does he bend the G-8 to his will?
lol I was reading the topic title and thought “anarchy would be the best case” but that depends on the definition of anarchy you stick to… mine would be something like this…
A system of governance, that goes to lengths to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable society. 
From the situation that arises when the heads of government take their seats in a room similar to The House of Representatives Chamber. All the heads of government are equal (you might even say that Barack Obama is first among equals). The point is: They are all at the same level - head of government, and they are all in the same room - heads of government. So you have heads of government sitting in an arrangment that appears to be similar to the arrangement of the State of the Union, you know, where the 100 Senators and the 435 Representatives file into The House of Representatives Chamber to listen to the President deliver the State of the Union address. Except, instead of Senators and Representatives, its Heads of Government filing into a similar room.
In the same or similar way that some heads of government have lost their power.
So any person who enters that room is automatically the most powerful man in the world? If I were to enter that room, would I be? If not, how does this man differ from me?
Specifics, please. Give us a detailed hypothetical situation.
Alessan’s got the first half, I’ll hit this one. Hmm…
It can be said, of sovereigns, that their reigns are ended in continuous means. Some are ended by the Gods, in the case that they die of illness or of accident in their prime, or whilst still holding their power, and in all ways beyond anticipation and certainly beyond causation, for the Gods reveal not their plans to mortal men. In this fashion was made the death of Alexander, King of Macedon, popularly called the Great, struck down by fever.
Some are ended by foreign Sovereigns, wherein one will take up arms against the other, and destroy his army, and make a prisoner of him, for the strong will do what they will and the weak will do as they must. In this fashion was made the death of Bayezid I of Turkey, who was defeated by Timur and taken back to Samarqand a slave.
Some are ended by ministers of the cabinet, and other high advisers and dignitaries, in the hopes of creating a successor who might lean close to one or other of the late sovereign’s counselors and thus grant him ultimate power, ruling as King-in-all-but-name. In this way have Chinese emperors beyond counting lost their lives, nearest to my mind being Guangxu of Qing, as the eunuchs, nobles, and concubines that surrounded them have made and unmade their masters in the hopes of creating better and more pliable ones.
Some are ended by popular anger, as the commons, churls, and carters storm the gilded palaces of their hated kings and cast him down to die, their rage so fervent as to be made almost tangible, trampling him to death beneath their feet in acts of wild catharsis. In this fashion was made the death of Nicholas II of Russia, killed by his own people for his crimes of their want and need.
And some are ended simply by Time, as their races are run and they seek no more, content in the next generation to carry on their will, and fade away without issue or strife. Such was the death of Washington, who, having drunk from the cup of absolute power, drank his fill and no more, and returned to a private and personal life.
Which were you anticipating here? Which of these does the so-called Pantocrator have at his disposal, and how did he get them?
They need him because of the limits of their power. He needs them because he cannot do anything openly - he can only do so in secret and what better way than an open secret – the G-192 summit.
Keep in mind that during the G-192 summit that room would be over restricted airspace, underground there would be motion sensors, and around that room, the building, and surrounding area would be Secret Service, police chiefs, police officers, reporters, protesters, foreign security, dignitaries, agents.