Planning A World Government

Today all 195 nations on Earth have agreed to have a Constitutional Convention to form a world government. It’s a free-for-all sandbox mode with delegates from every country including official delegations and tagalongs and independents.

So here’s the Curtis LeMay Plan For World Government

-Presidential System on the American model.
-President to serve a term of six years and no term limits.
-Vice President and various governments departments round out the Executive Branch.
-The Legislative Branch consists of the Senate (500 members) and the Assembly (2000 members). Senators are elected for terms of six years and assemblymen for terms of three years. The world are to divided into Senatorial districts which will contain four Assembly districts each.
-The Judicial branch is to consist of the Superme Court and the lesser Regional and District courts.
-All national governments are to be abolished or surrender all their powers in full membership in the world government. Associate members need not do so.
-Full members of the world government will be divided into the following regions:

North America
South America
East Asia
South Asia
Middle East

These regions will be divided into Senatorial and Assembly districts.
-The President will be elected by direct popular vote.
-There will be one world currency: The Terran Dollar for all purposes and all other currencies will be made obsolete.
-Secession will be forbidden for all members and will be crushed by government forces.
-There will be a equitable system of trade to prevent any regional or district trade wars.
-All military forces will be combined and systemized to form a global military. All other militaries will be dissolved.
-The basic rights of freedom of speech, religion, though, assembly, and press are to be guaranteed albeit with stricter definations to prevent libel and slander.
-Most other rights in the US Bill of Rights will be carried over.
-The government will be styled the United Terran Federation.

So what do you think?

You forgot to mention the part where I become Empress Dictator for Life

I think you would have better luck forming a World Government if you didn’t assume the U.S. was best at everything.

In this “sandbox,” do we give a damn what other countries think?

That as soon as the nonWestern powers realize they have more Senators, by dint of their greater population, they’ll outlaw anything they don’t like and forget all that freedom of speech and religion and junk.

It’s will disintegrate almost instantly, unless the Indian population retains some fondness for the democratic process, in which case it’ll last six months, tops.

What if a national government and its people do not share your vision and do not want to be a part of your world government? You would “crush” them?

Sovereignty and self determination be damned.

Human cultures and societies are simply too diverse for this fantasy to be possible. There would be no benefit anyway.

Precisely what problems is this government setting out to solve? And how is this different from the Romans conquering everyone in sight and “civilizing” them, their wishes be damned?

And what happens to people who don’t particularly like this government? There’s nowhere else to escape to.

The US Presidential system is quite frankly, shit. The idea that the popular vote is overriden by a byzantine electoral college is offensive to those of us used to a real system of popular voting. Furthermore, the whole premise of combining the head of state with the head of government is problematic to say the least.

A more likely appropriate candidate is a government based on the Westminster System as it is fairer and doesn’t force the merger of patriotism with politics (hating the Prez = hating USA) nor ultimately create 2 party oligarchies with little to distinguish them. Parlimentary systems are far superior in directly representing the popular views of citizens.

Your proposal essentially boils down to:
US political system = close to perfection + add foreigners and force US political system on them

Easily extrapolated from Curtis’s posted ideas about Afghanistan and Iraq.

You can forget about cobbling together a world govt that doesn’t recognize that we already have one, the Corporate World State. It should be clear to an idiot that the USG is owned and operated by international corporations with none but local political interest in human welfare and that that state of affairs will not change until people like Curtis wake up to the fact that corporations are not people, no matter what their SCOTUS front men had to say on the matter in the late 1800’s.

Perhaps that is why the OP specifically states the World President would be elected by direct popular vote, not by an electoral vote system.

On the other hand, I’d say your proposal to use a Westminster-style system is, obviously, even worse than an American system, for the simple reason that the Westminster system assumes the head of state is a hereditary monarch. Westminster works fine for the UK and its various commonwealth children but it’s a system that assumes a lot of legacy compromises; Curtis has offered us a sandbox, an opportunity to create a system designed for the world. Why not look outside your own experience? I’d be intrigued by the possibility of starting with a system like France, which has elected, and politically meaningful, heads of state AND government.

Or maybe something more divvied up; maybe what we need for a government this big is a Council of Presidents.

The other question would be the separation of powers between the World Government and the various member states. Anyone who lives in a federal country knows that much of the political discourse is about the conflicts between federal and state/provincial governments. I think we can assume the World Government is in charge of the military, but who’s in charge of education? Criminal law? Transportation?

Short of fending off alien invasion, why do we need a world government?

What’s with the horrible name for this super-country? That’s going to start your first civil war, right there.

Stopping war would be nice. Freedom for all. I can see a lot of benefits.

We have quite a few problems of an international scale. Environmental problems, disease, economic disruptions, exploitative international corporations, etc. It’s politically impractical at this point, but as I see it we have reached the point where a planetary sized government is in some sense the “natural size” of government. Just as at one point it was tribe sized, then city-state sized, then “kingdom sized”, then continent sized; over time the size that governments can and generally need to be to do their job right tends to increase. We’ve reached the point where everything everyone does affects everyone else.

My personal belief is that we’ll likely get there eventually; or at least to a system with a few really huge governments. But there’s a huge amount of cultural inertial and philosophical differences to iron out first.

I’m not sure why we need world government for these benefits, nor how world government will insure them in the first place. I see no reason civil wars wouldn’t fracture the world government as they have for nation/state governments, and “freedom” by any measure is actually only currently enjoyed by, what, half the population? The other half can’t just be declared “free” with the stroke of a pen, and I see no reason whatsoever to trust the freedoms I currently enjoy to the votes of a bunch of people who settle political differences with machetes.

Basically, Curtis is drawing a nice tidy way for a world government to be arranged, but has no idea how to get to such a point or how to stay there. Why 500 senators? 400 is a round number, too, as is 1000. Why not make all the states nice and square so they look pretty on a map?

What could be more representative of the will of the people than where they choose to vote with their dollars?

I don’t think a council of presidents is going to be very efficient. It seems like the best way to get nothing done is to assign it to a committee and that’s all this really is. Not that I think a world gov’t is the right way to go. Plus, I think that its unrealistic to think that all citizens agree enough on anything to be subject to one gov’t without civil unrest.

Well, if world government really does eliminate war (presumably through the use of magic wand technology), the need for quick reaction is greatly reduced.

But we’re going to crush anyone who doesn’t agree with the policies and wants to leave the union. There are going to be a lot more wars under this system, but we’ll call them Police Actions.