I don’t mean a dictator or a king running the whole world; I mean a democratic type of world government. It just seems like there are laws that need to be established that the whole world must abide to. It’s about time humans stop fighting in their own species so much and starting so many wars, and learn to unite. By constructing a world government, we can increase the sense of unity between countries. It’s about time the US gets off their condescending high horse, and actually gives a shit about other countries that are not developed or are in serious trouble. “The US will have to spread its wealth across the world,” is not a good argument, but a selfish one. We should be making strong attempts to unite with other nations and support them, rather than isolating ourselves from them due to superiority. This unity will make us as humans on planet Earth, a stronger species. We may be able to become more civilized as a result. For example, the world government will be able to make animal cruelty laws. Animal cruelty is a huge problem, and the reason we aren’t getting very far in solving this problem is that we are not able to outlaw such unethical practices in other nations. However, if we have a world government, then we may be able to establish such laws, and be much more effective in fighting animal cruelty.
Most governments seem to have at least a few other governments that they hate pretty freakin’ badly. Diplomats have been trying to calm this all down since, well, ever.
Perhaps during National Brotherhood Week.
Humans are greedy and selfish. Too many who are, and in positions of power and influence, will not give them up for lesser mortals.
Yes but, imagine there’s no countries. It isn’t hard to do.
Doesn’t the United States give quite a bit of money in the form of foreign aid to a wide variety of programs? The much hated George W. Bush came up with an emergency AIDS relief plan to the tune of 15 billion dollars (not that there wasn’t some controversies with the program) so it seems to me that the United States has demonstrated that it gives a shit about other countries that are in serious trouble and not developed.
What makes you think the majority of the world will support animal cruelty laws? What is animal cruelty anyway? Will a dude in Papua, China, France or Mexico all have the same idea of what is and isn’t animal cruelty? We can’t even agree on human rights. At this point a one world government is pie-in-the-sky fantasy land dreaming.
Well we do not have “world government” but there are several things which are handled on an international basis. The law of the sea for example. Or closer to home, laws relating carriage of goods by air as well as persons. Ditto for by sea. There are international conventions on thousands of topics from mobile phones to standards in industry.
The cultures of the world are still very tribal in nature. Even within nations. There are some areas where the “melting pot” idea of coexistence has taken hold, but in most others the insular nature of tribalism results in at best a separate but equal hostility where each side looks out for it’s own interests first while somewhat attempting to get along with others.
We already have one on going attempt at world government that consists of the various tribal interests yelling at each other while accomplishing almost nothing.
It is called the United Nations.
I actually support a form of world government, although not anything like the PC socialist, “multicultural” utopias like say the Star Trek’s federation. Essentially I’m seeing it as an extension of the various free trade pacts, mutual defence treaties, etc. on the one hand or as a closer “Union of the West” (basically something like the EU extended to include the US, Canada, Mexico, the Southern Cone, Oceania, and the first world states in East Asia) which will gradually absorb countries as they become fully developed.
Mustapha Mond for president!
Worth reflecting on:
They eat dogs in China! :eek:
For the same reason most countries in the world aren’t functioning democracies.
Why do you think all the world’s dictators are going to nod the their heads and say, “Ok, we give up”?
No fucking way. Humans are still children. We’re stupid, petty and cruel. The life we lead in the West is nothing like the life the vast majority of people on this planet live and every day we are served up examples of people willing to kill and destroy to stop progress, or even just different ideas.
I don’t want my vote to be considered of equal worth as one from someone in a slug-brained theocratic and/or dictatorial backwater with no traditions of freedom.
Agreed.
What’s next, having the votes of black people count the same as those of white people?
That is, quite obviously, a bullshit comparison.
This. It follows if you accept the weak Fukuyama principle, that nations, by and large, will become more democratic over time, since that system has been proven to work. The Soviet Union is gone, and China is embarked on a remarkable experiment in economic growth. Cold wars have been shown to be a lot healthier for humanity than hot wars have been. Europe has engaged in the greatest surrender of sovereignty since the U.S. states united.
A “world government” that grows out of a unity of “free trade organizations” is nothing that any nationalist needs to fear.
Funny, last night I was going to ask why so many people absolutely flip the fuck out in terror at the idea of a one-world government, but decided against it.
My view on the subject is that, in principle a world government is a good idea, and a great goal. However, my view is that it’s not at the present feasible, and perhaps even undesirable.
We need to smooth over a lot of international tensions and without a bunch of careful consideration you’re just going to end up with a joke nation with an ineffective government and nothing will change.
The trick with a world government is that you effectively need to balance it so that everybody gets along JUST well enough, the world military is JUST strong enough, and the government is FAIR enough that nobody is going to consider it “worth it” to go to war with each other. That doesn’t mean we need world peace already in place to start a one world government, but we really need something much closer than we’ve got now – as well as a world with a much more level economic playing field than there is now.
I think that we should work towards a one world government as a goal for decades or centuries from now, but note that it has to be something that takes a form much different from current governments (because of the immense cultural differences, among other things) and that it’s not something that can be rushed into. We also have to note that it’s not going to solve all of our problems magically. Civil wars happen after all.
We also may have to ask some unpleasant questions about political paradigms. For instance, is something like a republic or democracy even tenable on a global scale? We may have look hard at history, and analyze our systems and how they apply to a very, very diverse world. We might have to confront that things like free speech, or even ideals such as “voting” or “freedom” may simply not be possible to keep such a large nation stable. I’m not saying they, specifically, will turn out not to work, I’m just saying that many cultures in many places are probably going to have to sacrifice some ideals (even things they consider “rights”) to get the whole thing to work. And then the question becomes whether the stability and benefits are ever worth the loss of freedom and cultural ideals.
I trust my country. I don’t trust the world.
Not really. It’s usually the US and China giving the finger to everyone else.