Good for them, bad for us. Term limits solve the issue of special interest groups and lobbyists nearly entirely. You can’t really get in bed with someone when the guard is changed consistently. It ensures that there will always be fresh minds and ideas entering into government which should alleviate generational problems and over conservative views upon new technologies. It means far more people from a wider range of backgrounds participate and contribute their ideas. It also at least helps the problem of political ill will standing in the way of progress. If you don’t have to worry about re-election constantly then you are more apt to do the responsible thing, which is not always the most popular. If you want direct democracy, then do so and have done with it.
What the others said about the flaws and oversights and omissions is all correct. Further, I am against any and ALL forms of “one world government”. If there were one government, you’ve lost the checks and balances. Governments and countries are sometimes limited, for fear of what the other countries and governments will do to them if they go too far. If there is just one government, then no one is left to declare war on them. They are not accountable to anyone anywhere. It is pessimistic, but sometimes the threat of being destroyed is the only “check” there is.
Isn’t the point of a world government that we would not need war anymore?
That is supposedly the goal. But, then again, it’s a very effective tool (it may be the only tool) for “removing” tyrants and monsters. Imagine a tyrant in charge of the contral world government, with no one able to take him down. What if a guy like Kim Jung Il were the world president? In full control of the world police and the world army? What then?
And this too. Amoral, dishonest and (even worse) incompetent political hacks, no longer limited to one twnship or county, but in charge of the entire planet. NO!
The movie version was roughly equivalent to a Nazi adapting The Diary of Anne Frank into a movie.
As for the problem that some tyrant will gain control of the presidency it is to be noted that when a world government is established most people will be sufficently intelligent not to immediatly fall for demagogues.
Now that’s bullshit.
In ancient Rome anyone who offerred free grain to the people immeditaly got their support, but in the advanced democracies it takes quite a bit more to be elected.
Sounds like it’ll work great, as long as you also engineer a citizenry that will accept it. Of course, given the power to do that, you could also simplify your constitution considerably.
You need to outline the lines of succession.
Because if you are going to try to please the whole world with one government I am predicting that a lot of the people on your list are going to get shot.
Probably on a fairly regular schedule.
I judge the movie on its own merit, not based on how it relates to the book on which it is very, very loosely based.
And the movie sucked on its own too.
Good old Rome. Rulers of their entire known world (just like this here proposed world gubmint). Rampant corruption, bribery, bread and circus, a corrupt Senate and a whole slew of over the top crazy emperors. An empire made famous for its cruelty and grasping greedy ambition. An empire that finally collapsed as much under its own weight, as to the constant attacks from enemies it had created.
You just made my point I think. Who watches the watchers?
Is there a section that deals with how a region or a people leaves the organisation?
Can government agencies promote religion?
Can this world constitution be amended, and if so how?
Seeing as how all people on Earth would be members of this Federation, why have written down that the leaders must be members of the Federation, unless it is possible to leave it?
If it is possible to leave the Federation, what rights would a former member have?
Ummmm feet first in a box?
Sure you can: with seven billion people to chose from, chances are good that you can find an heir that shares your views, while you become the man behind the throne and keep making the same political deals you always have.
No.
Through majority votes in both Houses and the signature of the Chancellor.
Indvidual citizens can abandon their citizenship.
They will be “residents” of the Federation.
That doesn’t answer the question at all.
It doesn’t matter-The people in power will amend the constitution ASAP to get rid of that clause as soon as they get addicted to the power given them.
-The Presidency is to be largely a ceremonial branch but with advisory and veto powers.
So he’s ceremonial except that he can scupper any law he doesn’t like.
-The President will have powers of clemency
Does this imply that there will be a death penalty, currently extinct in civilised countries, or merely that he’ll be able to release his criminal cronies from prison, Iran/Contra style?
-The President will remain nonpartisan
ON what grounds will he be elected if not on his support for a particular political platform?
-The President must be a Federation citizen
So he must be from the Earth, yes? Would you allow naturalised citizens, or must he have been born upon the earth?
-The Chancellorship is to be determined by a joint session of the Senate and the Assembly
A bicameral legislature, then? Any particular reason? Any reason we shouldn’t have this personage elected too?
-The Chancellor will sign into law bills passed by the Planetary Congress or veto them; either situation will result in the bill going to the President
So we have two people who can cancel any law that doesn’t take their fancy, then? And the only one to be subject to a recall election is the one with least power.
-The Chancellor will hold power of operation over the military
Which, in a one state world, will presumably be explicitly targeted against one’s own populace.
-The Chancellor will appoint Cabinet members and Judges
Much like the american system, then.
-The Senate is to consist of five hundred members representing a Senatorial district
-The Assembly is to consist of two thousand five hundred members representing an Assembly district roughly one-fourth the size of a Senatorial one
If the districts are a fourth the size, why are there five times as many of them? Wouldn’t this lead to the world being controlled by those states which are currently most populous, ie the Chinese and Indians?
-Assembly elections are to take place every three years
-Senatorial elections are to take place every six years
Much like the American system.
-The Judicial Branch is to consist of the Supreme Court, Regional Courts, and other lesser Courts.
-The Supreme Court will consist of fifteen Justices to be appointed by the Chancellor with Congressional approval.
This is, again, very like that American system which has so singularly failed to work over the years.
-Federal crimes include treason, rebellion, terrorism, mass murder, organized crime, slavery, and genocide.
On what grounds could one be charged with treason in a one-state world? Come to think of it, is there a reason that any of those should be tried by a world court whereas other crimes would be tried by a local court?
-The death penalty is an option in Federal crimes, by firing squad
Painless and spectacular, although inherently unjust.
-The regional governments shall be divided into following levels: Regions, States, Districts, Counties, and Municipalities
Plenty of room for duplication there. Would certainly reverse the EU’s moves towards unitary authorities.
-The officers for these regions shall be respectively designated as High Governor, Governor, Administrator, Manager, and Mayor
So we’re not only ordering the whole world to give their officials English titles, but also telling them exactly which ones to use?
-All humans are granted freedom of religion, speech, assembly, petition, and press provided these statements are not libelous and slanderous or cause violence and disorder.
That’s a lot of qualifications.
-All humans will be entitled to due process, trial by jury, search and seizure, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
I believe that’s FREEDOM FROM search and seizure. No right to remain silent? No limit on detention without charge?
-All humans will be considered citizens of Federation
Which rather negates the above clauses requiring only citizens to be admitted to government. Although if someone wanted to vote a horse into the senate, say, I don’t see why they shouldn’t be allowed to.
-Citizens with the exception of those commiting felonies will be granted the franchise at eighteen
As with the death penalty, most civilised states allow ex-cons to vote (even current inmates in some places), so you propose a world government which strips undesirables of their suffrage. You also suggest in some countries, such as the UK, a reintroduction of the distinction between felonies and misdemeanours.
-Citizens will be expected to obey the law, serve in Federal Service, pay taxes, and serve on juries
Is this meant to mean conscription?