Global government- return to hangar

[Kyriakos]

Although it has been some time since i last watched tv (due to the general misery presented on it) i heard from some friends that talk of a plan for a One World Government is all around the news. Obviously mostly focused upon as some sort of over-plan of shadowy centers.

I was wondering if a OWG would really be a good idea though, even if it is not a plan. Even today, with local governments, there is little sense of the rulers being held responsible for the crisis they cause; what is to happen if instead we have only one country, a country of seven billion people?

Personally i heavily doubt it would be a force for overall good. Also i doubt there would be a majority of people wanting it atm.

What say you? Are you in favor of a OWG, and do you think the current crisis was triggered due to innumerable little factors which were just out of control, or was it some plan of some sort?

Btw the return to hangar, obviously referring to the famous eponymous song by Megadeth, was meant to signify a secret plot, although like i said i do not bother to follow the news even when they are less conspiracy-oriented than now. Got to admit though that the EU collapsed pretty fast, and no, 300 Billion of debt was not the catalyst; this was 2% of the EU's combined budget and just imagine how well the crisis in Europe could have been avoided with a logical plan.

 

[aronnax]

There will utter madness. I cannot think of logical way for a one-world government to work without having to slide into some dictatorial state. The world is far to varied and different to be able to work together like a singular country.

The size of the world parliament would be huge and just unfeasible. You'll need at least 20,000 delegates!

 

[Smellincoffee]

The only people I know who take the idea of a one-world government seriously are fundamentalist Christians who are obsessed with "The Rapture", the "Endtimes", and the Antichrist.

I used to hope for a Star Trek-style united Earth, but I don't that if that'll ever happen.

 

[squadbroken]

One-world government at it's core isn't a bad idea but I wouldn't entrust any of the scumbags who run things in any country today with that sort of power. It would require some kind of global revolution to make it possible - and not just a sociopolitical revolution, but a revolution of the mind.

 

[classical_hero]

The only people I know who take the idea of a one-world government seriously are fundamentalist Christians who are obsessed with "The Rapture", the "Endtimes", and the Antichrist.

I used to hope for a Star Trek-style united Earth, but I don't that if that'll ever happen.

Who would have thought the EU was possible early last century? Things an change quite rapidly if there is a cause for it.

 

[Rashiminos]

Who would have thought the EU was possible early last century? Things an change quite rapidly if there is a cause for it.

Slightly longer reply:

There was a cause. It was not a widely agreed upon cause at the time, and it required steering different groups into the desired direction. That steering has not abated.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Who would have thought the EU was possible early last century?

Victor Hugo.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

What squadbroken said.
I'll add that one could maybe limit the necessity of a "revolution of the mind" by ensuring that this world government would stay very federal. So federal as to account for different ethnic/cultural/national sentiments. We probably should wait for wealth distribution to become more even-handed, too.

The first great advantage of a world government is that we could start to finally cope with an already globalized economy (and hence politics would get on top of things again instead of being a subject to the whims of global economic competition).
The second great advantage is that nations would stop to aggressively try to screw each other because the central authority would now be an actual world police (and not just an ideological fantasy as nowadays).
So a world government is in general desirable because it offers the most potential for benefiting humanity as a whole. It though also offers a lot of potential for screwing humanity as a whole. Therefor caution and great patience is required.

Oh and I find this one-world-government-talk in Greece hilarious.

 

[Skwink]

I'm happy with a one government world, as long a I lead it.

 

[Quackers]

Victor Hugo.

He said that last century?

 

[Traitorfish]

Victor Hugo.

Not to mention Mazzini, Garibaldi, Mill, Bakunin and the French National Asssembly of 1871. If anything, they'd probably be surprised at how disunified Europe still is.

 

[carmen510]

Diversity of the population and the sheer gargantuan task of governing over a large population makes a One World Government unfeasible and unpractical.

Put into practice, we'd likely see vast areas of instability and "internal" conflict and massive inefficiencies of scale.

 

[Eat_Up_Martha]

If it could be implemented with at least a modicum of responsibility and transparency, then a global government would probably be a good thing. I don't think that dividing ourselves into discrete states responsible only to themselves is really necessary anymore and never really contributed to global unity or well being.

It might be a big 'if,' but hey, swing for the fences or don't step up to the plate.

 

[Patroklos]

The only people I know who take the idea of a one-world government seriously are fundamentalist Christians who are obsessed with "The Rapture", the "Endtimes", and the Antichrist.

I used to hope for a Star Trek-style united Earth, but I don't that if that'll ever happen.

Apparently you have never heard of this thing called Communism.

 

[Shaihulud]

A global government will propably occur when we require one, due to threats or opportunities that requires a global initiative. I don't see it as an impossible scenario, but possibly in the future.

 

[SG-17]

I used to hope for a Star Trek-style united Earth, but I don't that if that'll ever happen.

Everyone should hope for a Star Trek-style United Earth. Then maybe it will actually happen.

 

[Winner]

The size of the world parliament would be huge and just unfeasible. You'll need at least 20,000 delegates!

Why? Though I agree that a world government at this point in our history would be a bad idea, I disagree with your reasons.

There are 193 states participating in the UN at the moment (or so says Wiki). Give each of them 3 delegates and you end up with a representative body smaller than the present-day European Parliament (which is far too big for its own good) - 579 MPs.

If this global state - let's call it Earth Alliance (the one who gets the allusion first gets a cookie) - was largely decentralized federation that only had the powers it needed to enforce peace, free trade, environmental protection, fair use of common resources (things like fisheries), and other things of common interest, I don't see a reason why it couldn't work.

One day, it will have to work if we are to survive as a species.

 

[Kyriakos]

Maybe we already are too damn many though. I think unions are good, but only when they have some kind of arguable foundation. The union of Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Fyromania ( ), Albania and Turkey into a Byzantine empire could work for example, (if any union in the balkans could, anyway) and so could the reunion of Austria,Hungary, Slovakia and Czechia.

Why? Because there would have been some historical background to it.

Now with the european union you do not have any such background, and time and again the powers that be (and sometimes even whole peoples) have shown they couldn't care less about distant to them countries.

Btw the idea of a balkan union is not new. It had been around prior to the balkan wars. It also was around (as a commonwealth of cultures) before the greek war of independence.

 

[Winner]

Nah, I am pretty OK with the EU. Up to a certain point, it's actually better to have more members, because then nobody can single-handedly dominate its agenda.

Also, I fail to see what could these smaller blocs of states accomplish. Austria, Czechia, Hungary, and Slovakia (and Slovenia, to round it up) would together have some 35 million people - roughly comparable to Poland. Which is nothing, it doesn't create a market big enough to really matter, even on the European level alone. The whole point behind European integration is to create something that big enough to be noticed and strong enough to protect the interests of its members.

You dwell on historical ties and connections too much. People who are educated often tend to do so, but "normal" people just don't care For them it matters little whether Bohemia used to have good ties with, say, Serbia 100 years ago, because its relevance to their lives right now is negligible.

 

[Murky]

This is a conspiracy theory that's been talked about for a while now. The chances of a one world government is extremely unlikely. Probably a .0000001% chance or something like that. The logistics of it would be a nightmare. There would be insurgencies everywhere. There's currently no security force in the world capable of securing the whole world at once. Even the USA, that out spends everyone else on military, is limited to what it can do at any one time.

There will continue to be global organizations like the United Nations and the IPCC. There will be continue to be NGOs to help feed the poor and do good around the world. These are good things to have around because they can help in anything that requires cooperation between nations.