Global Government
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-10-2014, 08:53 PM
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 08:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 06:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  We're talking about one nation, earth, and why it's desirable.

And I'm talking about real life.

And that's a different thread.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2014, 08:53 PM (This post was last modified: 07-10-2014 08:58 PM by Michael_Tadlock.)
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 06:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 05:30 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I am not sure how a world government would be practical or useful. The governments that exist today only have a mandate because of their historical precedence, or because of a shared cultural and ethnic identity.

Patently false. There are nations that are recent, there are nations of mixed ethnicity, there are countries comprising multiple languages.

"Patently false" is not the same thing as "I can find a counter point". In the general sense, nations rarely form without a racial or nationalist impetus. Obvious exceptions are in the cases where peoples create government in order to escape political oppression, I'll grant you. However, it is pretty much never the case that you need to former a larger government in order to do so.

Nations that comprise of many distinct ethnic tribes almost always do so for historically good reasons. The likelihood of a modern state forming in the same way is exceedingly slim.

We can talk about a unified world government as a hypothetical. There are very good reason why it is very nearly impossible.

Quote:
Quote: I don't think the human race is at a place where we can comfortably exist in universal homogeny. If a world government were to arise in our modern setting, it would either lack any real authority (not unlike our current UN), or it would be the product of military conquest and therefore tyrannical. I suppose in an ideal setting one unified authority could provide some advantages. I think the scale of our modern world is such that it becomes rather impossible to effectively govern on such a scale. I personally believe if anything we are going to move towards smaller and more decentralized governments in the future.

Who said anything about homogeneity?

Nationalism is one part of a shared identity is it not? With one unified state you lose sovereignty, you lose autonomy, you lose any sense of separatism or isolationism. Its ideals place unity over identity, compromise over making your own way. Now certainly some form of federalism or a confederacy can retain some of these, and I don't argue that the ideal world government, just the same as an ideal anything, would not be a good thing. Perhaps this is not the discussion you desire to have, but I find it much more interesting to contemplate why this will almost certainly never happen. The benefits of such a government are rather obvious if you grant it that nearly anything is possible. As a thought experiment it prompts me to consider all the reason that keeps us separate and distinct. What is it about the nature of governments and the tendencies of people that make such a union so improbable - even in our enlightened, modern age?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2014, 09:36 PM
RE: Global Government
Wouldn't there have to be some kind of borders though...?

I mean, everyone's shitting themselves over Ebola right now, imagine if there were no national borders and infected people could carry a virus wherever they fancied... I think a single, global government would be unable to manage a population 7 billion strong. I think passports would still be a necessity, or perhaps ID for everyone because crime is never going to be eradicated, and its a big old world for a fugitive to get lost in.

I think it would have to be done in stages... The first stage is possibly already under way, with nations grouping together into unions, such as the European Union, African Union and the South American equivalent.

I heard somewhere that an entity like the EU is best described as a confederation... The member states are no longer entirely independent, but its not a full blown federation either. I think a global confederation would be the best way to go about it. In which unions of nations would retain a sizable degree of autonomy, but in harmony with, and coordinated with other large unions. The supreme governing body would be there to enable that coordination.

Essentially, it would be a bigger version of the EU...

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2014, 09:59 PM
RE: Global Government
Since getting from where we are now to having a world government is pretty much an impossible task, its pros and cons are somewhat irrelevant.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2014, 11:00 PM
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 09:59 PM)yakherder Wrote:  Since getting from where we are now to having a world government is pretty much an impossible task, its pros and cons are somewhat irrelevant.

Not at all impossible.

Organisational changes, cultural changes and social changes happen all the time whether through slow evolution or through revolution or as part of managed programs.

Global-cultural change is just a different scale.

But if you would like me to expound on the 7 steps that would be required to make it happen, I'd be happy* so to do.

With commitment and resources, I reckon it could be accomplished in less than 100 years, maybe 50 (or even less if genocide is considered an acceptable method of improvement).

*Consultant rates apply.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2014, 01:39 AM
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 11:00 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 09:59 PM)yakherder Wrote:  Since getting from where we are now to having a world government is pretty much an impossible task, its pros and cons are somewhat irrelevant.

Not at all impossible.

Organisational changes, cultural changes and social changes happen all the time whether through slow evolution or through revolution or as part of managed programs.

Global-cultural change is just a different scale.

But if you would like me to expound on the 7 steps that would be required to make it happen, I'd be happy* so to do.

With commitment and resources, I reckon it could be accomplished in less than 100 years, maybe 50 (or even less if genocide is considered an acceptable method of improvement).

*Consultant rates apply.

Well we are only 200 years from Star Trek level Utopia if genocide is on the table (granted we did miss the mid-90's Eugenics War that killed 80% of the population). Theoretically a global government would work not sure if we are going to get there any time soon however.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2014, 03:57 AM (This post was last modified: 08-10-2014 04:00 AM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 08:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 06:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  We're talking about one nation, earth, and why it's desirable.

And I'm talking about real life.

No, you're more talking about another hypothetically that's irrelevant to the point. Your ideas are based on if we suddenly became a united one world government right now as the world stands... which isn't the only or main basis for the thread's hypothetical scenario. To say this wouldn't work is pointless when nobody is expecting or talking of it happening.

The point is in a future scenario when there could be a united world government. I've never understood the fear angle. Sure if it's a totalitarian force, but I don't think a totalitarian force could really hold power over the whole world for any period of time. I never got peoples concepts that individualism and cultures would be lost. What would be so drastically different from state/national sub-cultures that exist all across different areas in modern times or ancient times.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
08-10-2014, 04:56 AM
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 08:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 08:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  And I'm talking about real life.

And that's a different thread.

No it's not.
If something is suggested and it has absolutely no real world bases then that should be noted as a serious flaw against it...

Quote:No, you're more talking about another hypothetically that's irrelevant to the point. Your ideas are based on if we suddenly became a united one world government right now as the world stands... which isn't the only or main basis for the thread's hypothetical scenario. To say this wouldn't work is pointless when nobody is expecting or talking of it happening.

No, it's based on human nature.

Quote:The point is in a future scenario when there could be a united world government.

In a magical fairy land future maybe...

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2014, 06:33 AM
RE: Global Government
(07-10-2014 02:16 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(07-10-2014 01:22 PM)wazzel Wrote:  I do not see where a single world national government could adequately address all the local and regional differences. Big countries provinces have a hard enough time, I do not see how a single world national government would be any better.

O rly?

Literally any possible administrative unit will contain disparities and be subject to flaws. There are wards in my city that complain about the "imbalance" in the city council. My part of the province complains about being neglected by the provincial government. Smaller provinces in my country resent their proportional lack of influence. And my country is the smallest, least important G7 member...

While true, my opinion is that the larger the area being governed the bigger the disconnect. Here in the US I would prefer more stuff to be pushed down to the states. I think it would be better, as long as the federal government kept them on a common level.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes wazzel's post
08-10-2014, 08:26 AM
RE: Global Government
See most of the complaints I've been hearing are the same complaints you hear about governments now.
"Oh people would disagree!" "People have different values!"
"Not everyone would respect the new government."
Oh you mean like how it is right fucking now?

Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”

― Gordon R. Dickson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Winterwolf00's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: