NationStates Jolt Archive

...is it achievable or desirable? long term views.

i would say that it is desirable, but too bored to type my thoughts out, so i'll just argue with other people's opinions instead ;)

When the aliens come...

yeah, not till space ramps up a bit and people have something to unify for, other wise it just woulnt work.

I think it's achievable, desirable, and inevitable. But it's not in the near future, in fact it's a very very long way away. I wouldn't risk to guess what form it would take, though. Probably some kind of democratic confederation evolving into a tighter union.

Enivitable, necessary, and ( eventually ) workable. But as someone said, "The Devil is in the details." The details are what we are trying to work out at this very moment.

It'd be difficult. Although Russia and America, who would be fairly large components of a WG, claim to have settled their differences, but there is still a degree of mistrust, simply from all the years of the Cold War. But, having said that, if they could truly work together, then I reckon it would have a very good chance of happening

It may eventually be inevitable, but I don't see why it would be desirable.

It may eventually be inevitable, but I don't see why it would be desirable.

It is desirable because throughout history we have gradually come together into larger and larger groups, and each time it has made us stronger than the sum of our parts. Unification nearly always works, provided it is not rushed.

...is it achievable or desirable? long term views.

i would say that it is desirable, but too bored to type my thoughts out, so i'll just argue with other people's opinions instead ;)

Unified world government? It may well be desirable, depending on the circumstances that might create such a government. Or it would be destable, depending on the circumstances.

Is it achievable? Not right now, but it is conceivable that conditions will arise that allow such a thing to happen.

A couple of questions though? Why would we unite under one world goverment? What would happen to the 190+ nations of the world? Would they become part of a confederation? Perhaps they would merely be a united front of willing nations, banding together for one agenda? Or would a new nation arise, one that took all under its banner and proclaimed them its citizens?

Would it be military, economic, or political in nature? Would it be a scientific pursuit like space travel, or an attempt to solidify world economies into a more cohesive system? Would we expand beyond earth or keep to ourselves and concentrate on making our home better?

...Would it be hard to play nationstates then?

I don't think a single world government is particularly desirable. I mean, today, if the government of your country is doing something you don't like, you can emmigrate or seek asylum. What if some Saddam Hussein or Fidel Castro type character came to the top in this world government? Where would you seek asylum?

I like the idea of a variety of different governments around the world, so people can go live with the ideology which suits them best.

I don't think a single world government is particularly desirable. I mean, today, if the government of your country is doing something you don't like, you can emmigrate or seek asylum. What if some Saddam Hussein or Fidel Castro type character came to the top in this world government? Where would you seek asylum?

I like the idea of a variety of different governments around the world, so people can go live with the ideology which suits them best.

The very issue currently playing out on the international stage.

It definately is possible, but not for a long time. My guess is it wouldn't be led by one president or prime minister, but by some sort of council with representatives from multiple cultures and peoples. For example, one person could be elected to represent Asia, and another to represent Europe, another to represent North America, etc, etc. The biggest hurtle is that to do this, the idea of different countries with borders, militaries, currencies, etc, would need to be completely erased, and definately some nations (US, China, Russia, UK for example) would most likely oppose losing alot of their influence in the globe to this kind of government.

Then, you would also need something that would cause this kind of unification, such as a nuclear war or the invention of faster than light travel and the discovery of alien races. Who knows.

Lets hope something like this happens sooner than later, since I can't stand the way the world works today. lol

No, it's not desirable. I can see benefits, but there are several risks which make it undesirable:

*There is a chance that the world governent could turn into an inescapable global tyranny.

*To unify the vastly differing cultures of the world would be a total sham. This is one of the reasons why the USSR did not work.

When the US decides to conquer or destroy the rest of the world...

When the US decides to conquer or destroy the rest of the world...

You're either very anit-US, or a megalomanic. From past expierence with you.. megolomanic

the idea of a one-world government is very efficient. i mean, at the risk of sounding like a libertarian, governments waste a lot of money, if there was only one man who needed a private jet instead of 190+ (just an example, the real savings would be with the civil service and the military).
there is of course the worry about absolute power and the inescapability of bad government. i'd just say make sure you don't get bad government...

is it inevitable?yes.human history is the history shows it.
will it be soon?prolly not.ot untill people let go of useless things such as culture and tradition.
will it be good?well if we have let go of culture and tradition yes....otherwise its prolly a global tyranny and bad.

A one-government world, with the same kinds of hooligan's as run every country on earth now would result in the death of personal liberty in the name of Security.
Those who were made "Leaders" (and face it, goverment is leaders) would as likely spend all of their time consolidating power and squishing dissent.
And we'd still have National, State, Province, County, Burrough, City, Village and Parish governments still up to their old tricks. How much oversight does humanity need? :sniper:

HA!

Layarteb laughed at me, but I knew my plans would be useful on SOME thread!

This is a government for about the year 2500, after humanity has created colonies on other planets, and some of the colonies have declared independence:

" I am thinking a kinda hybrid between the Russian Federation and the United States. You have alot of small Republics inside of a regional federation, and the the federations make up the entire planet. The republics have about the same amount of power as a State in the U.S.s does, but just a bit more(like the ability to have offical religions, languages, etc.) The planet will have one gloal currency, one global army, but many different cultures, religions, etc. If one republic attacks another republic(which would be near-impossible since the republics don't have their own armies, just small militas), then the rest of the region must take action. If the rest of the Region is unable to solve the problem or IS the problem, the the entire planet will the called in to solve the problem.

There would be an election every 3 years for President of Earth and for the presidents of the Federations. Whoever wins President of their federation will nominate a candidate for president of the Planet. There will then be a global election, and then the victor will be President of the United Earth Directorate. All the other candidates from the other federations (or, in the case of federation elections, republics) will serve as a council-member on the Council of the U.E.D. or their federation.

The Councils are the most powerful group of people in the legislative government. That is split into Three parts. On the bottom there is the House of Representatives, from which each Federation(or, in the case of a Federation Government, Republic) sends a number of people proportionate to their population to represent them. Then there is the Congress, from where each Federation(or Republic) sends 3 people to represent them. Then, there is the Council(which has already been explained). For a federation bill to be passed, it must first be passed by the federation House of Representatives, then by their Congress, then by their congress, then by their council, and the finally by their President. If the Global President see's it as a problem for the entire world, he can have the power of Veto. For a bill to be passed for the entire world, it is the same except for if it is a bill that concerns military action, the presidents of each federation will look over it. If a majority rules in favor, it will be sent to the president, who will ratify it.

The colonies are governed by a governor, who is elected by the people of the colony. They then have just one Parliament, and then the governor will ratify it if the President of Earth gives the O.K. Bills that have to do with Sucession, etc will go through the Earth Congress first.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Thelightningstar/World2250.png
(A map of the Federations)."

OK. Some questions.

Elections every three years. This means one year of getting to know the ropes and two years of campaigning for re-election. Are you deliberately proposing this short a time scale to prevent the executive branch actually doing anythig?

The councils. Why is the senate representation not to be proportional to the population. Are you particularly wanting to give a higher percentage of representational power to some regions? (Nordic Union, Greater Australia p.s. what have you got against the kiwis?)

Colonies are not to be democratic then, just good old terra firma can have representation?

The federation distribution is a little random. Why is mexico in North America, when culturaly it is much closer to South America, as is shown by the term Latin America?

Istanbul is still going to be divided between two regions?

Would you not have been better following the lines of cultural division that the world already has?

It is unacheivable until we learn to accept other civilisations and their existance, and not to try and westernise, islamicise etc. such civilisations.

No, it's not desirable. I can see benefits, but there are several risks which make it undesirable:

*There is a chance that the world governent could turn into an inescapable global tyranny.

*To unify the vastly differing cultures of the world would be a total sham. This is one of the reasons why the USSR did not work.
I agree.

Here's my idea behind a one-world government...that's not really a government but more of a United Nations with teeth. And claws, and M-16s.

The New United Nations is put forth sometime around 200-300 years from now, when it's actually reasonable to do so and after several Cold Wars involving factions such as the European Union, China, the United States, and the Islamic world that also involve many proxy wars. Some areas are destabilized; others are built up.

The UN exists largely to keep the peace between nations, supported by the largest nations of the world. By now, the world will have changed dramatically. Britain will be united with continental Europe in a European federation that encompasses much of eastern Europe as well as western Europe. Many former Soviet bloc nations will join, and even Turkey will be a member. Russia will not join and will either have to modernize completely or will exist in authoritarian limbo, falling prey to whatever the next utopian ideology is. Unfortunately, I predict the latter will come true, and Europe will fight a bitter Cold War with Russia.

At this time, a world government will be a balance of the largest states, only they will need to give up a measure of sovereignty. The old UN was a failure because of absolute veto power and because any nation that didn't like a UN edict could tell the UN to go fuck itself. A more powerful UN can enforce its legislation; of course, it's going to take something drastic to force nations to give up a measure of sovereignty. They may even agree to use the same currency.

A world government would not work if it's just one or two states as the "poles." There needs to be a few, preferably six or eight...hopefully scattered throughout the world. An American state, a European state, an Asian state, an Islamic state...maybe throw in India, South America, Russia, Latin America, hopefully Africa or Australia...maybe even a second Asian state (after all China and Japan may not be too inclined to cooperate...)

Another problem with a world government is that at some point, an entire nation is probably going to disagree with the ruling of the world government. They'd probably split appart from the world govt., resulting in civil war on earth. Or actually it would just be bog-standard war, since the other nation would be a complete nation. Anyway, my point is, I don't think there will ever be a time when the entire world agrees on something. Too many people will be too displeased by the policy of the world government for it to ever exist without opposition and "rogue states".

...is it desirable?
Only if I'm the boss.

-snip-
Not to mention a ridiculous amount of power if ridicuously few hands

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Thelightningstar/World2250.png
(A map of the Federations)."
Oh yes, I'm sure that Pakistanis would be delighted to be told that they were citizens of "greater India".

Someone once said:

"A world government will only be possible once there already is one."

That sums up my opinion, pretty much. Can't remember for the life of me who said that, though (the quote might therefore be a little paraphrased, too).

possible - yes (for a while, anyway)
desirable - HELL NO!

Oh yes, I'm sure that Pakistanis would be delighted to be told that they were citizens of "greater India".

Hey, I've lived in Pakistan, and I believe it is possible.

I mean, they lived together for a long time under the British Raj. Only two(Sindh and Baluchsitan, I believe) of the provinces that make up Pakistan actually wanted to leave India. If there was a greater Indian state where all religions where accepted, it could work.

Also, this is just a REGION, not a COUNTRY. If you read correctly, most modern Nations will remain semi-autonomous, under the head control fo the Federation(kinda like Russia)

HA!

Layarteb laughed at me, but I knew my plans would be useful on SOME thread!

Me? Nah!