NationStates Jolt Archive

Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fear a one-world government.

You should fear ALL governments.

ehm...
I'll give you a cookie? :p

And can you be an apologist (making excuses) for something that doesn't exist yet? Wouldn't they just be One-world government proponents?

World Government is far in the future, do not fear something you will probably not live to see.

Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fear a one-world government.

Because it wouldn't waste your money going to war with other governments?

"you must learn to fear yourself before you fear others"

A one world goverment comes from a differnt mindset.

It would not work today as man is still driven on the accumulation of wealth and power.

War will not end with our current approach to running the planet.

World Government is far in the future, do not fear something you will probably not live to see.

you never know ;)

Mankind is to war-like and powerhungery to have a oneworld goverment. it si like communisum. looks good on paper, but not in real life. human instinct is just to powerful.

Who told you fear would be allowed?

Because it wouldn't waste your money going to war with other governments?

True, it would waste my money instead on suppressing dissident movements and eliminating opposition. Sooo much better, right?

True, it would waste my money instead on suppressing dissident movements and eliminating opposition. Sooo much better, right?

Ah yes, I forgot, the only possible type of world government is a totalitarian super-dictatorship. :rolleyes:

Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fear a one-world government.

Because the fear is the fear that it would be a tyranny by UN, whereas in reality any FUNCTIONING whole world government would need to be the most democratic and free ever seen on the earth to encompass all the different peoples of the world.

And like the other guy, I will give you a cookie.

EDIT : :confused: And WTF is up with the word apologist? What am I apologizing for? I am supporting an idea. And I notice this word only comes up with a negative connotation, and so far I've only seen it wielded by conservatives. So, to be egalitarian, there's an answer you anti-world government apologist. :p

I am not a proponent of one-world government, but I always find it funny that it is assume that a one-world government inherently must be an oppressive dictatorship and/or communist.

What if a world constitution was adopted almost identical to the US Constitution. Hell, add a clearer Second Amendment if you like.

Nations became states.

(US states and similar national subdivisions just remain in the same place in the hierarchy.)

Elected President, Senators, Representatives, etc.

I can see many, many problems. I don't think it would work.

But it wouldn't necessarily be 1984 and black he-lee-o-copters.

You must fear a world government because it will surely lead to totalitarianism, bloodshed, etc. You also should also question your government and other governments if they are doing something you don't agree with. You have to stand up for your beliefs. If I didn't stand up for my beliefs in abstinence, that abortion is wrong, etc., I could be swayed by anyone, and that's not good.

When goverments start to unite, we are on our way to good times, no more things like war only those grazy politicians yapping. Oh damn not a chance

What if a world constitution was adopted almost identical to the US Constitution..

That's a better option? The US constitution, as we say here, is not that much to hang in the Christmas tree. No offense.

That's a better option? The US constitution, as we say here, is not that much to hang in the Christmas tree. No offense.

:p

'dems fightin' words, Pilgrim!

Given that those fearing one world government here are Americans, it seemed the best example.

And, yes, the US Constitution works rather well, thank you.

One world government in the sense of a State is not even a question. What is more likely is that the UN(or some other organization) could receive power of all military strength(reserves limited to natural disasters and some extreme riots). However, the current permanent seats of the security council plus some other big nations would run the UN(or whatever it would be called) and all the small nations would have to follow.

Definately all blue sea forces should be banned except for UN use. With severe limitations the risk of war might decrease.

I think that soon China will take over the role of super power and we will just go on as usual, just being.

:p

'dems fightin' words, Pilgrim!

But I want to be a scantily clad Indian (Native American)! If that can't be arranged, just the scantily clad will do.

And, yes, the US Constitution works rather well, thank you.

If that's the case, why do you people still seem unable to decipher it?

The problem is that various governments are always founded on the prevailing ideologies of the people involved. In the West, that means democracy and human rights. I have a guy in my history class who is Ukrainian, and he says that the idea in Russia has never been democracy. It's been more along the lines of a benevolent czar. In China, the paradigm is that you always show deference to those above you, with no regards to rights. Is there any possible way to bring those together? I doubt it.

Ah yes, I forgot, the only possible type of world government is a totalitarian super-dictatorship. :rolleyes:

No, it isn't the only possible type of World Government; it is possible a World Government would slowly form over a long period of time from cooperation between different blocs of countries then that government would not be very centralized by its nature and would not be a dictatorship. Countries would have to give some of their sovereignty willingly to this World Government and if it depends on its constituent states for support then it probably wont be a dictatorship

No, it isn't the only possible type of World Government; it is possible a World Government would slowly form over a long period of time from cooperation between different blocs of countries then that government would not be very centralized by its nature and would not be a dictatorship. Countries would have to give some of their sovereignty willingly to this World Government and if it depends on its constituent states for support then it probably wont be a dictatorship

In case you didn't notice, I was being sarcastic.

Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fear a one-world government.

They would have to make decisions in the interest of the entire world as opposed to a few rich countries. As a reuslut we would be able to control TNC's

Because it wouldn't waste your money going to war with other governments?

You are right! Unfortunately it would waste our money by going to war against its citizens.

By war I mean control. Ensuring that all of us citizens are nice productive sheep who dont question authority, becase obviously the politicians know whats best for the people. And anyone disagreeing with them is a "malcontent" who is going to disrupt the lives of other citizens and it is therefore justified, for the common good, to use extreme measures against these people.

The 'world government' as you put it is ruled by the world, not dominated by it (as if they were alien overlords or something). Fearing your own government without good reason borders too much on paranoia.

If you are alluding to the UN, they don't collect taxes, they aren't a real government. They basically feed the poor and use the little resources they have to keep the world from going to Hell. Maybe its a good thing they have limited resources, maybe it isn't.

Maybe you should list some reasons why you think it's a bad idea.

Mankind is to war-like and powerhungery to have a oneworld goverment. it si like communisum. looks good on paper, but not in real life. human instinct is just to powerful.

You can add 'anarchism' to this list :p

You must fear world government because it will be ruled by blood sucking vampires!!!

Other than that I don't see why you should fear a world government more than any other stupid government.

the #1 reason to to fear a one-world government....


it aint gonna happen so your fear is better described as paranoia

You are right! Unfortunately it would waste our money by going to war against its citizens.

By war I mean control. Ensuring that all of us citizens are nice productive sheep who dont question authority, becase obviously the politicians know whats best for the people. And anyone disagreeing with them is a "malcontent" who is going to disrupt the lives of other citizens and it is therefore justified, for the common good, to use extreme measures against these people.


I really don't see why a world government would be any more oppressive than a national government.

I am not a proponent of one-world government, but I always find it funny that it is assume that a one-world government inherently must be an oppressive dictatorship and/or communist.

What if a world constitution was adopted almost identical to the US Constitution. Hell, add a clearer Second Amendment if you like.

Nations became states.

(US states and similar national subdivisions just remain in the same place in the hierarchy.)

Elected President, Senators, Representatives, etc.

I can see many, many problems. I don't think it would work.

But it wouldn't necessarily be 1984 and black he-lee-o-copters.


Well, maybe 1984 is a bit of an exageration. But still, the US government is getting more intrusive and abusive, not less. It is the nature of governments to grow larger and more controlling with time. There is no incentive for government departments to grow smaller(budget, personel, reach) with time.

A politician the wants to get elected/re elected must at offer to the public solutions to problems. If the problem doesnt exist, it is in the politician's interests to create one.

Similar thing with beaurocrats. Government programs dont die, they find new names. It is in the interest of senior civil servants to extend the reach/authority/size of the departments they run. They are not rewarded for shrinking them, and the get more "power" by growing them.

I am not arguing that there is some sort of sinister plot. I believe that people coming up with this stuff truly think they are "helping" society and making it better. But slowly, over time, more and more regulations build up. The government becomes more and more involved in the everyday lives of its citizens.

Look at the UK with its CCTV system. Couple that system with facial recognition technology meant to catch terrorists at airport. Great you say, now we will be able to catch them when they are walking the streets. But what happens when tech improves to the point where you can plug in a national or global drivers license database into it? Are you comfortable with the govt being able to track everybody's movements through out the day?

I really don't see why a world government would be any more oppressive than a national government.

Less checks and balances. A single government is less susceptable to global scrutiny.

Citizens also cannot vote with their feet

Human unifacation into a Global Government will probably never be achieved unless the curcumstances the human race was facing demanded unity. The cultural differences, seperate ambitions, split ideals, and strong nationalism all divide the human race in seperate groups. Groups that have been known as countries. So while an Earth-wide Government is good in theory, it will probably never be achieved, unless humantiy was facing global destruction.

Human unifacation into a Global Government will probably never be achieved unless the curcumstances the human race was facing demanded unity. The cultural differences, seperate ambitions, split ideals, and strong nationalism all divide the human race in seperate groups. Groups that have been known as countries. So while an Earth-wide Government is good in theory, it will probably never be achieved, unless humantiy was facing global destruction.
...which it will when we run out of oil, and big businesses do nothing to stop it. My theory is that once that happens, the entire world, mostly highly developed areas such as Europe and America, will collapse into a feudal system similar to Middle Age Europe. People will be fighting amongst themselves trying to survive because international and even interstate travel will be virtually impossible thus rendering large commerce out of the question and the economic collapse of nations will fall upon the world. Many of these "factions" that will form in each country as a result of loss of big businesses and way of life as we know it, will be overrun by corrupt leaders that will destroy nearby factions. Then humanity will continue to self-destruct until there is nothing left to lose and we either adapt to a nomadic way of life without any further advancements in any field of science or economics etc, or we will have already destroyed ourselves along with the planet in a nuclear war. Cuz hey, we all say nuclear war will destroy the world, and there'd be only one way to find out...

...which it will when we run out of oil, and big businesses do nothing to stop it. My theory is that once that happens, the entire world, mostly highly developed areas such as Europe and America, will collapse into a feudal system similar to Middle Age Europe. People will be fighting amongst themselves trying to survive because international and even interstate travel will be virtually impossible thus rendering large commerce out of the question and the economic collapse of nations will fall upon the world. Many of these "factions" that will form in each country as a result of loss of big businesses and way of life as we know it, will be overrun by corrupt leaders that will destroy nearby factions. Then humanity will continue to self-destruct until there is nothing left to lose and we either adapt to a nomadic way of life without any further advancements in any field of science or economics etc, or we will have already destroyed ourselves along with the planet in a nuclear war. Cuz hey, we all say nuclear war will destroy the world, and there'd be only one way to find out...


Maybe if oil starts to run out, we can re-open all those coal mines, and get the steam trains out again. Woo! Take that, Thatcher!

Really, though, I can't see the feudal system coming back, even in the case of economic collapse. Anarchy, maybe, but not the feudal system.

The only way Mankind will ever unite is if

1) Hostile Aliens invade us with the intention to enslave or exterminate.

2) Half of the Human race is wiped out by a massive natural disaster like a Super Volcano going off.

Other than that, basic human nature will prevent a one world gov. However a confederation type organization imo is quite possible, an effective one, not like the UN. Yeah don't mind me, I'm just daydreaming.

A one world government would not work anyway. Too many different ideologys, too many dividing lines, too many different groups. These forums are a excellent example of why one world government would never work.

One world government could work, but it would have to give local regions a great deal of autonomy. A federation of free nations is much more likely than a massive distatorship. For the most part, each nation would remain as it is, except for a shift in military control from individual nations to the world governemnt and firm international trade regulations. It would probably see the end of import tarrifs.

Of course, if you give enough time for corruption and space colonization you could end up with a Gundam-esq sitution.