NationStates Jolt Archive

Think about it. The current state of the World is stupid.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.

We're all on one planet together. Does this strike nobody else as obvious?

Think about it. The current state of the World is stupid.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.

We're all on one planet together. Does this strike nobody else as obvious?

dude... you soooo stole my europe thread.

Think about it. The current state of the World is stupid.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.

We're all on one planet together. Does this strike nobody else as obvious?
Great Idea... now all we need to do is find a leader everyone can agree on.

The world doesn't unite because humanity simply has too many differences. Differences in race, religion, sex, ideaology, looks, lifestyle choice, etc

dude... you soooo stole my europe thread.
Nono... he's got a point. A united Europe would still leave the problem of warfare against whatever's left out there, so he really didn't steal your thread...

but his name is just too close to my ex-French teacher's name for me to feel comfortable around here :eek:

We'd still need an army, because the sheer scale of the world means people could still rebel or wage an insurgency (think Montana militia types) against the government.

The main reason people don't unite is because of nationalism; ultimately, every other conflict can be reduced to that.

it is all the allies fault. if they had not resisted, today we could be one happy united reich under the fuhrer.

The world doesn't unite because humanity simply has too many differences. Differences in race, religion, sex, ideaology, looks, lifestyle choice, etcA separate country for ugly men and beautiful women. Interesting.

The main reason people don't unite is because of nationalismThey can learn to be patriotic about the new World State.

The main reason people don't unite is because of nationalism; ultimately, every other conflict can be reduced to that.
Nationalism is a fairly recent (last few centuries) development. Most human conflict is caused by the human need for conflict. Without something to oppose people get antsy and start lashing out at things to generate some conflict.

And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.You forget civil war. Being one country does not exclude war.

it is all the allies fault. if they had not resisted, today we could be one happy united reich under the fuhrer.

I invoke Godwin’s law :p

Nationalism is a fairly recent (last few centuries) development. Most human conflict is caused by the human need for conflict. Without something to oppose people get antsy and start lashing out at things to generate some conflict.

That's true as well; I suppose you could reduce it even further than nationalism.

A separate country for ugly men and beautiful women. Interesting.

They can learn to be patriotic about the new World State.


when I say looks, I dont mean how "beautiful" or "ugly" someone is considered to be, but things like hair color, size, etc. Remember Hitler's insistence on a master race of blond haired, blue eyed Aryans?

It is, but very slowly. Wait 500 years and we're there.

It is, but very slowly. Wait 500 years and we're there.
In 500 years, humanity will cease to be.

A fill quarter of it was only a century previously, more if one encorporates the USA, under the illustriousfalg of Britain:)

*hums Rule Britannia with Earl Gray tea in hand*

*hums Rule Britannia with Earl Gray tea in hand*

Earl Gray!? Down with bergamot, up with Assam!

A one nation world is a very scary concept. The large the government, the more corrupt it is apt to be, and the easier it would be to revoke certain rights that citizens cherish.

Earl Gray!? Down with bergamot, up with Assam!

Duel you for it:p

I'm sure that copious reasons have been given as to why europe is unable to unite, and you're asking about the world? :headbang:

the world aint gonna unite before hostile aliens attack, and even that'll be a rush job that falls apart when the immediate problem recedes. see orson scott card, ender's game etc.

the world aint gonna unite before hostile aliens attack

so we get an intersteller union yay!:D

What exactly is wrong with having a bunch of small countries? Why do people seem to want to consolidate more and more?

And as to why a world government wouldn't work: People just want different things from their government. Could you imagine Texas and France operating under the same system?

What exactly is wrong with having a bunch of small countries? Why do people seem to want to consolidate more and more?Because you can then institute equitable wellfare for all.
If there's only one 'country'-esque collective, then your social status and well being won't depend so much on where you were born anymore.

The world does not unite because the government would be too central, beuraocratic and ignorant of the state of its citizens to be effective

The rich people of the west don't want to share $ mith the poor of the rest of the world

Minority groups would be forgotten. You just need to have a seperate government to represent seperate groups, or at least not more than a couple of several groups

I dont know how to say this other than... people have conflicts and just want to fight eachother. If the world were ruled by a central government, civil wars would break down a government which would not be able to control them, and the resulting collapse of world order would be in the intrests of nobody

If the world were ruled by a central governmentBut why would the world necessarily have to be ruled by a heavily centralized government?
There are different ways to organize a government. If you take the USA as an example, a lot of power still lies with the seperate states.

It's a Martian Plot.

But why would the world necessarily have to be ruled by a heavily centralized government?
There are different ways to organize a government. If you take the USA as an example, a lot of power still lies with the seperate states.

I think the US is too centralized.

Why doesn't the world unite? Very simple: people do not want to sacrifice their cultural uniqueness and be assimilated.

I think the US is too centralized.But it's not so much centralized as, say, France.

And if the world united, you could already cut down a lot on many centralized branches of government. e.g. You don't need a foreign ministry, since there are no longer any foreign countries.
And it'd be convenient to have instant worldwide jurisdiction for handling 'federal' crimes. No more criminals slipping into another country to get out of reach.

Why doesn't the world unite? Very simple: people do not want to sacrifice their cultural uniqueness and be assimilated.Uniting does in no way equal being assimilated. In fact because of the EU all our indiginous minorities have become much better supported to protect their language, culture and other heritage.

But it's not so much centralized as, say, France.

Quite right, but France is one state, whereas the US is a federal union of 50 states. I don't mind my own state being as centralized as France, I just don't like Uncle Sam trying to do everything.

Of all the Western democracies, the US is actually one of the least centralized. So many things are controlled by the states.

AFAIK, Canada is similar.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.
Good work. Now who's gonna prevent other groups from forming armies of their own? That obviously requires the threat of force :rolleyes:
And don't bother giving me that 'World Govt Army' argument - they're just as big a threat to liberty as the world government itself.

Sorry, but it will be a cold day in Hell when I surrender my sovereignty, MY RIGHT TO SELF-RULE, to somebody else. My one vote is weak enough as is; it doesn't need to be weakened any more.

Of all the Western democracies, the US is actually one of the least centralized. So many things are controlled by the states.

AFAIK, Canada is similar.

Yes, Canada is quite similar in their decentralization. However, I'd prefer the US to be even more decentralized.

Think about it. The current state of the World is stupid.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.

We're all on one planet together. Does this strike nobody else as obvious?

[shrug] People are different, and have wildly, drastically different opinions and beliefs without the slightest hope of rapprochement. If we had some sort of leader/king/dictator-oriented government, no one could possibly agree on a leader, and if we had some sort of global rule-by-the-people, the entire concepts of "majority" and "minority" would become pointless, since a tiny minority whose ideas would be completely discarded might be an entire subcontinent. Majority rule becomes pointless and meaningless on too-large or too-different (which often coincide) scales.

Just wait a few years and you'll have it. Seriously. No joke. No one believes me! NAYSAYERS! THEY'RE ALL AGAINST ME! *thrashes about room* *psychiatrist comes in with a tranquilizer*

...anyway, The peoples of the world cannot unite without a strong leader to force them together and cut their governments apart. This leader must be able to hold the world together until no one from the "Old Times"(before unity) exists. Since said leader likely won't outlive anyone, they must train a strong successor should they die. After all this is finished, you might be able to open the polling stations. Btw, said leader would need to issue a constitution that they are subjected to.

The world won't unite until the world is threatened enough to unite.

Or until my super race of Dragons with Guns conquer the world.

The Problem Is, If You Put The World Under One Whole Central Government, The Government Can't Possibly Handle The Entire World. So It Will Split Into So-Called "Sub-Governments" Which Are Still Controlled By The Central Government. But Eventually, Those Sub Governments Will Split From The Central Government, Forming New Countries. And This Process Will Continue. Forming One Centralized Government Is Only A Temporary Solution.

"... Why doesn't the World unite?"

Um ... how about because we're all stupid, selfish, greedy and envious? :)

"... Why doesn't the World unite?"

Um ... how about because we're all stupid, selfish, greedy and envious? :)Ya know E, I have to agree with you on this one.

A one world government is an inevitabilty, provided we don't destroy ourselves first.

My personal prediction on when it will happen is right after we make contact with an intelligent alien species.


Nothing like something really strange to put your petty differences in perspective.

Not enough string to tie the continents together.

when I say looks, I dont mean how "beautiful" or "ugly" someone is considered to be, but things like hair color, size, etc. Remember Hitler's insistence on a master race of blond haired, blue eyed Aryans?

It wasnt "blonde haired blue eyed", it was just the Nordic/Germanic race in general that they viewed as the master race. You dont have to have light hair and light eyes to be nordic/germanic, but you DO have to be Nordic/Germanic to have light hair and light eyes, and that was the point they were trying to make. For whatever reason.

Think about it. The current state of the World is stupid.

We don't need hundreds of little countries, do we? It would be a lot easier with just one. And overall everybody would save a lot of cash, as nobody would need an army, because everywhere would be part of one country.

We're all on one planet together. Does this strike nobody else as obvious?

Yes that would be the best thing for the world to do.

Why didnt you make this a good Public Poll question?

"... Why doesn't the World unite?"

Um ... how about because we're all stupid, selfish, greedy and envious? :)
Heh, this is funny.
I thought it read, "Why doesn't the World untie?"

And so I'm reading this thread title, thinking:
"It already has!"

Maybe not hilarious. But worty of:
:p