World peace needs a world government?

Question

What do you think? Humanity wants and needs world peace. Wars do not seem to be the solution to problems. Isn't a world government a necessary step towards that goal? I am drawing an anology form the US civil war where individual states had to give up their sovereignty to the authority of a federal government.

Answer 1

World peace does not require a world government. Peace can be attained through free trade and friendly relations in attaining a common goal. For example, France was invaded by Germany during each of the World Wars, but through free trade agreements that evolved to become the EU they were able to obtain peace. Another example, would be Japan and the U.S. the new nuclear deal with India that was precipitated by the investment and trade with U.S. corporations despite conflicts during the Cold war. All countries have the common goal of economic prosperity. The best way to achieve this is through free trade based upon the economic principle of comparative advantage. These free trade agreements may evolve into a world government over time just as the European Union has evolved. But peace through trade comes first.

Answer 2

Well, I think we don't necessarily need a world government, but we still need an international authority. Like the UN was supposed to be. Sadly though, the United Nations, managed to be just that, a nationalist puzzle, where everyone wants everything, and no one wants Human Rights or Ethics, or even World Preservation.
If we want world peace, we have to concentrate on the "world" and that's something which we can only achieve if we actually let go of our local problems and wishes. The US signing the Kyoto protocol, Europe actually caring about the problems in Myanmar, Japan getting along with China, Germany with Irak...things like that. An institution concerned with just the Laws which humanity should uphold would be great, true, but what happens if we hand over too much power, what happens if we turn into a world dictatorship? I think we should preserve the United Nations, just make the world and all nations more aware of the problems today... and maybe, with a little luck, we might even have a tomorrow.

Answer 3

World peace will only be solved by a world war so big that all countries fall apart and everyone becomes everyone's enemy, everyone becomes everyone's friend. In times of war there is sympathy and compassion. In times of peace there is gluttony and greed in abundance, because there is no checks on that peace. Thus, a world wide government would form after such a war. Still don't we already have that to some extent? The solution to this world is balance not war or peace. After all, sure a government would form, but then how long would that last? Someone would mess it up, just give them time. Governments are simply illusions to keep people in check.

Answer 4

I have several problems with this. First, I doubt you could have a world government that was even remotely democratic. If you did, in the current world it would be heavily socialist which would be a disaster. If we look at the UN as a model, it is dominated by totalitarians, communists and socialists. Not exactly people I would want to be in charge of my life.

Second, you state that wars are not solutions to problems, but then turn around and give an example where war did solve a problem. The Civil War settled once and for all the issue of slavery in the United States. The first 80 years of US history is littered will failed negotiated solutions to slavery. War certainly solved Nazism, and stop the atrocities of the Japanese.

Is war a good thing? Not if you or a loved one dies, and not if you are on the loosing side. However nearly all significant political and economic improvements in the world have been proceeded by war. The reality is our world was, is and always will be dominated by the effective use of force or the threat of it.

Answer 5

Hell No! Who would get to vote them into office? The same people who voted the idiots into office that are there now. No Way! Maybe we need not look to a collective or all inclusive government, but at individual and global enlightenment. Maybe that would be a better way to approach world peace. How can we really work toward peace when 30,000 people in this country alone (which is higher than all other countries combined) died of gun shot wounds last year? I think if we all worked more on ourselves, trying to attain enlightenment than we wouldn't be looking to act out toward others. Just a theory. But yeah, I don't think a world government is good for anyone.

Answer 6

I believe World Peace will only exist with countries making friendly relations with each other in order maintain that peace, to sustainably manage the environment, solve the worlds largest problems and work towards every nation treating and respecting it's citizens well as possible, adopting and adhearing to just and natural inalienable rights, respecting individuals freedom of thought and conscience, and providing them with prosperity there goals. This does not require World Government and therefor attempting it is only a distraction. I also believe attempting to impose a world government would be so violently opposed that it would worsen the level of peace in the world not improve it.

Answer 7

It'll never happen. We can't even all agree in our separate countries about what is right. How is the U.S. going to merge with China or Iran and get along? How is Israel going to get along with the rest of the Arab world? How is Pakistan and India going to merge? Who would be in control?

There is too much division between countries, peoples, races, religions, and politics for a stable world government to form and last. Countries are not going to give up their sovereignty. People in the EU don't even want to hand over their sovereignty to a united European government. Imagine that on a world-wide level.

Answer 8

Some president allready though of that,its called the UN, we never pay our bill, and most American Press say its a boondoggle. They told the President, Do not invade Iraq, but did he listen? So it does not work or will not work untill all nations agree to abide by it.
UN, The Geneva Convention, helped alot of US Soldiers out in WWII, Korea,Vitnam as well as ever other Combatant. But we have decided to re right that so that we can detain suspects indefinatley and without any regaurd to thier saftey,dignity or well being. Torture is torture no matter how you legal one makes it.
The Islam and the Christians could agree not to fight in a World Govement, that would be awesome. Then the Shiites and the Sunnis, then the Cathols and the Protestants, it could work.

Answer 9

Theoretically the United Nations is a world government. The problem is that it does not have much authority. As the European Union gains power over the member nations, the number of world powers will be reduced and the UN should gain more authority.

We will need to develop one currency world wide and a basic world wide governmental structure. The UN has the goal of a world wide governmental structure, but UN rulings have yet to have the power to force nations to action.

I agree with you. We do need to have a world government in order to truly establish world peace.

Take care,
Troy

Answer 10

What? I have to have some type of criteria? Sounds like I'm attending a Repub Convention. Oh well here it goes any way. As long as humans have each other to hate/fear world peace will never happen. I think it would take non-humans/aliens from another planet to put our minor differences aside. Ronald Reagan has hinted toward it. I don't see any other way. Oh yeah my credentials, phuck it I wanted to answer.