2007-01-08 07:35:48 · 27 answers · asked by Humpy 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Caroline Lucas – But seeing as she was a chief spokeswoman for the Green Party, and they don’t even believe in the need for a national leader, I’m not sure what she’d say to the job offer.
I actually believe a world government would be a great idea, though not sure about the world president.
If you had 10 million people per constituency, you could have a parliament of just over 600. The constituency boundaries would obviously have to transcend country boundaries at points, but this would be an advantage as it would help remove nationalism; surely the main reason for a world government.
They wouldn’t even need legislative powers. They could just be a forum of debate and judgement. Everyone knows that the UN is a joke. Malta has equal voting rights to Indonesia, a country will a population nearly 500 greater. Plus it’s just the elite of each country acting in their own interest, usually undemocratically elected in the first place. A fully democratic world government could cast a judgement with a much greater relevance. The UN couldn’t condemn the Iraq invasion, as the UK and US both have a veto, and the French opposition was spun as French self interest. If a world government voted to condemn the war it would be a lot harder for the white house and number 10 to spin.
We could start one now. It wouldn’t need to replace the current national governments. It would of course need a lot of capital to build a council chamber and field and election. But if I had several billion pounds it’s what I’d do before anything else.
And then I’d vote for Caroline Lucas. ‘Cause she’s great.
2007-01-08 08:22:51 · answer #1 · answered by James C 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Chuck Norris
2007-01-08 15:42:08 · answer #2 · answered by C B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Dan O, *I* would make a great first World President.
Obviously because I know everything. Just ask me!
2007-01-08 15:41:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The world is not ready for a world president, or for a world government. No one person or political ideal is currently up to the task of governing the entire world.
2007-01-08 15:39:26 · answer #4 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Keep your eye on Swartzenegger....
Research his childhood and past, including the politics/current events surrounding him. There was talk of amending the Constitution for him so that he could run for president.
He has all the right ingredients: diversity, political support, megalomania and Hollywood's portrayal as a crime solving hero...
Frightening!
2007-01-08 16:04:47 · answer #5 · answered by no worries 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Irans lunatic midget president
2007-01-08 15:37:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Biblically, I agree with Sgt. Pepper. The anti-Christ will be the first and only world leader.
2007-01-08 15:38:18 · answer #7 · answered by Boatman 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That's a terrible idea, why would we want a dictator of Earth. The whole idea of a one world government is very bad and I'm disappointed that you would like to see this.
2007-01-08 15:38:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Bob Dylan...no one would be able to understand him, but he can carry a tune...and like with his music, we can just make up things for the words in his speeches
2007-01-08 15:44:58 · answer #9 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Vladimir Putin
2007-01-08 15:42:36 · answer #10 · answered by RockiesFan 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋