World Government?

Question

A world government would solve many of our problems including global warming. Why has no government taken the lead on this issue and who should be first.

Regards
DL

Answer 1

My opinion....

It is needed. Primarily, resources of the earth will be properly allocated and used. There will be no one-man dictating....as it will be a government represented by all, just like the UN but this time it has the final say on policy making. There would be no political boundaries. No more nationalism like protecting the motherland (US, China, Europe, etc). Now, its protecting mother earth. There would be no other races but only HUMAN RACE. The main objective would be for the preservation of life on earth and of earth itself (as possibly can) and the exploration of other "habitable planets".

Imagine, it will be 1 resource doing this, and not like we do it today...US sends rockets, Russia Sends rockets, China sends rockets.....waste of resources when in all, they have the same goals i.e to explore the outer-space. This is an example, and can be replicated to all "human endeavors" (i.e. research and sciences).

Answer 2

Its un-necessary. Governments CAN and have worked together to solve international problems when they want to.

World Government as a concept is not such a great idea, we might just want to stick to some international institutions like the UN.

There have been many instances where the UN has had problems with corruption and malfeasance and allowed some fairly bad stuff to happen because the member states couldn't get their acts together.

Many states, like the US (currently) have an ambivalent relationship with the UN where once it had a good relationship.

Russia and China both have been on the receiving end of a few UN sanctions and UN led military operations, so its important to understand that not every nation has exactly the same interests.

Most recently the situation in Darfur, where the US and other nations (that really don't care) have spent months engineering arguments and reasons why "it's not a genocide" or an "ethnic purge" and therefore UN shouldn't have to get involved. The same thing has happened repeatedly in Rwanda/Burundi, Liberia/Sierra Leone/Ghanna/Congo, Angola/Rhodesia, Israel/Palestine (and all of their neighbors, repeatedly),the situation with Pol Pot and the purge in Cambodia.

However despite these obvious failings, there are instances where the UN has performed admirably in providing food assistance and very notably in the administration of public health measures to eliminate diseases (smallpox, polio (almost)).

IF you had a world government, what form of government should exist, a democratic system , or an autocracy/tyranny?
What would happen to the states that didn't join this new world government?
What would occur to member states and more importantly their citizens if state A was a democracy and state B was a dictatorship, who rules?
How are those rules enforced?
What standards of Justice are applied?
English or Metric systems?

The basic problem is that the world is not a homogeneous group, should their be a standard salary for public officials of the government, this sounds like a good idea but if a mid-level clerk is paid 15,000 dollars in Ghana, maybe that's good money, but in Manhattan, they'll live on the street.

Finally and this is the real argument for why world government is not such a great idea, assume there is a large federal world government, the idea of a large standing constabulatory ARMY is of course one of the major points of definition for a government. So what exactly happens if the government were to become corrupt or elect a sociopath like Hitler into office. There wouldn't be a USA or Russia to save us, we'd have to hope friendly aliens swung by and helped liberate us, OR we'd have to destroy the governmental systems from within, which could take decades.

Don't worry we're all in good company when thinking about this subject.

“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” - CS Lewis

“The only tyrant I accept in this world is the 'still small voice' within” - Ghandi

“When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.” -Plato

Answer 3

it's coming. pretty scary though. do you really think it will solve world problems? one leader ruling everyone? that's very frightening! how do expect one part of the world to want to do for another. the United STATES are each looking for handouts for their own. the EU states are all looking for the same. this world cannot live under one rule. it's not healthy.

Answer 4

No one wants a world government.