English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

...or would a single "global governing entity" actually be more efficient than all of the separate sovereign governments? If anyone can give a convincing argument either for or against this idea, it would be most appreciated. Happy posting.

2007-06-29 09:56:19 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

5 answers

Most governments have trouble managing one country; I suspect that any government that manages to become "in control of the whole world" will find that global management is ever more difficult. They would be so far removed from local problems that they would be essentially disconnected.

The only realistic way to enforce global policies would be to be considerably more technologically advanced than the people you are controlling.

2007-06-29 10:21:54 · answer #1 · answered by Mathsorcerer 7 · 2 0

It would be highly efficient. Highly humanitarian. Highly peaceful (however forced that peace might be).

Sounds really good, doesn't it. Might deceive the entire world. Mightn't it?

Down with GROUPTHINK!! Up with free speech! It doesn't get better than what we have here, folks.

2007-06-29 10:06:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 2 0

As a person born in this country, I don't want people who aren't American running my life and making rules for me. We aren't advanced enough for Star Trek politics, not yet.

2007-06-29 10:01:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

look at the damage so far...homosexuality becoming considered normal, the government turning a blind eye to illegal immigration....my God, how much worse can it get? Much worse is my answer.

2007-06-29 10:05:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Do you see our politicians giving up power? Do you see a world who supposedly hates up giving power over to our politicians?
Not gonna happen...

2007-06-29 10:02:13 · answer #5 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers