With a bit of luck, never.
2007-12-26 05:43:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Richy the wise guy 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
There are two approaches to this - a constitutional approach similar to the U.S. convention in 1787 and the UN Charter adoption in 1945, or a gradual approach as pursued by the European Union from the 1950s to today.
To clarify, we won't have a unitary world government, and no one is advocating such (though many are rallying against the idea. haha)
What will be adopted will be a federal system that respects the reality that we have several diverse cultures, but also recognizes that there are a number of mutual problems that no one government can solve by itself or even under treaties based on the goodwill of the signatories. Rather than have taxpayers pay for overlapping and duplicative "solutions", a federal system will provide citizens the representation necessary to create an accountable international government and delegate to it the moral authority to solve truly global problems with global solutions.
While the U.S. and EU approach recognized that We the People required time to come together with a shared identity. In the U.S., the Constitution was limited and vague and most Americans favored their local or state heritages for decades after it was adopted. In the EU, the treaties focuses in on specific issues where there was already common needs (steel and coal to start, others later) while providing for a European-wide parliament to let the People come govern the expansion of the Union slowly over time.
This is how we should approach unifying our planet under a representative, accountable government. Start with those issues that don't respect borders - environment, terrorism, etc. - with a means for We the People, not just the ambassadors, to guide its ongoing development.
2007-12-29 04:11:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Tony F 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just how good is the UN at governing? It seems to me that lately they have been ignoring their intended purpose and bilking nations out of billions in fines over this Global Warming hoax that they love so much.
Do you really think a unified global government is such a good idea?
How then would the average person be represented? Is it fair to clump all different religions, cultures, etc. under one governing body? How would you prevent discrimination and unfairness? Shouldn;t the people decide what's best for them instead of a committee half-way around the world? I know there will be voting, but a country with a larger population would easily overrule that minority then what? Opression? War? genocide?
Bad idea buddy.
2007-12-26 03:48:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by Voice of Liberty 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Not to be a doomsday prophet, but isn't that one of the signs in Revelation of the end of days? And honestly, I don't think it will happen any time soon. While it may seem some countries are moving closer to that system, the whole world on whole won't be even close to that in our lifetimes. I think it'll take another 500-1000 years for that to be even a consideration. Not to mention, I think the EU and others will have countries that break away after a while due to differences from within.
2007-12-26 02:53:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Magnus 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The sooner the better. I don't know an exact date of course, but I would hope that it comes before the end of the century. A lot of traditionalists act like this is the worst thing that could ever happen, but it's really not. In fact, I think it's a good thing. By taking away nations' sovereignty to some extent or another we would greatly reduce the risk of war and self-destruction of the human race.
2007-12-26 02:55:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ua 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
When the liberals take over and force people to submit to them. Then they will have an illusion of peace and agreement while under the surface there is violence and force. When the liberal movements gain hold in places like the Middle East, we will see this closer to fruition. When the liberals gain power in most of the major governments of the world, they will move towards world unanimity. Such is the goal of people such as Bill and Hillary Clinton who want to put Hillary in as President of the US, and Bill in as President of the EU and the UN.
2007-12-26 02:53:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by SithLord 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I can't imagine all countries being willing to give up their individual sovereignty to a world power. Who would control it? And since the nations in the UN can't even agree on what form of government is best, how would it be set up? I just don't think it is feasible.
2007-12-26 02:52:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by ItsJustMe 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It will never happen. Look around the world today. There is so much dislike and hatred between countries. There can never be a unified Government until this dissolves. There will always be individuals who fight unifying everything, so the chances of it ever happening are very slim.
2007-12-26 02:51:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by cwiz59 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I imagine that the best chance for a world government hinges on the discovery of extraterrestial life. Governments are erected to protect a certain "type" of people, most obviously based on location, but also historically based on religion, race, and other factors. Until there is something different from humans to make other differences seem small and insignificant, there will not be a world government.
2007-12-26 02:58:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jonathan L 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yeah I'm going to have to be one of those nevers, because people are too power-hungry to let one person rule as president of the world with a group of lawmakers from across the world trying to solve problems. In short, people are power-hungry, and the political ideas are far too diverse for people to unify to one central government. For instance, theres communism, democracy, monarchy, miltary dictatorships, they all too diverse, plain as that.
2007-12-26 03:04:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
When all the largest worldwide corporations merge together to control "everything"
I'd say, between 5 and 20 years. Given the current rate of mergers and dissolutions.
2007-12-26 03:06:05
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋