Pax Romana; reality or the shadow of a dream?

[Desperado †]

The concept; reality or the shadow of a dream?

Many have dreamed of world peace, though others have taken on the challenge in a different way. Pax Romana, to surrender under the Romans but then have a peaceful prosperous life. Would the world be better with one moderate ruler. Though a sense of nationalism would be lost, one of world nationalism would prosper. World peace would be achived, and with a good moderate goverment, world stability and thriving economy also. The world could be equal, and focus on the overall goals of humanity and the planet. But obviously the means of achieving this would be devestating, a war that would engulf the world, a third world war, which in this day and age with nuculer, could easily end humanity. This idea was pursued by the Romans, and has been used in many films, such as Kingdom of Heaven e.t.c..
But is it morally right?

[AqD]

That peaceful and prosperous life was built on slaves and heavy-taxed and abused non-citizens....
________
Sierra live

[Desperado †]

That peaceful and prosperous life was built on slaves and heavy-taxed and abused non-citizens....

It probably was, depending on which sources you look at. But with the right plan it could work fairly today, and with so many underpaid people in unfair markets working for big corporations today and with wars still ongoing between those countries is it that different?