Global Authority

[Hotdog]

Discussion for repective levels of global authority.(Examples- U.N., Kyoto Protocol)

I solidly believe in the presents of a governing body ahead national interest. This is a very small world, becoming tiny(and cramped). No longer can nations feel supereme to do whatever they feel without responsibility. The world should have a voice. To me, there seems no other logic appropriate.

[David Deas]

Well. We have one. Problem is such a governing body would have no practical way to enforce its rule.

[IamthePope]

Well. We have one. Problem is such a governing body would have no practical way to enforce its rule.

I think this is the essential problem with any world gov't theory. Without any means of enforcing their will, I doubt that any world government will have any authourity. The UN has the ability to sanction (a powerful ability) but without unmatched military power, I doubt that they could force a nation to bend to the collective will of the world.

IMO, The US is currently the closest thing the world has to a defender of the UN's will. As ironic as that sounds. After all the US and her allies were enforcing the UN resolutions during both Gulf War conflicts. and No nation can match US military prowess.

[Hotdog]

I guess it is a sort of utilitarian approach. I understand that it would be impossible to completely satisfy everyone, and have no amounts of corruption. However, it seems that it could overall represent the fair opinions of the world.

I think it might be less complex then you would imagine. It could work with a system of representives for each country, all inculsive. Each country electing their, or appointing their, representitive. While each country maintaining a great level of independence and variety. The matters which the global governess would have authority would be decided on by being brought to vote. It would only applicate for concerns that affected multiple countries. Sounding sort of familar? But, who am I, this meger man, to decide an attempted framework of nations. Have any suggestions, please display them. I am way over my head.

I dreamt the utopia, in a sea of madness and conflict.

I think this is the essential problem with any world gov't theory. Without any means of enforcing their will, I doubt that any world government will have any authourity. The UN has the ability to sanction (a powerful ability) but without unmatched military power, I doubt that they could force a nation to bend to the collective will of the world.

Less guns is the idea for me. I believe in changing peoples ideas by good example. I am probably naive.

[RusskiSoldat]

There will be no world government anytime soon.
I cannot imagine Israel and Palestine, China and Japan, USA and North Korea, Russia and Poland all under one political system.

[Ahiga]

Isn't one of the traits of the anti-christ (Whether or not this was from the times of the new testament, or a creation of modern authors on the subject), that he would have some part in the World Government?

I don't think it's a really good idea. The world itself is too diverse and I cannot see a Government ruling fairly with the diverse and conflicting cultures. Imagine a world Government ruling one of the Sharia-law Muslim Nations and a Democratic one like Denmark or America. How could they deal with the two very different nations and peoples?

[David Deas]

Well. More like *breaking* U.N resolutions than anything else.

[Caelius]

Well. More like *breaking* U.N resolutions than anything else.

You have to look at the broader aspect of things, not just Iraq. NATO and by extension the US are the only means by which the UN can exert it's will as the world's closest thing to an international governing body.

[David Deas]

What we have already established isn't being given enough credit. The U.N did a decent job of comming up with the right answers assessing the Iraqi situation prior to the war. As a matter of fact, in order to go to war with Iraq the United States had to break every single relevant U.N resolution. It'd be more than an enforcement problem if the United States didn't wipe their @ss with every single international law in the books on our way to Iraq.

[PacSubCom]

It'd be more than an enforcement problem if the United States didn't wipe their @ss with every single international law in the books on our way to Iraq.

If global government goes bad, there is nowhere to hide.

[Tom Paine]

If global government goes bad, there is nowhere to hide.

If national government goes bad it can be pretty hard to hide when the nations around you have also gone bad...

[MaximiIian]

The world should have a voice. To me, there seems no other logic appropriate.

Aye. The problem is, what should we rally around to unite the earth?
To me, the answer is simple: species. The world's population could be persuaded to unite on the grounds that, since we are one species, we should be one united nation.
Federal Republic would probably be the best system. With that, the nations can retain thier independence, but there is still a deliberative body (parliament) where the nations can discuss and solve thier problems, with an executive officer similar to a prime minister or a president as a figurehead for people to look to for guidance.

Now, it could work, but probably would require some catastrophic thing to kick it into motion.

[the Black Prince]

in theory it could work, and should work....


if humanity is ever going to spread out among the stars, we are best posed to do it as a united planet.
as for enforcement... each country contributes toward a budget, relative to its GDP, and part of this budget is military

[Tom Paine]

A united planet when we don't even have a single united nation in the world? Utopian.

[Aristophanes]

I don't know if anyone else has observed this, but there seems to be a general rule with governments that the larger the area and population they have to administer, the greater the corruption and abuse. The United States, with a strong history of decent government and rule of law, is RIFE with corruption, political excesses and abuses; and most other large democracies are 'progressing' away from accountability, official competence and integrity. World government is a terrible idea.

[bigfootedfred]

and most other large democracies are 'progressing' away from accountability, official competence and integrity. World government is a terrible idea.

Ive seen the same 'progressive' trend in an egg.
Usually, its called 'going bad'.

A world Body in theory is not bad idea.
But add the human element and lust for power and it decays quickly,
as it would depend on powerfull members not just doing whatever the hell they want regardless of the other members.

if humanity is ever going to spread out among the stars, we are best posed to do it as a united planet.

Its unfortunately more likely to be corporate.
Oh what fun if we find another species like ours, we can invade and nick all their resources....
Hail The Corporate Human Empire....look at our history, if we do find any 'life' out among the stars,
Humankind will most likley try to conquer loot and plunder them.

[Tom Paine]

Hey, the UK is supposedly one of the least corrupt governments in the world (maybe why corruption shocks us so much)...

[the Black Prince]

if we're so uncoprrupt, why are there so many corruption stories and allegations?

all that stuff with the minisaters husbands italian connections, and then blairs cash for peerages thing and so on...
not to mention the whole legislative and regulatory reform bill, which is just plain abuse of government power

[Tom Paine]

Well the last is inexcusable, but the others aren't so uncommon in any other nation as to elicit comment as they do here and certainly not to precipitate a scandal.

[Aristophanes]

Well the last is inexcusable, but the others aren't so uncommon in any other nation as to elicit comment as they do here and certainly not to precipitate a scandal.