• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democratic countries are coalescing into a new humane world order.

A "United Countries of the World" would, by definition, be a totalitarian government. That you don't see that is - frankly - a little scary.
That is not the definition and it is scary that you think so. What do you consider the U. S. government?

Totalitarianism is a form of government that attempts to assert total control over the lives of its citizens. It is characterized by strong central rule that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression. It does not permit individual freedom.
 
Government has been evolving in to a single world government since the first troop moved into a cave. Do you read history?
Obviously not.
 
A couple of points.

This may seem a bit pedantic, but democracy per-se is not always a good thing. We use that word as a shorthand for "free societies that do things in a way that we think makes sense". Typically, that respect individual liberty, the dignity and value of the citizen, a certain amount of capitalism (face it, capitalism produces prosperity like no other system), and a certain liberality.
Thus was born the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Bill of Human Rights, and ancillary documents, which have been ratified by most nations of the United Nations and has formed the basis for most subsequent International Humanitarian Law and various treaties. It is based not on the forms of government, but the basic principles of governance.

I don't think we will ever have a true global government (at least not in my lifetime), but I think more and more international relations will be governed by collective instruments such as these. Even the USSR participated in the drafting process, and China has acknowledged it, although its human rights record is, at best, "uneven". These documents may be aspirational, but they can guide future behavior.
 
Thus was born the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Bill of Human Rights, and ancillary documents, which have been ratified by most nations of the United Nations and has formed the basis for most subsequent International Humanitarian Law and various treaties. It is based not on the forms of government, but the basic principles of governance.

I don't think we will ever have a true global government (at least not in my lifetime), but I think more and more international relations will be governed by collective instruments such as these. Even the USSR participated in the drafting process, and China has acknowledged it, although its human rights record is, at best, "uneven". These documents may be aspirational, but they can guide future behavior.

The majority of the membership of the UN could be said to be "uneven", at best, on human rights. In many cases their acknowledgement of the documents is purely pro-forma and not even aspirational. Just sayin'... half the nations of the UN aren't places I'd even want to visit, let alone live.
 
That is not the definition and it is scary that you think so. What do you consider the U. S. government?

Totalitarianism is a form of government that attempts to assert total control over the lives of its citizens. It is characterized by strong central rule that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression. It does not permit individual freedom.

I don't claim to know what the other poster meant exactly.

I'd feel comfortable saying that an effective world government (as contrast the UN) would inevitably be authoritarian, in that it would have to impose itself by force on many nations and peoples of the world.

Think about it. The world is far from a monolithic culture... so VERY far from it! Could the same entity govern San Diego, Saudi Arabia, Amsterdam, Palestine, India, Australia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Russia and China... without imposing on some/most/all of those places/peoples in a forcible manner?

So perhaps you're proposing a form of federalism, with a measure of local autonomy. Perhaps you recognize that laws/gov't that works in Oregon won't work in Iran. Ok... but can these disparate regions even achieve enough commonality, enough sense of mutual interests, to agree to place themselves under a singular governing entity?

I don't see that happening, in any foreseeable future this century, without being imposed by force on at least some of those nations. And what if some nation decides to secede? If their people vote to secede? Will they have that right, or will they be prevented using force or economic coercion?

These are some of the problems involved.
 
"New World Order" is a pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

If some countries in the global community don't want to play along e.g., China, North Korea, Russia, Vietnam etc..), then there cannot be a New World Order.

Also, not all members of the U.N. are democracies. Some are republics, some are Monarchies, some are communist, some are dictatorships. It would be unfair to ram democracy down their throats.

Would it be fair if the People's Republic of China petitioned the U.N. to spread Communism? Of course not.

Let democracy take root wherever it can. But the U.N. should not coerce other countries to become democratic. The U.N. needs to make ALL countries feel welcome at the U.N. assembly. This is what best promotes world peace.
good points .......the best way to 'sell' democracy is through the process of education and material gain for all citizens...living in peace and understanding.....slowly.....it works the same for 'selling' the removal of religious fundamentalism and racism.....

when one looks at Russia today and China today one sees educational and material gain like never in history, and the masses are generally content for now......but how long will they allow themselves to be educated and globally accepted into the family of man and listen to men like Putin and Trump and Xi and the religious dictators of Islam and fundamentalist Christianity......pray to God not much longer.....
 
Back
Top Bottom