What would life be like if there was a one world government?

[bluesmoke]

Traveling isn't easy. It's only gotten worse in the last 40 years - and if social media is any indication increased communication is doing more harm than good and is rampant with ideological based censorship. Same with traditional forms of media.

I would say the likes of twitter is more a way to take advantage of social media legal protection to communicate ideological based falsehood/propaganda/lies that previously could not be accomplished through traditional media.

 

[bluesmoke]

March 17, 2083
or Trump's second term, whichever is first.

Barron Trump would be 77 then. Could happen.

 

[Razoo]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

Forget it ......... we need to gt rid of ALEC pronto

The United States of ALEC: Bill Moyers on the Secretive Corporate-Legislative Body Writing Our Laws

Democracy Now! premieres “The United States of ALEC,” a special report by legendary journalist Bill Moyers on how the secretive American Legislative Exchange Council has helped corporate America propose and even draft legislation for states across the country. ALEC brings together major U.S...

www.democracynow.org

 

[Lisa]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

You seem to be jumping to conclusions that any world government would be a totalitarian dictatorship.

That would depend on what form of government it is and what rights that we as humans are guaranteed as part of that form of government. I would support a limited parliamentary forum of government or a constitutional republic with an expanded bill of rights to what we enjoy in the US. The countries of the world that we know of exiting would still exist but much like the various 50 states in the US.

 

[noonereal]

It would do everything badly.

could not be worse than 50 states in one country

 

[aociswundumho]

You seem to be jumping to conclusions that any world government would be a totalitarian dictatorship.

That would depend on what form of government it is and what rights that we as humans are guaranteed as part of that form of government.

All of that would be based on majority rule, and the end result would come to represent the average government of the 190 or so countries in the world. In other words, the form of government would be the one known as "leftist shithole".

 

[Lisa]

All of that would be based on majority rule, and the end result would come to represent the average government of the 190 or so countries in the world. In other words, the form of government would be the one known as "leftist shithole".

That majority representative rule would be balanced with guaranteed rights of each person, just as we have in the USA, but expanded because the Bill of Rights is not sufficient for the 21st century.
Would you rather that he have a monarch by birthright, a religious ruler such as the pope, or a totalitarian dictator as a ruler?

Our Constitution is a good start but I would make many changes that were not thought of in 1790 to address problems that have come up since that time over 220 years ago.

 

[Razoo]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

Never going to happen......... there are too many governments who want control others their way ..........

Cleaning up America's back yard might be a place to start which is going to take quite sometime.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

 

[Chomsky]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

No foreign wars?

 

[aociswundumho]

That majority representative rule would be balanced with guaranteed rights of each person,

Consider free speech. No country has free speech protections like the US. For example, nearly all of them criminalize so-called "hate speech"

Hate speech laws by country - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It therefore follows that this one world government would not even recognize the right to free speech.

Our Constitution is a good start but I would make many changes that were not thought of in 1790 to address problems that have come up since that time over 220 years ago.

No doubt you would would want the right to keep and bear arms to be severely restricted from what it is in the U.S.

That majority representative rule would be balanced with guaranteed rights of each person, just as we have in the USA, but expanded because the Bill of Rights is not sufficient for the 21st century.

I gave two examples: the right to free speech, and the right to keep and bear arms. Let's see if you support expanding these rights or restricting them.

 

[Craig234]

I tend to think a one world government is an inevitability. Others seem to think it's the end of the world. How do you think things would play out if one government ruled the planet? Would there be any positives?

First of all, no one knows. Second of all, it's an open question whether the government would be its own power center, like in China, totalitarian like in North Korea, or a tool of powerful interests like in the US, or a 'real democracy' like in Scandanavia. How it was set up, how much power citizens have, what checks and balances there were, all matter. It would have great benefits and other great menaces.

 

[Craig234]

No foreign wars?

In particular, a near end to the threat of world-ending nuclear war, which is a forgotten threat, much like viruses were in 2019.

 

[dex4974]

You seem to be jumping to conclusions that any world government would be a totalitarian dictatorship.

Nope.

I think it could and probably will be done better than our current way of doing things.

 

[Aristaeus]

No foreign wars?

Lots of civil wars though!

 

[Aristaeus]

Although an interesting thought experiment, I can't see how you could have one government representing liberal western democracies and conservative religious societies. There would also be a geographic alienation between most people of the world and wherever the government was located.

 

[bluesmoke]

Forget it ......... we need to gt rid of ALEC pronto

The United States of ALEC: Bill Moyers on the Secretive Corporate-Legislative Body Writing Our Laws

Democracy Now! premieres “The United States of ALEC,” a special report by legendary journalist Bill Moyers on how the secretive American Legislative Exchange Council has helped corporate America propose and even draft legislation for states across the country. ALEC brings together major U.S...

www.democracynow.org

ALEC just makes things simpler/easier for the corps. They would still hold sway w/o. Getting rid of them doesn't change that but for being a signal of a rising tide of the avg American which might do just that. IMO.

 

[ataraxia]

Why do you think it inevitable and what would it look like?

I think of the Earth Federation in Star Trek. A lot of the technology and developments foreshadowed in that show from the 1960s have come to pass. Gene Roddenberry was extraordinarily prescient. This may be one other thing.

 

[ataraxia]

That majority representative rule would be balanced with guaranteed rights of each person, just as we have in the USA, but expanded because the Bill of Rights is not sufficient for the 21st century.
Would you rather that he have a monarch by birthright, a religious ruler such as the pope, or a totalitarian dictator as a ruler?

Our Constitution is a good start but I would make many changes that were not thought of in 1790 to address problems that have come up since that time over 220 years ago.

Yes, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 would be something which might then actually carry a little more weight- including their protection for citizens of the US itself: the rights to food, clean water, shelter, a basic education, and access to healthcare.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Texas and California can't agree on things and people talk about a one world government. It's got to be the most stupid and naive conversation ever.

And I know exactly why people bring it up.

 

[ataraxia]

Texas and California can't agree on things and people talk about a one world government. It's got to be the most stupid and naive conversation ever.

And I know exactly why people bring it up.

Heck LA can’t even agree with San Diego on many things. But that doesn’t mean they stay in a state of perpetual warfare like some Italian city states from the Renaissance. People have always had disagreements. The key is to have formal systems and legal institutions where they can work it out without warfare and bloodshed and other dysfunctional methods. That’s what systems of civilization, law, order, and justice are all about and why have proved to be so highly helpful in the progress of humanity from the jungle.

 

[Lutherf]

Why is it so hard for people to figure out that, as a rule, government tends to take care of government first and then the people, but only to the extent that they continue to support the government?

 

[ataraxia]

Why is it so hard for people to figure out that, as a rule, government tends to take care of government first and then the people, but only to the extent that they continue to support the government?

Maybe. But does that mean anarchy is the solution?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Why is it so hard for people to figure out that, as a rule, government tends to take care of government first and then the people, but only to the extent that they continue to support the government?

Move to Syria.

 

[longview]

I think it is a very slippery slope!
For a one world government to be effective, it must be able to raise funds, and fine states that are out of compliance,
but the power to tax is the power to destroy, and should be granted carefully.
I think one of the most difficult parts, would be to get agreement on what are basic Human rights.