|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 310
|
Should we be governed by a "world government", with the United Nations Assembly becoming a directly elected parliament? Should nation-states give up more of their sovereignty to supranational institutions?
The model of the nation-state has traditionally provided the basis for international relations. However, there are many problems which are impossible for individual nation-states to solve and which require international cooperation, for example environmental problems, third world poverty, international law, trading rules, etc. And cosmopolitanism is coming back into fashion; many people consider there to be such a thing as an international society with international laws. This has serious implications for the old nation-state model and evokes the possibility of the United Nations evolving into a popularly elected "world government". Should (and could) such a government exist?
__________________
Every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lives here on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam. http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
|
I don't think this idea will work; the world is just too big, and there is no way every country will agree to join. Even now, the UN is having trouble enforcing their law(economic sanctions do not work every time).
There will be countries looking for loopholes in the law, and there are bound to be complaints of the "world government" being biased against smaller countries. I have always thought that large countries (like Russia/USSR, USA, China) have a hard time keeping track of everything that goes on in their respective country, and it will be even harder for a government to keep track of the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
I V vi iii IV I IV V
|
But is there one man or woman on Earth that knows all the details of every single country on the planet?
No, that's why we have many people who know more about their specific areas. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
FFR Player
|
But even with so many people running things, there is no way every problem will get resolved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
GotR Creator
|
This is why we need some sort of super-computer to run things. Robots keep the rebellious countries in line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
FFR Player
|
I think its a bad idea simply becuase its to larg to be controled by one government they have tried to rule over large areas in the past and they simply cannot do it, They can enforce laws in some places where they cannot in others they can control in some places where they cannot in others and the laws very so greatly upon countries now theres no way they could come to any soft of equallibrium. Who says any of the coutries would join, and what if some did and some didnt or all but one..
__________________
![]() Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
FFR Player
|
Well, everyone knows what happens to single gov'ts with big empires. Rome, Greece, Ottoman. There need to be seperate levels of this idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Certified Calendarwhore
|
I don't think there should be a world government. This is how I see it. While it might act well in the beginning, eventually it'll break down. The government cannot enforce its laws everywhere effectively, and some parts will be ignored. Then, some countries may want to secede possibly because they are dissatisfied, and they build their power in the ignored areas, causing a large problem for the world government to deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
FFR Player
|
We do have a world government, it's called America.
![]() No, there shouldn't even with the power being split in to local, state, and federal the entire world would be too hard to run with because there aren't enough optimists to run it. Sure, there's a handful qualified for the job, but not enough to fufill the needs of the world at the same time. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: hell
Posts: 580
|
Quote:
Oh no! A lightning strike caused our super computer to turn evil and is going to nuke every country! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
GotR Creator
|
It's a fail-safe for all computer systems. When some piece of it breaks, and it's no longer able to function to its fullest capacity, it defaults to EVIL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
FFR Player
|
all i need to say is think about the matrix, i mean seriously one of these days we could very possibly out do our selves to the point it cuases us harm. Not saying th matrix is in anyway fact, however would knows what really could happen, somthing can only be so good before its bad.. not to mention all the flaws and faults and shit in technology right now, its barely reliable.. do we really want that running our lives.. talk about mass chaos.
__________________
![]() Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Jersey, Barnegat
Posts: 21
|
i saw a movie were this happens and the antichrist comes down to kill people
__________________
Estuans interius Ira vehementi Sors immanice Et inanis Sors immanis Et inanis Estuans interius ira vehementi Estuans interius ira vehementi Sephiroth Sephiroth Veni, veni, venias, Ne me mori facias Veni, veni, venias, Ne me mori facias Veni, veni, venias, Ne me mori facias Veni, veni, venias, Ne me mori facias Sephiroth Sephiroth |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
FFR Player
|
this is a good idea because world problems would be solved which would save all ppl and humans would be more united
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Certified Calendarwhore
|
I doubt that people would be more united as the result of a world government because usually people tend to group with others who share the same opinions. Supposedly, if there was a world government, what would happen if there is an issue in which many parties with many opinions disagree on? Let's say that none of them wish to compromise. When a decision a reached, it somewhat favored a few of the parties and not the others. Those parties would likely get mad and accuse the favored parties, and this would cause a large conflict.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7
|
what a stupid post, you just watched star wars 3 and came back and made this wtf, such a gd noob like ull nvr be a jedi, ur liek stupid
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 310
|
Quote:
Anyway, the issue of human rights is indeed universal. To that end, intergovernmental cooperation has secured the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and numerous subsequent conventions. There are many intergovernmental conferences on human rights and other global issues such as the environment. And where agreements are not reached, or are not satisfactory, this reflects the genuine difference of interest and opinion amongst the different nation-states; it would be wrong for a global government to impose a single policy in these circumstances.
__________________
Every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lives here on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam. http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|