what are the pros (and cons) of a one-government world?

it seems as though each time i bother to check out cnn or foxnews we're getting closer to being ruled by a single government, if we're not nearly there all ready.

i know about most of the cons, but are there any pros to living in such a world, and could it be a better place?

 

I honestly can't think of single pro.

 

CONS:
- Cultural imperialism. The dominant culture (Western, Chinese, Indian, etc) will force its beliefs on the rest of the world.

- Lack of sovereignty. It's common sense that localized governments understand their communities better than national (or even worse, international) governments, simply because they don't have as many people to watch over.

- Mob rule. Americans may be apathetic about a lot of things, but let's face it, the average human is a lot less educated than the average American. I don't want to be governed by people who understand nothing of politics, history, or economics.

- Socialism. The poor vastly outnumber the wealthy, and even though it's counterproductive in the long term for them, they'd probably vote for a socialistic world government simply because they don't know any better. This would send the global economy into a nose dive.

- Lack of alternatives. If there's a world government which operates under a political system or ideology that I don't approve of, where am I to go?

- Constant war. A global government would necessarily ignore the concerns of one region in an effort to placate another. Regional animosities would rise, attempted secession would be almost certain, and acts of terrorism and insurgency worldwide would soar.

PROS:
- Umm...err...none that I can think of.

 

Yes, we are headed for a one-world government. Whether we end up there or not depends on a lot of things. However, I can tell you one thing. If we do end up at one, it will be to our detriment.

 

I don't think a one government world will ever really work, eventually some country or a group of countries would make a change

 

If we are talking about a government (recognized, costituted authority) rather than a controlling cabal, one benifit would be the elimination or decrease in military spending.

 

All that would change militarily is the government would constantly be fighting terrorists, insurgents, and rebels in every part of the world, instead of other governments. Violence would probably actually INCREASE, because organized groups (other governments) are more likely to be deterred by the threat of force than less-organized rebels, who may behave irrationally.

Impoverished areas would view their new government as culturally imperialist (and rightly so). The notion that everyone would be happy with a global government and live in peace is naive.

 

Maybe not, it would depend on how the new government came to be.

Yes, it is naive and not everyone would be happy. But the police type function of counter-insurgency is different than the traditional military concern with foregein invasion. There would be a monetary saving there.

I am focusing on the possibilities of One World Government. Perhaps I am being too theoretical or optomistic.

You seem to be focusing on how we might get from here to there. Your vision of that path is rather gloomy. It may not be wrong, but it is gloomy.

 

And with the government policing insurgents, what is one to do is they, oh, say, don't like the government. The world's governments are fucked up enough as it is. You think it would be good to let these people control the entire world?

 

"one-government world"

very hard to define my answer it's not only a scary thing to have form of government

And to me, and for many of us, we already live in a one-government world,
Do I have to remember you what money is?

 

As long as this 'one world goverment' pick up my rubbish every week and provide the services i have right now.. i don't rightly give a shit.

 

I am not pro one-government, but it has some advantages. First of all, there would definatly be less wars (of course, there will be rebels and terrorists, but major wars between governments will not exist), it would be easier to control pollution, easier to ban nuclear and biological weapons (because without international wars, there is no legal need for such weapons), easier to travel abroad, etc.

 

Fascist pig Kandahar disregards me when I speak of a New World Order, yet he clearly understands its implications.

Interesting.

Pros of a One World Government: NONE

I see the prick was banned. Good!

 

Well, the pros and cons are one and the same.. Just depends on whether you're at the top, or the bottom.

 

Hi,
There are many and, unfortunately, even more urban legends about global rule of law. Here are just a few:

http://kirkomrik.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/a-gentle-intro-to-general-federalism

Just click on the link to an Introduction to General Federalism. In any case, I've copied and pasted a few here:

Global governance, for both economic and technological reasons, is inevitable.
There are two approaches: the default in play now known variously as Multi​

​

​

​

lateralism and “disaggregated States” (and which won’t work) or transparent,​

~ ​

​

​

​

Finali Ordo Seclorum ​

– Introduction to General Federalsim ~​

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page ​

​

​

​

7 of 82​

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Last modified by V. Van Houten ​

​

​

​

​

1/22/2013 Healdsburg, CA.​

openly ratified global rule of law. Which one do you want? Secrecy and
deception are becoming less and less viable as the information age heats up.
Transparency is the only long-term, winning option. To be clear,​

multilateralism and “disaggregated States” are creating a vast power vacuum ​

​

​

​

in the global arena whether we like it or not. That vacuum is exceedingly dangerous and needs to be filled with something worthy of our consent. By now it is no longer a question of whether one agrees with world government existing, it’s a question of what world government you’re going to allow to exist. Amongst those involved in the process it is now common knowledge that a “world government” of “disaggregated States” consisting of unaccountable, unelected and unnamed “agents” exists. And the very nature of this cartel makes it hard to convince the public that such a thing already exists. As Ann-Marie Slaughter put it, these are judges, lawyers, politicians, civil servants, corporate executives, philanthropists, etc. all of whom none of us would know or recognize. The fight today is to substitute a legitimate form of governance for the disaster already put in place.
III. As a result of the aforementioned, domestic policies in nations around the
world are already being affected and adjusted by “foreign agents” with a
“global agenda”; its just that the public doesn’t realize it yet precisely​

because of the secretive or low-key nature of the act. The irony of the
situation cou​

​

​

​

ldn’t be more stupendous: those screaming against “world
government” are too late and their protestations only make it harder to​

remedy the present condition. As the saga continues the problem only
deepens making the odds of victory longer and longer. This fact needs to be communicated because observing the internet and youtube its clear few if any realize this. It must be communicated that the idea of world government, ​

​

​

​

in and of itself, is not inherently “evil”. It’s how its done, whose involved and what its ultimate content is that matters.
IV. Lack of political will power to accomplish the most necessary and serious business; something that is becoming increasingly global and tragic:
a. Suppose it was discovered that a celestial object would impact Earth in
two years and annihilate it. The global political will to cooperate and
evacuate as many human beings as quickly, thoroughly and as justly
as possible would likely never happen without a competent global​

authority. In fact, they likely wouldn’t even tell you a​

​

​

​

bout it (see
above).
b. Suppose it were possible to feed the entire world’s population with​

donations from a handful of billionaires who were more than willing to​

~ ​

​

​

​

Finali Ordo Seclorum ​

– Introduction to General Federalsim ~​

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page ​

​

​

​

8 of 82​

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Last modified by V. Van Houten ​

​

​

​

​

1/22/2013 Healdsburg, CA.​

do so, but who could not because of jurisdictional and Rule of Law
problems in the affected areas. This happens to occur a lot.
c. Lack of common fiscal policy has resulted in a dramatic loss of
manufacturing jobs in the United States and a dangerous and
unhealthy pattern of reducing the capacity in the United States to
manufacture critical goods.
d. National borders exist as inheritors of an ancient paradigm of resource
competition by force of arms in which cooperation was not always
technologically feasible. Though this is no longer a limitation for
cooperation, and even though the continued presence of these borders
undermines cooperation today, we still maintain these borders
unnecessarily.
e. Lack of common fiscal policy has produced inefficiencies due to​

unnecessary factors such as “sovereign” import and export duties and​

currency exchange in the global trading network costing billions
annually.
f. While the waste aforementioned is measured in billions the bizarre,
unnecessary and ludicrous redundancy in military hardware globally in​

order to establish, support and maintain “sovereignty” and “foreign”​

policy wastes trillions of dollars. The impact this would have on the
global economy if these vast resources were used responsibly would
be phenomenal. Every single person on the globe lacking adequate
housing and food could be provided for with those funds. The current
state of affairs is therefore completely unnecessary.
g. Untold numbers of deaths, injuries and cases of emotional trauma due
to permanent separation of consanguinity occurs every year for no
reason other than the fact that someone drew an abstract line across
the ground and called it a national border.
h. The ability to deal with emergencies in public health, such as the
spread of AIDS across national borders, has been greatly undermined
by lack of a central tracking and remediation authority with the power
to simply operate in multiple jurisdictions.
i. Psychopaths and despots are drawn like magnets to nations having the
least stable and established governments where they can seize power
and abuse and brutalize their populations for decades. As soon as this​

terror begins the cowards hide behind the right of “sovereignty” and​

demand that no one intervene. Because of the selfish interest
principle, nations will routinely ignore or overlook this in order to serve​

~ ​

​

​

​

Finali Ordo Seclorum ​

– Introduction to General Federalsim ~​

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page ​

​

​

​

9 of 82​

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Last modified by V. Van Houten ​

​

​

​

​

1/22/2013 Healdsburg, CA.​

their own interests. Unfortunately, this practice is rampant across the
globe.
j. Criminal enterprises heavily exploit varying laws across the globe and
the tendency of nations to block cooperation between jurisdictions for​

“sovereign” and “nationalistic” reasons is rampant. As a result,​

investigating and prosecuting criminal behaviour is unnecessarily
extremely difficult when perpetrators cross borders. Stranger
abduction and human trafficking for sexual exploitation has, for
example, benefited from this condition greatly.
k. Global traders in the futures markets exploit the existence of multiple
jurisdictions to employ and direct mercenaries and other agents
overseas to create disasters, catastrophes and other crimes from other
countries where they cannot be prosecuted.
V. Technological Proliferation and Sophistication
a. Technological progression has vastly outstripped our sophistication in
the social contract and governments cannot keep up. General
Federalists call this ​

​

​

​

technological deregulation. If this isn’t addressed​

soon all equity in law, and justice itself, will be impossible to issue.​

And only a global scheme can fully address this, something we’ll take​

up momentarily.
b. Related to the aforementioned is the presence of weapons of mass
destruction whose number and type is bound to increase as technology
progresses, creating a hazardous global situation where no central
authority is in control.
VI. Court shopping by the elite
a. While not common knowledge, those with the money and influence
typically hop jurisdictions around the world to obtain favourable Court
and governmental rulings and subsequently, in many cases, evade
justice in other jurisdictions. The victim is left without lawful remedy.
VII. The world is shrinking rapidly, too fast for current modes of ideological
thinking
a. Related to II, this means that relationships between individuals
globally are intensifying socially, legally and economically and a
system of justice to resolve disputes is needed. Otherwise, justice is
absent.
b. Specific Ideologies are quickly becoming overwhelmed by the sharing
of culture, views, opinions and other ideologies precisely because
ideology is by definition a ​

​

​

​

special case of propositional governance
(General Federalism is the first system of logic surrounding the social​

~ ​

​

​

​

Finali Ordo Seclorum ​

– Introduction to General Federalsim ~​

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page ​

​

​

​

10 of 82​

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Last modified by V. Van Houten ​

​

​

​

​

1/22/2013 Healdsburg, CA.​

contract we know of that is truly general and not hobbled by this
limitation). Ideological belief systems lack the generality sufficient to
be applicable to ​

​

​

​

all societies. But because it comes with strong opinion,
much like nationalism it tends to remain staid, blocking any ability to​

see “through the lens” of other ​

​

​

​

ideological belief patterns. The United
States, with its Roman Empire complex, is especially adversely
affected by this. Most Americans exhibit a marked tendency, especially
evident when placed in an international perspective, to only
comprehend local ideological belief patterns and seem to lack any
conscious awareness that other systems even exist, much less the
reasons for or reasoning behind their form and design. And all
ideologies tend to nurture this state of mind which is a conspicuously
provincial one. General Federalism, and the system it propounds as a
solution, can help enlighten and break this pattern.
VIII. Sovereign regimes tend to compete with each other for a share of finite pies of resources. This leads to inefficiency but, more importantly, to any hope of establishing a concept of economic equity (not to be confused with “equality”) in which parties involved in commerce may resolve disputes. This concept is called General Equity in General Federalism. But perhaps of greater applicability is the realization that in many cases the lack of general equity means that millions may have good cause for dispute but do not even realize it. General equity tends to uncover and expose these causes.
IX. If war is not desirable, anything that mitigates it is a good thing if the cost to do so is not greater
a. While war is probably inevitable, any system that tends to prevent it
and bring conflict into a Court setting will likely be an improvement.
b. The vast majority of conflicts result in a much larger death toll for
civilians than military personnel. Any degree to which Rule of Law can
draw people off the battle field would be an exponential improvement.
c. Having a condition in which the world is governed by nearly two
hundred separate, fully sovereign regimes is insane and is the very
essence of international anarchy. This condition, viewed at the level of
interstate relations, is by definition anarchy. This cannot be good for​

humanity. Two hundred years ago anarchy at this level didn’t matter​

since the technological infrastructure was too limited for the problems
of anarchy in this arena to be realized. This is no longer the case and
constant struggles between nations over the selfish pursuit of
resources will only get more intense.​

~ ​

​

​

​

Finali Ordo Seclorum ​

– Introduction to General Federalsim ~​

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page ​

​

​

​

11 of 82​

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Last modified by V. Van Houten ​

​

​

​

​

1/22/2013 Healdsburg, CA.​

X. If poverty is not desirable, anything that mitigates it is a good thing if the cost to do so is not greater.
a. This is related to the economics topic, but basically, a system of justice in economics is needed. Poverty is also inevitable, but anything that mitigates​

- kk

 

I am sure there are pros, just none you want to admit to liking.

 

consider this

there has always been a 1 whirled govt
on this planet

the worldwidespidersweb is a datamining [life sucking] op
with the agenda of profiling everyone on earth


all the political/philosophical/national [alleged] differences are part of the
veils to keep people in conflict and confusion

its been working for 440,000 yrs
if it stops working humans will be exterminated
ands a new egg hatched

filters are reading this thread and gauging who is a threat
getting ip's, addresses, names, networks, even associations ...


now consider that is wrong and go on with meaningless chatter ...

 

What a completely pointless subject, we assume that we are talking about the USA being that single government....ruling China...Russia.....Africa......even North Korea, please!!

These countries are not going to agree to the US ruling them and asset stripping them, so they would have to conquer them. They couldn't even conquer Cuba, on their doorstep, with 12 people living there and after 50 years of blockade, they still can't. The USA have never won a war in their entire history, unless you count arriving late in two when all the battles were won and lost.

Anyone who thinks there won't be wars, is a fool, there will be one big perpetual one.

 

3407LOVE

1AM
26ETHER
3V010VE
4EVER
5TAR5HIP COMMAND
6ODHEAD
7HE4UTHOR
7here's nothing after 7 beacuse 7 ate 9 ... 7he7imeless7ruth
4 micro-chip off the ol aerospace research supercomputer block.
4 Key note from 7he he4RT of the Grand Ole Opry MasterPeace of 7HECRE4TOR.
3407=LOVE
http://www.itanimulli.com

 

Coulcnt agree with you more there dude :bobby: