The Student Room Group

One World Government

I was just curious to see other opinions on this?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Well why don't you start by giving yours?
You mean one government for all?

Terrible idea.
One day I guess, when the aliens invade us,
Reply 4
Original post by Mathemagicien
Inevitable, but its a long way off.

Shame the British Empire fell, we could have had it a lot sooner.


So you would be for the idea? May I ask why? ^.^
Reply 5
Original post by The Roast
You mean one government for all?

Terrible idea.


Indeed I could imagine the controversy xD what's your reasoning though?
Reply 6
Original post by Mathemagicien
Once we get a better form of government, and all countries reach a similar economic and cultural state, a one world government would be more efficient, and enable humanity to progress scientifically, technologically, and most importantly of all, more easily colonise other planets.


I must say I completely agree. However, is there a chance that it will also cost our lives with how opinionated we all are today. If we can't settle on one planet without wars how do you think we will cope with others? It could lead to others to attacking us if they see how violent we are with each other.
(edited 7 years ago)
The People's Republic of Europe?
Reply 8
Original post by Mathemagicien
That's why a one world government is preferable before we colonise; although, since the cost of colonisation is going to be extremely high (the nations owning the colony won't want to risk that investment in a war) and take an extremely long time to develop (by then we'd probably be much more unified, even if not one world government) to anything approaching an entity that can wage wars, I don't think its really a problem.


Once again, hands down some really good points. Power sometimes though isn't meant to be handled by humans, wouldn't it give the government too much power over us and control us even more than we already are?
Or furthermore, perhaps other life has already been found but is hidden to avoid chaos.
Views?
Reply 9
Hm.. Why so?
This would be impossible in our current situation and highly unlikely to ever happen for an extremely long time, although barriers between countries do seem to be slowly breaking down.
The main problem is how one government could control the entire population on this planet when individuals have such different attitudes, opinions, etc. Basically it all comes back to the reason we have countries in the first place. Also, who would be in control? Electing a leader would be a nightmare.
Reply 11
Original post by Mathemagicien
Power over humans must be handled by humans; who else would have the power? Perhaps machines, if we ever develop advanced AI; but that is quite dangerous imo

I'm not afraid of governmental power, as long as it is a competent government in charge, who have our best interests at heart. The latter is the problem - we need to ensure governments are competent and benevolent, not necessarily curb their powers.

What do you mean "perhaps other life has already been found but is hidden to avoid chaos"? You referring to the conspiracy theories around Roswell and all that? If only our governments were that competent. In reality, they haven't got a chance of keeping that stuff under wraps for long, if it were happening. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7449927.stm


No I don't believe the Roswell incident, however I do believe that there is something hidden. Such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-d0wBYrMxU&index=108&list=FL7HfrUyld8ANmzT-P1SdN-g and all of the others that worked in similar positions. However, I am uncertain of my judgement as I believe nothing is fully the truth or a lie when it comes to things such as this.
Reply 12
Original post by aliman65
This would be impossible in our current situation and highly unlikely to ever happen for an extremely long time, although barriers between countries do seem to be slowly breaking down.
The main problem is how one government could control the entire population on this planet when individuals have such different attitudes, opinions, etc. Basically it all comes back to the reason we have countries in the first place. Also, who would be in control? Electing a leader would be a nightmare.


I couldn't agree more with electing the leader, no matter who it would be there would always be a problem with them according to everyone's controversial minds. I find TOWG hard to picture, unless of course WW3 happened and a certain country gained power over others which would truly be devastating.
Because 1-sized-fits-all rules don't work for nations that are incredibly unique.
Not sure about a world government. Perhaps, robots will deal with these matters for us? :P

A world government might happen eventually, however I think it will be an empire (or two empires) rather than a coalition. The reason is an empire is more united than lots of different factions (can you imagine the back stabbing that would occur in a coalition?).

Either we impose our culture on others and they accept it while an single or two men hold equal power (think Roman empire/Spartan except with less corruption and more democratic).

One day an empire will raise, however there are alot of different ways of going about creating one (its not just war empires have been built on, for example Carthage).
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 15
Original post by mrITguy
Not sure about a world government. Perhaps, robots will deal with these matters for us? :P

A world government might happen eventually, however I think it will be an empire (or two empires) rather than a coalition. The reason is an empire is more united than lots of different factions (can you imagine the back stabbing that would occur in a coalition?).

Either we impose our culture on others and they accept it while an single or two men hold equal power (think Roman empire/Spartan except with less corruption and more democratic).

One day an empire will raise, however there are alot of different ways of going about creating one (its not just war empires have been built on, for example Carthage).


An interesting concept. However, if it's two men which hold the same power (such as North and South of Rome) isn't it likely that they would just end up attacking each other? Rulers are thirsty for power. Also, what's your opinion on the matter?
Original post by TheNerdxP
An interesting concept. However, if it's two men which hold the same power (such as North and South of Rome) isn't it likely that they would just end up attacking each other? Rulers are thirsty for power. Also, what's your opinion on the matter?


Hi TheNerdxP,

That would be true if we followed the exact roman model, however if we added a bit of Spartan in there. Then there should be no problem.

The Spartans for example had two kings, one in religious matters and one for military. Therefore, the new world order or empire would have two elected men of equal power, but only one would control the military or we could have a council where the state controls it (kind of like the senate when they had power before the emperors).

So the elected kings or emperors would have power politically etc but they would either serve as different roles and thus there should be no conflicting interests or/and we could have a senate where they control the army/army's and are accountable to the people (who also vote for who will be a senator).

If one did try to attack with their army or built one of their own to try and take over, the senate could give full power to the other king temporally or march in themselves with an elected person. Naturally the Senate and the other king would declare the blood thirsty king as a enemy of the empire and thus anyone able should do him harm. They could even allow the people to elect a new king and give the military power to both kings to deal with the traitor (though this would be a last resort).

In addition the senate could pass a new law where they summon the fyrd if needed that are there to be called upon when dealing with traitors.

Ultimately, the Spartan and Roman's had an excellent system that if the best bits fused together would make for an excellent government (add a little bit of Saxon/modern into the mix for good measure).
(edited 7 years ago)
Eventually we will have a one world monarchy, all nations at the moment are in the stages of being democratized, all people must vote as this will be a requirement in order for national democracy to eventually be removed with global consent in favour of said one world monarchy.
Reply 18
Nice theory could never work in practice though.
Reply 19
Original post by mrITguy
Hi TheNerdxP,

That would be true if we followed the exact roman model, however if we added a bit of Spartan in there. Then there should be no problem.

The Spartans for example had two kings, one in religious matters and one for military. Therefore, the new world order or empire would have two elected men of equal power, but only one would control the military or we could have a council where the state controls it (kind of like the senate when they had power before the emperors).

So the elected kings or emperors would have power politically etc but they would either serve as different roles and thus there should be no conflicting interests or/and we could have a senate where they control the army/army's and are accountable to the people (who also vote for who will be a senator).

If one did try to attack with their army or built one of their own to try and take over, the senate could give full power to the other king temporally or march in themselves with an elected person. Naturally the Senate and the other king would declare the blood thirsty king as a enemy of the empire and thus anyone able should do him harm. They could even allow the people to elect a new king and give the military power to both kings to deal with the traitor (though this would be a last resort).

In addition the senate could pass a new law where they summon the fyrd if needed that are there to be called upon when dealing with traitors.

Ultimately, the Spartan and Roman's had an excellent system that if the best bits fused together would make for an excellent government (add a little bit of Saxon/modern into the mix for good measure).


For them points I must applaud you. Wouldn't it be slightly different in the electing process though? For example, with the spartans there's less sub-cultures but if this was on a national scale then how would we decide who's in charge of the military? With everything going on at the moment for example, if a Muslim was elected to be in charge of the military those who are ignorant may fear them having power and cultures would most likely collide to fight and blame any of their faults on their race and religion. Personally, the factor that I believe could be a problem is religion, the Spartan's had the same religion, but since people nationally are devoted to different religions most would find it offensive to be overpowered by someone of a different religion. This is unless there is some sort of way that we can merge all religions into one and come to a mutual agreement.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending