Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Heaven Is A Halfpipe

One World Government - Good or Bad?

One World Government - Good or Bad?   33 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think a one world government would potentially be a good thing or a bad thing?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

40 posts in this topic

We are already in a NWO and in a way a one world government and economic system. The symbolisim and systems of international organisation is primarily Judeo Christian. There's nothing 'new' about the world order. It should be called the CWO (Continuing World Order).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are already in a NWO and in a way a one world government and economic system. The symbolisim and systems of international organisation is primarily Judeo Christian. There's nothing 'new' about the world order. It should be called the CWO (Continuing World Order).

Do Russia and USA agree on who leads it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the current world crisis are best expressed as expressions of the "Tragedy of the Commons". Without some overarching authority to police international relations there is always an advantage to some nation exploiting the common goods to the detriment of everyone else. On a relatively unpopulated world we could live with the consequences of that - but in a densely populated world of scarce resources it starts to threaten the survival of civilizations.

We either find an equitable way to manage our affairs on a global scale or we will probably collapse as a global Civilization. I no longer feel we have a choice regarding a One World Government, we either do it or decline into a very bloody and brutal future.

Having a single or few dominant players dictating the rules to favour themselves (as the USA has attempted) just will not cut it as a solution to these issues.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad idea; there are a lot of things where interational treaties are needed-- air travel, stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, environmental issues, and so on, and some institutions where regions and even the planet as a whole can insist on civilized behavior from some states (institutions that we lack now, for stupid reasons having to do with notions of sovreignty, as though we were not all on the same boat), but in fact existing governments are too big to be effectively managed.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it be one government or not, we are still bound to coexist and interact with each other. Both the groups we lump ourselves into, whether it's a neighborhood or country. Having or not having a one-world government is in the end a matter of taste I think. Because both ways do work in managing your business if you have the will to make them work, and both ways can fail if you dont have the will to make them work.

Just the problem is, if you wanna have a one-world government, it means you enforce your taste on this particular matter on others. I dont like that being done to me.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this one world government thing can be done realistically. It will be a sheer bureaucratic nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really if we reformed the UN making it truly democratic and giving them a standing force that takes volunteers from member nations then we could retain some sovereignty but have a democratic world government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A single world government is not in the cards and, although one might help a little on the margins, it is probably better to deal with international issues via negotiated treaties and single-purpose institutions.

One ideology that obsolete, however, is the non-interference rules a few governments try to maintain -- when an autocratic government goes too far, there should be ways of dealing with it before they are entrenched or begin to bother others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really if we reformed the UN making it truly democratic and giving them a standing force that takes volunteers from member nations then we could retain some sovereignty but have a democratic world government.

What is truly democratic? And is democracy the ultimately best thing? Especially in large scale? Your thoughts on why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The advantage of democracy is that people have a sense of influence, even though it may be a fraud. They also have a sense that they can overthrow the regime without violence, and maybe occasionally they can, although politicians generally try to rig things so that elections always go their way.

There are many problems with democracies, the most important being the almost total ignorance of the candidates that people are forced to vote with. You have the carefully managed image of the candidate and the mud-slinging, neither of which really is useful in becoming an informed voter.

Another problem with many democracies is two or more political parties, which can so control the voting in some areas as to rig elections and which eventually fall into the control of extremists and special interests -- especially two-party countries with closed primaries -- such as the US.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a insanely complicated topic.

Through I think that humanity will have to eventually unite, wether or not it will result in a one world government is unknown.

We should be concerned on how such government is formed and constituted.

The common understanding of the whole "New World Order" thing is that a shadowy and malevolent group/organization of unknown size and strength is hell bent on world conquest/world domination...Which is a bad thing.

Truly, all of humanity will have to unite in order to survive as a species at some point.

Through, that contradicts voluntary unity if you think about it, but survival is an invariable factor...So in a way: Those who unite will survive and those who do not unite with anyone at all will not survive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"New World Order" is pleasant enough sounding, which is probably why the political lunatics managed to me it sound so scary. We need some sort of world order -- some sort of enforcement of civilized behavior within, not just between, nations, or sooner or later we will be extinct.

A single super-power such as the States could serve that role, but it has its share of political lunatics who would prevent it from doing so effectively. Various alliances might do as much. I don't see anything likely.

Edited by Frank Merton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this one world government thing can be done realistically. It will be a sheer bureaucratic nightmare.

Which is precisely why it would be a good thing. The more the government trips over itself, the less it can meddle in the affairs of those governed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about a rather chilling scenario. What if we develop actual AI by the time the World Government is actually needed? Much of the bureaucracy will be handed over to very efficient race of Terminators and maybe bureaucratic bottleneck might not be a problem anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.