• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support a world government?

Do you support a World Government?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 18.2%
  • No

    Votes: 54 81.8%

  • Total voters
    66
This would certainly help to equalize conditions throughout the world. With the world government taxing authority, it would be easy to get the richer countries to contribute more to help the poorer counties.

.
 
Obviously a huge hypothetical as we are not ready for a world government yet, but in the future if all nations have become democratic in nature would you support the United Nations of Earth so to speak? Could each nation work as a state and have different nations rights like we have state rights? The only problem is there would be no one to trade with so ultimately we would have to work to keep the nation alive trading among each other. Honestly I don't even know if capitalism would work for a world government since there would be no competition. There's a ton of things to considerand I personally think because of human nature a world government in even 200 years isn't possible. But as a hypothetical would you support such a idea?

I hope that this world will never be "ready" for a world government.
 
This would certainly help to equalize conditions throughout the world. With the world government taxing authority, it would be easy to get the richer countries to contribute more to help the poorer counties.

.

We are under no obligation to pay for poor countries nor is the wealth of the rich countries something that poor countries are entitled to. How many of them are poor because of dictatorships or oppressive governments?
 
This would certainly help to equalize conditions throughout the world. With the world government taxing authority, it would be easy to get the richer countries to contribute more to help the poorer counties.

.

another great reason to oppose such a pipe dream and oppose it with as much violence as can be mustered
 
I suggest anybody who thinks a world government is needed or viable go to the local psychiatrist. One has been reading too many sci-fi books
 


A little more crazy, but this about the only way it will happen.
 
We are under no obligation to pay for poor countries nor is the wealth of the rich countries something that poor countries are entitled to. How many of them are poor because of dictatorships or oppressive governments?
But if there was a world government, don't you think it would have taxing authority? Then you would be obligated to pay your taxes.

You know, the old saying 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.'

.
 
Obviously a huge hypothetical as we are not ready for a world government yet, but in the future if all nations have become democratic in nature would you support the United Nations of Earth so to speak? Could each nation work as a state and have different nations rights like we have state rights? The only problem is there would be no one to trade with so ultimately we would have to work to keep the nation alive trading among each other. Honestly I don't even know if capitalism would work for a world government since there would be no competition. There's a ton of things to considerand I personally think because of human nature a world government in even 200 years isn't possible. But as a hypothetical would you support such a idea?


It is better to have smaller localised government, decision making bodies, and then a world wide directive on human rights, environmental and labour standard. We are working towards that, standards are converging, but it will take centuries for it to happen assuming we don't fall into WWIII first.
 
Last edited:
Obviously a huge hypothetical as we are not ready for a world government yet, but in the future if all nations have become democratic in nature would you support the United Nations of Earth so to speak? Could each nation work as a state and have different nations rights like we have state rights? The only problem is there would be no one to trade with so ultimately we would have to work to keep the nation alive trading among each other. Honestly I don't even know if capitalism would work for a world government since there would be no competition. There's a ton of things to considerand I personally think because of human nature a world government in even 200 years isn't possible. But as a hypothetical would you support such a idea?
States don't have Tenth Amendment rights as it stands. So you're saying I would then be 1 vote out of 7 billion instead of 300 million? I would have even LESS individual sovereignty than I have now?

Yeah, no thanks.
 
It is better to have smaller localised government, decision making bodies, and then a world wide directive on human rights, environmental and labour standard. We are working towards that, standards are converging, but it will take centuries for it to happen assuming we don't fall into WWIII first.
And who enforces your world wide directives?

.
 
And who enforces your world wide directives?

.


The court that's charged with it, using sanctions and other forms of economic punishments with the cooperation of complaint countries.
 
The court that's charged with it, using sanctions and other forms of economic punishments with the cooperation of complaint countries.
Yeah, sanctions have such a great record I'm sure that will work. :roll:

.
 
The court that's charged with it, using sanctions and other forms of economic punishments with the cooperation of complaint countries.
On what authority does your court get charged with juridiction?

You do realize that the only reason a court is able to enforce anything is because there are guns to back it up.

.
 
Yeah, sanctions have such a great record I'm sure that will work. :roll:

.


Sure, it will work in certain instances, and in other there will be needs for other economic punishments.


On what authority does your court get charged with juridiction?

Society, people, government. The same authority that gives any court the power it has.


You do realize that the only reason a court is able to enforce anything is because there are guns to back it up.

.

Or the threat of guns, that's what the cooperative countries are for.
 
Obviously a huge hypothetical as we are not ready for a world government yet, but in the future if all nations have become democratic in nature would you support the United Nations of Earth so to speak? Could each nation work as a state and have different nations rights like we have state rights? The only problem is there would be no one to trade with so ultimately we would have to work to keep the nation alive trading among each other. Honestly I don't even know if capitalism would work for a world government since there would be no competition. There's a ton of things to considerand I personally think because of human nature a world government in even 200 years isn't possible. But as a hypothetical would you support such a idea?

As an ideal for the far future, if manking has overcome all the problems it is facing today, sure!

For the time being, and the foreseeable future, it doesn't sound feasible or desirable.
 
Sure, it will work in certain instances, and in other there will be needs for other economic punishments.




Society, people, government. The same authority that gives any court the power it has.



Or the threat of guns, that's what the cooperative countries are for.
So basically you are suggesting the UN or a simlilar organization would enforce your sanctions. Good luck on that. :crazy3:

.
 
To be more precize:

As an ideal for a far future, when all states are free republics and mankind has solved its problems, sure.

But I wouldn't support a world government even in the far future, if it was to replace regional governments. Smaller entities can much better decide over issues that only concern them. But it wouldn't be bad if there was such a world government, only deciding over issues that concern the entire world, be that climate problems, large famines, natural disasters and such -- or contact with extraterrestrial aliens. ;)

And there is something to collective security, if you ask me. You know, the principle the UN is based on already: A mutually binding alliance that makes sure collectively that single members don't start running amok. When one member state starts a war, the others can force it down with more moral authority than any single state ever can. And it can prevent disagreement between member states to escalate into war in the first place, by providing an institutionalized counseling and mediation system.

But such a system is only fully feasible when a large majority of member states is obliged to the ideals of freedom and republican government, not just on paper -- hence the flaws of the current UN system.

It would also require that people are mentally up to the task: Enough people need to view mankind as one united people, for that such a government enjoys enough support. Praised should be the person who doesn't love his nation, but the whole of mankind.

So if this ever happens, some day in the far future, it can be a good system. But at the moment, mankind is not ready for it yet.
 
Last edited:
Yes!
Imagine "government" 5 to 10K years ago, even before our constitution or the bible.
Fast forward to tomorrow and think again.
This has to be done carefully.........respectfully.....we need the quality of people for this task and DO NOT as yet have them.
This does not mean to forget about it; IMO, world government is here today, ...in the very beginning stages....aka the UN.

We need world wide human rights, and end to slavery, terrorism, disrespect, inequalities, ect...
We need to progress, not regress.
 
Do you support a world government?

I support a "world judge" and btw very strictly limited in deed. The purpose to not kill each other off. Not government in the traditional sense.
 
I support a "world judge" and btw very strictly limited in deed. The purpose to not kill each other off. Not government in the traditional sense.

I would not support that for one reason: People in positions of power are highly subject to being corruptible. Getting the world at large to agree on what is corruption, or what is not, is highly variable and subject to nationalist sentiments.
 
At present, a world government is not feasible. There's too much "us versus them" thinking in the world for it to be possible. But you can see a world government emerging even now. Just looking at markets, most nations are dependent on each for something or other. If the Tokyo stock exchange takes a dip, you can see it reflected in the New Your stock exchange. The products we buy may have been made in Malaysia or China but the raw materials and shippers for them may have come from 10 other countries. Multi-national companies are represented by a coalition of people from many nations. And then we have multi-national bodies like the UN and Interpol. We have world-wide maritime treaties, the Kyoto treaty, and the NPT. Lastly, we have the international space station where many nations are contributing parts of it.

All these things are parts that would be necessary for a world wide government. It is coming to be out of necessity. Thoughts of a world wide government as an enormous Big Brother are simply wrong. It wouldn't be manageable even if it was tried. Each nation would act like a state with it's own untouchable rights and it's own decision-making bodies. So Bahrain wouldn't be making decisions for the US. That wouldn't make any sense. Economic competition would still exist just as we see it within the US. Some states have better economies than others and each state is always pushing hard to make their own state more wealthy. Nothing would change there.

So even though a world government cannot exist at present, I think we'll have one eventually, even if we don't exactly plan for it.
 
If Science Fiction is to be believed, then not only will world governments become commonplace, but multi-world governments, too. I don't think it's inherently good or bad. But I think it will become a technological imperative.
 
A multi world government puts the timeline of inevitability of a single world government into perspective. However... the logstics of a multi world government are likely many magnitudes upon magnitudes heavier than those of building a government on a single planet.
 
Back
Top Bottom