Friends, the perilous state of the world has convinced me that it’s time to get rid of all national governments and bring in a single World Government. Why?
Well, currently we have a financial crisis, a global warming crisis, wars rage in many parts of the world and more are planned, large companies use their money to control ‘democratic’ governments while they rape and pillage all over the world, there is enormous inequality of wealth and opportunity among world citizens, some nations, using military force, are engaged in trying to control the world for their own benefit, etc, etc. It’s a bloody mess!
By breaking up each country into separate states or provinces, the tendency of some nations to make themselves into imperial military superpowers would be broken. I would retain state governments (eg. Kansas or New South Wales) to serve the local needs of their citizens. Each state or province would be allowed to have a police force to keep the peace but no nation or state could have any military and gun ownership would be banned.
Each state or province would then elect representatives who would sit in a world Senate, one that would have a rapid response military that would keep each state in line. The Senate would operate in a way that would treat every world citizen as equal and would ensure universal health care and education.
Racial, economic and nationalistic ideologies would be banned and religion would be restricted to home worship with all religious institutions being broken up and their wealth given to the poor (which was how religion was intended to be).
By carefully mixing and regulating the best aspects of socialism and capitalism the world’s people would, for the first time, have a guaranteed food supply rather than allowing market forces to reward the rich and starve the poor. Birth control would be mandatory and the world’s population would be maintained at a sustainable level.
Cooperation and sharing would become the driving force not competition and greed! People would be encouraged to spend their lives in artistic pursuits, being close to nature, caring about their children (not putting them in child-care centres), caring about others, enjoying music, philosophy, the arts.
Yes, with a World Government set up along these lines, peace and prosperity could finally reign on what’s left of our world.
What do you think?
Yes, I believe in world government. Not quite on the same lines as you, but it’s all in this post; http://crushedbyingsoc.blogspot.com/2008/03/grand-vision-utopia-i-dream-of.html
Reply
Certainly the current way we run the world isn’t working, Crushed. We need to move in a new direction. Urgently.
Reply
David,
I’m all for something better. A world government just isn’t it.
Do you really believe that Americans, Brits, French, Germans, Japanese, Aussies, Dutch, Canadians, Swiss, etc. will give away the bulk of their wealth and lifestyle to Egyptians, Libyans, Syrians, Columbians, Thai’s, Peruvians, Koreans, etc.? Really?
A meager, 5 room, poverty-level home, in South Texas is a kingly palace compared to the Mexican cobble shacks with no water/power/sewer just across the Rio Grande river. I don’t see Americans or anybody else opening their homes to others, much less giving away their homes. I don’t see Americans or anybody else giving away 100% of their earnings to get back 50%, much less 5%. Do you? Really?
Do you really think Christians will tolerate Muslim laws and vice-versa? Do you really think Middle-East men will let their women throw off their berkas? Really?
Do you really think Christians, Jews, and Muslims will give up their beliefs and tolerate the associated changes that would come with atheism? Really? You know, there is a tremendous amount strife and violence in India between the Hindu’s and others, it just doesn’t get much press. Do you really think they will give up their positions? Really?
I have trouble imagining it.
How much death and war would have to be imposed just to get one military nuclear super power like Russia, China, or the U.S. to submit?
If you can imagine these things you must know something about people that I don’t know.
Sorry for the negativism. The obstacles are imposing. I think it will take at least one and maybe multiple global events of grand scale to overcome the obstacles.
Q
Reply
Well, Q, given your scenario there’s not much hope for our world, is there? In fact, given the points you have raised and your belief that nothing will change, that we will destroy ourselves appears the only option.
Part of me agrees with you, Q. Another part rebels against it. How can we be so stupid to allow ourselves to walk down a road towards our own destruction when the will to survive is so strong? Are people simply blinded by greed and selfishness and false promises? Don’t they care about their children and grandchildren? Don’t they understand that if they give up some things they will achieve much more, be more happy?
Beats me!
Reply
David G, I am wondering if you are a Jew, not religiously, but still part of the tribe. I am very much against one world government as a plot to destroy liberty, to put it mildly.
Reply
Swan, if you had been following my blog for the last two and a half years you would know that I have been ultra-critical of Usrael and a strong supporter of the Palestinians. Go back over old posts on Seeking Utopia to find verification.
When the Palestinians began to fight among themselves, I gave up on them so I have not been as strident as I once was.
Me, a Jew? Me part of the tribe of deranged Jewish fanatics? Shock. Horror.
I am a strong atheist and a humanist so it wouldn’t be easy.
Reply
How about no government at all?
We can see the reality: people get corrupted by power. and centralization of power even under hopes or pretexts that is for the better of human kind is a huge threat to humanity.
Just put it simply.. what language should this world government talk.. and how can they address the people? Ah.. english.. so easy.. and then translators.. and then more and more beaurocracy.. and again “democracy”.. the majority deciding for the minority..
How about letting people live simple lives.. in villages.. how about allotting to each individual at birth a minimum but generous space for living (earth) and not allow him sell it or estrange it or to posses more..
how about indeed educating and telling people stop the f–k off making children when you haven t sorted out the mess in your lives.. and are just perpetrating your own unhappiness and frustration on the shoulder of your offsprings.. how about making the families pay if they want to have more than two kids.. f***ing selfish.. they cannot adopt.. they just want to replicate their little selves for eternity..
pitiful race.
And believe me.. the key is, if any, decentralization. Freedom at small level.
Independence with brains and empathy, for the right reasons, at all costs.
Reply
The Rescue Plan from Congress is necessary, and I wish it God Speed – but we need to start thinking about the bigger picture. As the world becomes more interconnected (isn’t it already?) – we must look to solving global problems for which we have no effective means of democratic governance. For your readers who want to look at the whole forest – and not just a section of the trees – there is a plan that is practical, fair, and doable. For a glimpse – please visit the website of the newly released (Sept 2008) book by Jim Stark – who was president of Operation Dismantle in the 1980s – a Canadian Non Government Organization devoted to global issues.
Reply
I m a fast reader. I was curious to see the Jim Stark option for the world.. sounds like Alice in wonderland. A non corruptible government. well, if I look at the forest and do not dissect the trees, that sound wonderful. But I do like to dissect.. hence I am marveled by these utopic permanently-on-duty-wired politicians..
amazing…
so.. to quote:
“everything is public unless there is a compelling reason as to why it
should be kept private, and even in such instances, the reason for privacy must be made
public, and there must be an affordable appeal procedure whereby a decision to conceal
information can perhaps be overturned”.. really. really. You see? Today’s public listed company have books which are public. They are mostly “cooked” and believe me, even if you wire the accountants during the 8 hours duty time, they ll find time to cook the books outside the duty.. Or else.. will you wire them in toilets, and all…
That book sounds and is science fiction.
Further more .. some more crap: an accurate lie detection test. wha ha ha ha ha .. never read more crap in my life. And who s to take the test? And who s to program the machine? And who s to interpret the results? And who s to test the tester? And who s to test the machine?
Oh My god. abberation under science pretense. once again, someone making money by mentally masturbating himself and the poor readers..
I wonder.. what is with you people, that you seem to envision the centralization as solution?
only to a blind.
An empire is an empire.
Let people have individuality and freedom.
Decentralize. Cut the crap with transparency. There is no achievability in real life of such thing at that scale.. and cut the propaganda of “people will be interested to watch the BIG BROTHER daily gatherings of democratically elected universal government, as their money and lives depend on it.. ” what the shit? so people would have to work 8 hour a day to make a living and then will have to follow BIG BROTHER politics live.. to make sure the world is safe… just because SOMEONE WANTS THE WORLD GLOBAL AND THEY WOULD DO ANYHING TO CONVINCE US GLOBAL IS NEEDED?
BULLSHIT.
GLOBAL IS NOT NEEDED.
GLOBAL is the enemy to our freedom.
Global is the destruction of individual.
GLOBAL is THE END>
and believe me. Big Brother will find ways to control the ones that are watching, together with the ones that are watched. We are delusional to always envision things in big scale.
Go small. Manager your own little pond, court, field, persona. Give up the CONTROL of the GLOBAL SCHEME OF THINGS..
I M sick of it.
Reply
I m so sick of it I forgot my point. so the genius Jim Stark, making a buck while saving the world.. and being remembered for the history, or even elected in the respective world government.. who s better equipped.. so the said Jim Stark gives you three chapters for free, and he says, among other abberations:
“everything is public unless there is a compelling reason as to why it
should be kept private, and even in such instances, the reason for privacy must be made public, and there must be an affordable appeal procedure whereby a decision to conceal information can perhaps be overturned”.. Oh really. Sounds like communist propaganda to me. All are equal and you are free to speak if it isn t so.. really. All is public. heheheh. and if there is a compelling reason.. oh oh oh who s to define what s compelling reason.. and the reason for privacy should be made public.. and overturned.. sounds like the existing legal system.. sounds like the existing government to me..
I should write a book myself at this point. As this “should shall will shall not for sure “… utopia crap who makes us believe that we are in deep shit for the wrong reasons, and seeking for the wrong solution.. is too big a market for me to try to make my buck exploiting it, like Mr stark.. what the heck..
My dears,
Wait for my next book “Ointment for a global herpes” by Pimp Lurk (my scene-artist persona).. you can find more details and three free chapters on : http://www.it.itches.a.lot.in.the.wrong.places.com
Love.
Not too much.
Tough…
Reply
Adina,
“No government” ends up being families, that leads to tribes, that leads to kingdoms, that leads to nation states, that leads to nations…
It has happened over and over and over in human history. It seems to be a herd thing.
The book “Guns, Germs, and Steel” provides a good detailed description.
Q
Reply
Nation-states are problematic institutions, being both sources of violence and protection, but the problem with new forms of Government, as with Communism, is always going to be the transition period. How do you get from a system of admittedly dysfunctional nation-states, dominated effectively by one military-capitalist super power but increasingly challenged by the rising middle kingdom-China, to your world government with its global welfare state, local police and strike-force military, without one pole of power making it happen, by force?
The world is always in crisis: there’s always parts of it that are sick; suffering. Nation-states were the mechanisms through which many people have been able to get educations, healthcare and housing. If there is to be world government then it will probably have to come through the good things that nation-states do, rather than a transnational albeit still state-based model like David is suggesting. On a more pessimistic note, and more as aquestion than a statement, what relationship do people here see between law and violence? If the state, even the global world government state that David is imagining, is to enforce its laws and regulations then how will it do this. In other words, if the principle on which you are basing your new world state on is to be state’s are to enforce their rule through force then which current nation-states are going to let another rule them through force? It’s a bit like the conundrum of disarmament: you take the gun from my head first then I’ll remove mine from yours . . .
Anyway good to see you’re still seeking utopia, David. Act local, think global is what I reckon. Government is what we do not only something that is done to us.
Reply
Dear Q, still beats me to understand what is wrong with nations. Why do all have to start speak english and submit to a “democracy” model, which just as all other models exposed here, have failed to prove themselves viable.. but again. the centralization is the danger. Just because nations were pushed to fight eachother, and some became arrogant universal policemen, that does not make the concept of nation more evil than the one of Government. I still can give plenty of examples of pacific nations, who never agressed anyone. I have hard time to find one single government on earth which did not give space to corruption. What is it with Nation that is so disturbing to some? I am myself a citizen of the world. But mind you, i hate to accept that my grandmother’s land and life and taxes will one day be decided by some english speaking burocrat seated somewhere in Australia let s say
, who does not even know exactly where her village is located.. why apply global decisions to local issueS? how applicable is this universal metrical standardization damn it? how will participation in this government be granted? mass? monetary power.? averages? damn it. Same errors over and over again and we still blindly believe that the solution is in centralization and averaging..
this world government simply fails to convince me as a viable solution.. it is just as dangerous and utopic as fascism and communism.
Reply
A one world society, yes. A one world government, no. If we have only one government for the whole world and it is subverted like the nazis subverted Germany or the republicaN party subverted then where could opponents of the government go to regroup?
We do need a better balance of power among the countries and institutions that serve the general welfare as oppossed to special intrests like the arms manufacturers and the medical industry.
Although I think that Buddhism is best,
it is probably a good thing that that a one world society would have different philosophies, or religions, and economic policies. Orthodoxies tend to cause human brains to become inflexible.
Humans need flexible brains.
People who believe in the tooth fairey are not inherintely any more barbaric than Atheists. Of course their are particular beliefs with in many different religious sects that can plant the seeds of inhuman behavior,
but the same could be said of the ideas of some philosophers.
Reply
Some great comments! Thanks.
Surely a World Government made up of Senators (elected or, better still, appointed) from each independent province or state could not result in a Big Brother organization.
Such decentralization would surely stop power ending up in a few hands especially if combined with some ‘re-education’ that would emphasize that cooperation (without collusion) is vastly superior to ‘winner takes all’ competition!
Reply
A one world government! Sounds very utopian! When men are perfect we can have perfect government – actually we’ll need no government at all, perfect government.
Let’s take an example – how about the EU. the EU parliament is formed of “chosen” representatives. Yet there are major power struggles – witness the recent Irish vote on a constitution and the internal demonstration within this parliament! Seems the French leader will FORCE the proposed EU constitution through anyway!
In fact there are major problems with the EURO as the Germans do not honor the Spanish or Italian printed EUROs. They are inferior!
From the UK Telegraph and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, we find that there is now revealed worse crooks in the European banks than in US Banks. Not just US corruption. Well help me God!
I say this, when you see France and Italy in revolt at – or near – the same time, know the world is in for very, very BAD times! Keep watching….
Reply
The problem with the EU, CFR Hater, is that it’s not a single body but a collection of disparate nation states all trying to retain their nationalism.
I’m advocating the end of nations and nationalism and breaking the world up into small, independent, self-sustaining geographical areas.
Thanks for calling by.
Reply
Therese Reply:
September 12th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I can drink to that proposal. No central banks and no nukes.
Reply
Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog.
Cheers! Sandra. R.
Reply