What are your thoughts on one world government? Is it inevitable? How can you make it work?

What are your thoughts on one world government? Is it inevitable? How can you make it work?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=omRf4ZPXz6E
youtube.com/watch?v=gQMvrSLBGkE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

The revolutionary army lead by Monkey D. Dragon will inevitably destroy any world government.

Unless worldwide culture becomes much more homogenized then it is impossible.

But it can also apply to many nations

>What are your thoughts on one world government
A wonderful concept.
If our species hopes to exist much further into the future, then global unification followed by outward expansion is needed.

>Is it inevitable?
I honestly don't know, but I hope that it is.
I suppose that a good (if very depressing) answer to the fermi paradox is that intelligent species may just be content to stay on their planet and squabble with each other until they go extinct.

>How can you make it work?
One religion, one culture, one currency and one Imperial government.
I can only see a world-state working if all but one culture (such as a revived Latin culture) and one religion are systemically destroyed.
Even once that is accomplished, I think a strong Imperial government headed by an empowered emperor would still be required to hold everything together and prevent regression into primitive tribalism.

The one world government already exists.
But far far from the public.
What we see on tv is just drama to keep us captivated and to keep existential dread setting in.

>>What are your thoughts on one world government?
No inherent problem. But as long as we let leftists live and procrastinate on the adoption of LifeCoin, it is a bad idea.

>>Is it inevitable?
Yes, but that doesn't mean it will be permanent.

>>How can you make it work?
Avoid the importance of the ruler with a constitution.
Avoid expansion of the state with an explicitly restrictive constitution.
Avoid the importance of the legislature with a constitution that prohibits policies, limits all conceivable policies such as taxes/tarrifs/etc to a range of values, establishes procedural rules and limitations, and includes a definition for every term/phrase included.
Have representatives have fewer rights than the citizenry
Only permit land owning men to vote.

>tl;dr
prevent commie faggots from being able to even propose a law

>Is it inevitable? How can you make it work?

I already own this planet and the animals on it (including humans) - there's nothing ya'll can do about it.

youtube.com/watch?v=omRf4ZPXz6E

>Is it inevitable?
If we survive it is if we don't it isn't. We just can't have multiple governments with nukes. As proliferation increases so too does the likelihood of a situation escalating to the point it endangers the continued existence of the entire species.

>The one world government already exists
It sucks at governing and being listened too then unless it is so omnipresent every two bit gangster and dictator that listen to no one in particular for some reason listens to them in an impossible game of contradictory 8D Chess.


Given the present state of world politics it would be a government in the absolute loosest definition of the word.

>it endangers the continued existence of the entire species.
You fucking normie, learn for yourself instead of being a sheep.
Nukes are memes. They have no meaningful lasting impact, and the only reason they are undesirable is because population centers exist.
Fallout is a meme and the alarmist models are objectively shit (they assume every city in the world is hit simultaneously and are all made of gasoline soaked rags)

You're the idiot.

You suppose that the war will be 1v1, you suppose your preferred voice piece scientist knows better than my preferred voice piece scientist.

I however know that time for all practical purposes stretches to infinity and the number of nations with nuclear weapons keeps ticking up.

Yes, nuclear war is inevitable. But it's literally just normal war. After three months have passed the result is no different than a conventional bombing campaign.
Millions dead in minutes compared to millions dead over months makes no difference.

It's an absolutely terrible idea that, thankfully, will never happen.
As time goes on, we'll drift even farther away from it, to the point of Ancapism.(And by that, I mean contract-constitutional states, or, states[Of many different government types] with only willing members)

youtube.com/watch?v=gQMvrSLBGkE

Nuclear war is far worse. It completely destroys the nations in question leaving little to no ability to rebuild. Assuming it is just the nations in question.

Fuck, you really don't even get it do you? Maybe we should fucking be erased with retards like you around.

Every nation on the planet will eventually have nukes, and the surest delivery method is by missile. Even if your scenario plays out and nuking vast swaths of the plane magicallyt does not produce extensive collateral damage on a similar scale to the original catastrophe. And said damage magically isn't long lasting. You would still have most of the planet nuking each other needlessly at the threat of themselves being nuked as the missiles fly. Because when the game has stakes this high you can't afford to not pull the trigger if you have the missiles flying overhead and are not completely certain where they'll land.

And for what? Your need to be extra special guy number one over those fucks from that one country? Fuck you. Eat a bullet you cunt.

>It completely destroys the nations in question leaving little to no ability to rebuild.
Yeah... nukes are cool, but they aren't magic. Go read some actual nuclear policy documents.

>And said damage magically isn't long lasting.
Did someone convinently ignore the nature of exponential decay?

>Fuck you. Eat a bullet you cunt.
Look mate, I'm sorry you live in a third world nation. But if you try to develop/build magic rocks like we did, we'll use our magic rocks on you.

>But if you try to develop/build magic rocks like we did, we'll use our magic rocks on you.
Pakistan, India, North Korea, Israel.

weak leadership means bad luck for the world and good luck for those seeking to ruin the world.

>let me tell you about my politics and why my smugly made condescending point is still relevant even though it took 2 minutes to be proven retarded

do go on.

>when I shitpost it's legitimate and immune from critique
>but when you respond with bantz, it's a thoroughly crafted argument that must be taken seriously
The absolute state of brainlets/leftists/marxists. wewlad.

>What are your thoughts on one world government?
Terrible idea by and for terrible people. No thank you.
>Is it inevitable?
No, nations are too different from each other for it to work, thankfully.
>How can you make it work?
Tyranny and mass-slaughter of dissenters, and the best(that is, worst)part of it is that there would be no where for the dissenters to flee to.

Fuck world government.

Your retarded point about nuclear proliferation being impossible because the nuclear powers would intervene is stupid user. It's been proven stupid many times. Now fuck off and dwi.

>Your retarded point about nuclear proliferation being impossible because the nuclear powers would intervene is stupid user.
See:

I can imagine something like Holy Roman Empire, a loose alliance of nations. Though I wonder how much it differs from current UN or EU.

>muh nukes
Didn't you guys get the news? The AI rapture is coming, and it will consume all.

The important question is, how important is the capability to be the first to properly deploy a discovered technology? That might give you an idea on how likely that a world state would emerge. What about social and genetic engineering? Wouldn't that determine how stable a world state would be?

Am I in the right ballpark?

It will become inevitable only in the event of Alien contact. It will become quite unfathomable not to have some supranational authority to negotiate treaties and regulate stuff related to space trade and exploration.

Aside from that, world government is not only unnecessary, but also counterproductive. Competition between states stimulates progress and development. One global government without any external competition would very likely stifle that.

I am OK with regional governments thought. For example I really hope the EU will grow into a federal state one day, after the British tumor finally fucks away.

i think the internet has made the nation state obsolete. it enables tax and regulatory evasion on a massive scale, national laws are becoming unenforceable.

also when i personally picture a utopian future of humanity, colonising the stars thousands of years from now there is only one people, one language etc.

the obvious problem is that a one world government would tend toward despotic authoritarianism, becoming bigger and bigger and more bureaucratic every year like an unstoppable snowball. I don't know how to address this problem, but that doesn't mean it can't be addressed.

It is possible, but nobody will like the result, because it will almost certainly be totalitarian.

furthermore i think we need a one world government to address global issues like climate change, tax evasion, migration and poverty

It will be a hideous gray mass of humanity where family and community mean nothing and we are all atomised individuals isolated fearful and dependent on the government.

So the same thing as now basically.

you put a lot of trust in actors don't you.

when a poltician runs on a certain platform, you probably trust that they will keep their promises.
Although historically this has been patently false.

only the most insane
or artificial intelligence that can keep track of several billion variables that all contribute to the product of "world governance"

it may look like chaos, disorder, and inefficiency to you, but when you increase your scope in physical space and temporal space you realize that everything could have happened for a reason.

you as a citizen of the world
are at the very bottom of the pyramid.
That makes your viewpoint very different to what it looks like from the top of the pyramid.

remember in true detectives how time is flat circle.
and in the bible
they say that god and his ways are almost completely incomprehensible by man, hence why we need faith that god is doing the right thing.

Only if you live in mega cities. For the rest of society its not a reality

governance and administration can easily be diveorced form "regional culture"

the brits did it when they ruled the world.
and so did the romans.

>the brits did it when they ruled the world.
It was the opposite it was dominated by ethnic Britons with a bureaucratic underclass of Indians.

>and so did the romans.
Romans did not live in a time where national identity was a serious thing.

I live in a town of 30000 inhabitants, and it's the same thing here.

>he thinks flyovers aren't on welfare

but the british still let the indians keep their culture

they didn't destroy all their hindu and bhuddist temples, and they didn't replace indian holidays with british ones.

Have you spent much time in a place like New York, London ect?

They also conquered them militarily and rendered their entire nations economy to be subservient to their own.

No, but if it's true on a large scale, it's true on a small scale as well. The idea has to have other causal reasons.

in a one world government.
distinct "regions" don't need a military.
and their economy is only one small part of the picture.

the important thing is that their culture, thus their "national identity" persists to this day.

>true on a large
Not at all, some of these effects and problems only emerge and function at the large scale.

>in a one world government distinct "regions" don't need a military.
It certainly does if that governance was imposed by a distinct group who wishes to maintain that level of control.

> their economy is only one small part of the picture.
Its a huge part of the picture to the people who are living in that region, especially if it disadvantages them.

>the important thing is that their culture, thus their "national identity" persists to this day.
Yeah, and it is what lead to the end of British Rule in India. Do you think a new world government is going to allow such a powderkeg to remain?

they say the most effective leaders, and the ones who enact the change are the ones that are never mentioned

and yes. people will go fucking crazy if their culture is robbed from them.

The One world government will need to respect individual culture or it will be destroyed, or no one will want to participate in it.

Once the one world government is in place, you wont need a "military" but will need a universal policing agency. You no longer wage war because you control everything. Now the governments task is policing.

i feel your thought experiments are conflated too much by confounding variables.

Disgusting. I hope not

>thoughts on one world government
The ultimate evil
>Is it inevitable?
Only if good men stand idly by
>How can you make it work?
I wont. I will devote my life to preventing it from working.

As technology advances the maximum size an empire can be grows with it, but once technology advances to let us off this planet, the idea of all of humanity under one banner becomes a joke again.

I'm sure complexity scientists can provide the answer

>One religion, one culture, one currency and one Imperial government.

No official religion would be much better.

A homogenous culture throughout the world would indeed be greatly beneficial for a world government

An autocracy would be a terrible form of government.
A technocratic executive committee in which members would be selected through merit would be much better.

smaller states are already becoming obsolete like city states did

outward expansion to what exactly?

Maybe if everyone gets filthy rich and become cosmopolitans. The digital world is already weakening national powers since it doesnt recognise any borders.

brown pussy

You've got the chain of causation backwards. The explosion of identitarianism we're seeing recently is precisely because the web is breaking down informational barriers and bringing the Other way too close for our comfort.