News What would a semi-rational theory be for a unified world government?

[quasi-quasar]

The other day, a classmate and I were fantasizing about traveling at the speed of light. He thinks the world needs to unite under one form of government, thus facilitating the path to discovery. I didn't think this would ever happen, because government and rebellion form a symbiotic circle (termed loosely of course, don't jump on me). Also, there are those people who will not see the deep importance of uniting. Unless given some incredible cause, it won't happen.

Two thoughts were spawned then. One from him:
The U.S can easily take over the world, given a couple hundred years. It's already begun, first with Afghanistan and a possible second with Irak.

One from me:
When we discover, or 'they' discover, life on another planet, we have a cause. All ye' earthlings will go into a flutter, and in utter entropy, fling both arms up in the air saying silly things like "What have we been doing with our short, insignificant lifespans?!?"

I pictured a time when Earth would unite under necessity to fight, communicate, or better-associate with distant civilizations. What do you think about his bold-ed theory??

 

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by quasi-quasar
I pictured a time when Earth would unite under necessity to fight, communicate, or better-associate with distant civilizations. What do you think about his bold-ed theory??

Methinks it is rather old;

"Today America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing that man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the world government." -Henry Kissinger 1991

"I couldn't help but say to him , just how easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly there was a threat to this world from another species from another planet outside in the universe. We'd forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries and we would find out once and for all that we really are all human beings here on the Earth together." Reuters, "Reagan Images Star Wars," International Herald Tribune, Paris, Dec. 5th, 1985

"The Soviets and the democracies will adopt the best characteristics of each other and, in the process of many years, there will not be a strict line of demarcation between their ideals; therefore no causes for war between them...because of the the developments of science all the countries on Earth will have to unite to survive and make a common front against attack by people from other planets." New York Times "M'Arthur Greets Mayor of Naples," Oct. 8, 1955

 

[quasi-quasar]

RE

I suppose I should read more books. Maybe everything I ever dreamed of will have already been chronicled.

How interesting.

Now we have to work on ESP, and Foresight.

 

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by quasi-quasar
I suppose I should read more books. Maybe everything I ever dreamed of will have already been chronicled.

How interesting.

Now we have to work on ESP, and Foresight.

Hehe, yes it can be difficult to come up with something completely original... but oh, it is a great feeling when you do, so never stop trying

Who performed that song about;

...nothing you can do that can't be done,
nothing you can know that can't be known...?

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by quasi-quasar
The U.S can easily take over the world, given a
couple hundred years. It's already begun, first
with Afghanistan and a possible second with Irak.

Like the spelling of Iraq (Irak) your friend's
idea sounds wrong and rediculous.
Both due to its assense and due to the foolish
assumption that "The U.S can easily take over
the world".

Originally posted by quasi-quasar
When we discover, or 'they' discover, life on
another planet, we have a cause. All ye'
earthlings will go into a flutter, and in
utter entropy, fling both arms up in the air
saying silly things like "What have we been
doing with our short, insignificant lifespans?!?"

I pictured a time when Earth would unite under
necessity to fight, communicate, or better-associate
with distant civilizations. What do you think about
his bold-ed theory??

I agree that a global threat to humanity or
the discovery of alien civilizations mat lead
to a single uniform government on Earth. The idea is
indeed old and is widespread in sci-fi litrature.

However, such a government will probably have
to respect and adress the local interests of each
nation and the traditions and religions of
various groups of people, at least until it has
existed long enough and humanity became edvanced
enough to let go of most of these.

I think this could indeed be very beneficial in most
respects compared to the current situation.

I have no idea how likely this might be in some
particular hypothetical situations.

Originally posted by quasi-quasar

Why the "long face" ?

Live long and prosper.

 

[FZ+]

Both due to its assense and due to the foolish assumption that "The U.S can easily take over the world".

Well, the US probably can. But it won't be much of a world left after everyone launchs their nukes in response...

I agree that a global threat to humanity or the discovery of alien civilizations mat lead to a single uniform government on Earth. The idea is indeed old and is widespread in sci-fi litrature.

Yep. ie. The "Federation", the "Empire of Man", etc etc etc

However, such a government will probably have to respect and adress the local interests of each nation and the traditions and religions of various groups of people, at least until it has existed long enough and humanity became edvanced enough to let go of most of these.

As far as I know, only one government system has been conceived to cover a globally large scaled basis. And that's marxist communism. Basically, it is based on the decentralising of government into mutual cooperatives ruled by worker's councils. But of course, that is the opposite of what we want.
The fact is, I think it is the reverse. It's not that government must address the individual national cultures, but rather the opposite - the cultures of the world must have grown together to the extent of wanting such a unified world.
The degree of unification we see in the UN today, for example, would never have come about without the action of a world war.