Why we need a one world government

[nismaratwork]

I agree, but that was my best guess for an answer to your question.

I can't say boo to that, thanks for the honest effort, and I'm sorry that I misunderstood your intentions. I admire the ability to be dispassionate and pose hypotheticals... I should have realized your intent; I won't make that error twice.

 

[nismaratwork]

Doesn't help to blame the hysterical people when we're all living in the same asylum.

So the UN can't seem to work through internal differences and fails to deal with issues effectively for the common good. That sounds like a dysfunctional family, and as I think was mentioned earlier can fail for similar reasons. But when a family fails, the logic is to either fix that family through therapy or mediation (--Evolve the procedures of the UN--)... Or to simply break it up through divorce (--Dissolve the UN and build a new, better system--).

We're all essentially one big family living on the home planet. If we only see ourselves as individuals catering to self-interests and fearful of unified structure, then I'd assume any house we create will suffer the usual instability.

My hope is that instead of waiting hundreds of years for the ideal sci-fi technology, we can simply look inwards and figure out how to build stronger families capable of handling internal differences (of opinion, sexuality, religion, financial, etc.). From there, we can better resolve differences with other families to ultimately build stronger communities, then onto optimized nation building, then onto a functioning world government... and then onto exploring the galaxy on the star ship Enterprise. :tongue2:

I doubt that will happen, but it's a beautiful vision of the future.

 

[Phrak]

Wow... you actually managed to match the OP and others, nutty for nutty. I'm impressed, and until I read on I could have sworn that you were joking.

I'd also dearly love to see your justification for this... list. It reads like Glenn Beck's nightmare closet, with the intellectual rigor of Keith Olberman, and the witty presentation of Wolf Blitzer.

I realize, and have made the point many times, that Stalin killed more than Hitler and (unrelated by war) Pol Pot and the entire Khmer Rouge, but 'second stringer' is absurd. Shall we simply minimize all genocide and other horrors because they don't match the numbers of another?

How did I know someone would take my words and turn them around, and that it would be you. But I'm just a nut with outlandish opinions on human nature, so this can't be true.

 

[nismaratwork]

How did I know someone would take my words and turn them around, and that it would be you. But I'm just a nut with outlandish opinions on human nature, so this can't be true.

So it would seem.