There are so many issues that cannot be adequately dealt with by nations. These issues cross national boundaries and this is exploited by unscrupulous people. The issues that I believe a World Government could deal with would include:
Pollution
Global warming
Environmental destruction
Species extinction
War
Poverty
Overpopulation
Immigration
Multinational businesses
Workers’ rights and exploitation
Tax evasion
International organised crime
Sex trafficking
Drug trafficking
Religious fundamentalism
Racism
Terrorism
Human rights
Tyranny
Democracy
Misogyny
Gross inequality
At present these issues are inadequately dealt with through treaties and agreements between nations, threats, coercion, bribes and other arrangements. It enables rogue states to set different arrangements. It enables international businesses to use loopholes that enable them to exploit people, tax and health and safety. It allows wars, extreme poverty and the abuse of human rights.
The United Nations is a body that has addressed these issues but has limited powers and only an advisory capacity.
I would like something more democratic and with more teeth than the UN.
Of course there have been many political moves to create a World Government through political tyranny – the Fascists of Nazi Germany and the Communists of the USSR had an eye on world domination – neither of which would have resulted in a very pleasant outcome.
No. What we need is a benevolent body that is working for the good of everyone, that is based on a set of human rights such as are laid out in the UN charter of Human Rights. Such a body would need to be democratically elected and have safeguards to prevent it becoming tyrannical.
The move towards such a body began following the horrors of the First World War. A war such as that, with the spectre of chemical weapons and mass killing, was so horrific and far-reaching that politicians realised that something had to happen. What came out of it was the League of Nations. This was a league of 58 nations that was intended to solve problems that would prevent a second terrible World War. It failed when Hitler and the Axis powers left with the intention of first taking over Europe. The League of Nations had failed in its primary aim of preventing a Second World War.
Following World War Two, with the added horrors of nuclear and biological devastation facing the world the United Nations was set up. Presently 193 of the 196 countries are represented in the United Nations. They are brought together to solve the big issues such as those listed above. Unfortunately they do not have the power to do much more than talk, pass resolutions and apply limited pressure and limited force. Even so they exist as a moral force for good, a talking shop to air grievances and resolve issues and a chance for different countries with different opinions to air their views and receive support and criticism for their actions. I believe all that has been a positive force that has prevented wars and enhanced human rights. The UN has made the world a better place. But it is not anywhere near enough. It is dominated by the developed countries and, with the use of their vetoes, has failed to stop many conflicts. Too many times the UN has had to stand around impotently while atrocities occur. Something greater needs to happen. We need to move towards a government with real power.
A number of prominent persons, such as Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell and Mohandas K. Gandhi, called on governments to proceed further by taking gradual steps towards forming an effectual federal world government. That is something I concur with.
I also think that this move towards a World Government is inevitable. It is there embedded in the human psyche. Reading Sci-fi one is always dealing with a world government. In the future nations do not exist. That idea is already there in human imagination and what is imagined one day becomes reality the next. If it can be imagined it can be achieved.
Personally I would like to see the end of this primitive tribalism of nations and move towards a more universal approach. I think that would do a great deal to put an end to exploitation, inequality and racism. But that is a dream for the future.
However, I am not stupid. I do not believe that the setting up of a proper federated World Government is not fraught with problems. Here are some that require solving:
How to set up a government which is democratic?
How to prevent corruption?
How to prevent tyranny?
How to prevent the abuse of power?
How to convince the wealthier countries that it is in their interests?
How to convince our present politicians to relinquish some of their power?
How to convince people, embedded in patriotic tribalism and nationalism, that it is in their interests to think more universally.
People are concerned that a World Government would develop into an abusive tyranny, that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is a real concern because it is true. Time after time we see the type of psychologically damaged people seeking and gaining power – the megalomaniacs, the sociopaths and psychopaths. They seem so plausible. They offer such bright solutions. But they are only interested in power and wealth and are utterly ruthless. They lie and deceive. Looking around the world we see lots of them holding the reins of power. There are many in all our political parties and on the boards of our multinationals. They are bad enough within a national government but what if they took over the world?
How could we put in checks and balances to prevent such mighty power being abused? How do we control the controllers?
Well I believe we see those checks and balances in operation in the best of democracies. I believe that with our advanced knowledge of psychology, democracy and politics it is possible for us to devise a system that would deliver a mechanism to prevent corruption, bribery and abuse of power. Not only that but I believe it is becoming essential for the survival of mankind on this planet. Without world government we a stumbling around through crisis after crisis – global warming, nuclear war, biological terrorism, environmental catastrophe – and we are in denial.
One mistake and that could be the end.
It is surely within our intelligence to devise a system that would work, within parameters that are acceptable.
World Government is, I believe, in the interests of all humans on this planet and is desperately needed by the rest of life we share this planet with. I just hope we have the intellect and foresight to make it happen!
This will be a disaster
Simon – I’m glad you say will.
I’m interested to hear just why you think it would be a disaster.
Isn’t what we are doing now a slow-motion disaster?
How would you deal with all these issues that are being so badly dealt with right now? It looks to me as if they will end in an inevitable catastrophe unless we do something to change it.
No thanks. I agree with the first post. Disaster for us all.
It would be nice to have some intelligent reasons rather than bland statements.
Your post just has too much stupid to reply to. What the fuck makes you think a world government could truly benefit every single citizen? Maybe if our population was reduced from 7 billion down to 10,000, but that would require people to die. Your world government has been growing for centuries and it causes most of your problems.
Because Edith – a. we don’t have a world government so it isn’t causing problems as you suggest and b. we have immense global problems that need addressing and it they are not addressed we will have a catastrophe.
we have a world collaboration though – business elites make certain the limits of what happens
Simon – yes the wealthy elite and multinationals are running things without any restrictions. They use international lack of coordinated laws to exploit and avoid taxes. They don’t care about people or the environment. That is why I would like to see them controlled.
Besides they already is a plan in place for a World Government. A New World Order devised by Bush Snr and Kissinger with USA running it.
Well that would be a disaster wouldn’t it?
You want World Order Government – well you got it.
Well I wish we had but we haven’t and are a long way off. What we have is the USA vying with Russia, China and other powers for the right to exploit. That is far from government.
Government has always exploited and will always exploit.
Some governments are poor and some are good. Some are corrupt and some are idealistic. Obviously some are better than others. However, we cannot exist in large numbers without government. Even small tribes have to have a controlling body.
I want a responsible world government which is put together with safeguards to prevent it becoming corrupt or tyrannical and one that will protect and increase the rights of people all over the world.
sorry my friend but these is very bad idea.
Why is that Bhudi. Can you explain your reasoning? How else would you deal with all those international problems?
yes i can.
OK – I’m listening.
1st – why this is bad idea
it is because in short you r saying to expand the ruling system.as well said by chanakya as a limited identity tries to expand from its nature identity it will going to be instable. for example: keep a stone on ground then take a scale and keep it on stone such that it get balanced. and force on one side of the scale you will going to observe that other side reacts oppositly
in simple words this is not global government this is colonizational rule.
take a other example : in west and in many places around the world family means 4 people. even in india today family means 7 peoples. 40th years ago india had families of at least 70 members. it means people are geting self centered. why its happening. because of worng education system.when you can’t change your self how you will going to change world. when you will going to solve one side problem the other side of world will going to revolt against you.
take arab 20 nation of one nationlity.
in india we say vasudev kojom ba com.
that means whole universe is one family. the indian sub continent civilization phylosophy depand opon this words. when india was colonised under british indian had not protested against british. reason was in india there was a common education ritual in hindus that if you want to take education you must identity with whole cosmos so the indians not supported there rulers and india was colonised if one rule came in world that means we will going to elect one person when a men does not know anything of particular area which is ruling how she or he is going to rule. just see the pm of canada he is stupid who elected him?
he dont have an idea and he is pm of beautiful nation.
diversity without clearity and separation = war.
this war means over. because if this time a global war or revolt arises this will going to be last war.
conclusion is this that we are not ready for such global change.
Thanks for that Bhudi. I can see that there could be instability and that the politicians could become divorced from the people they are ruling. I don’t agree that it is equated with colonisation though. It would be representative federation. All countries would be represented and enfranchised. It should put an end to war not cause it.
Maybe we aren’t ready for it yet. But I hope we find a way of making it work soon. There are so many huge issues that desperately need addressing.
We are all one people.
BTW – why do you think the PM of Canada is so poor?
well canadians elected a failed drama teacher as there leader. people elected him because he is cool and handsome, come on.
the idiot have zero administrative knowledge, he goes to an private island for enjoying holiday with an terrorist. he have friend circul of radical people his minister lie about there birth place and enjoy there election win in dubai,pakistan etc.
the former radical and terrorist people are advicing and consulting police and agency about how to tackle terrorism.
look his youtube videos and speechs he play drama. he dont have a confidence to face truth . after his visit to india many people here are saying him pappu.
Thanks Bhudhi – I’ll have to pay him a bit more attention.
It would be anything but representative. As if USA would settle for equal billing with Somalia or the likes! Get real will you.
How do you come up with this crazy madness. Why?
Depends how its done doesn’t it?
you could have said that about Brexit but you didn’t!
Simon – could have said what about Brexit?
I’ll number your problems and address them with simple solutions.
1: Pollution – Stop mass-producing a bunch of toxic waste. Or better yet, accept that life will find a way, and many of our current industrial pollutants were found on the primordial Earth that life originally evolved on. Environmentalism is selfish and anthropocentric by nature, because it puts humans on a “parental pedestal” as guardians of a system we don’t even understand. If humans really cared about the environment, they would let natural selection take its course, instead of picking and choosing what species we think need protected. We as humans don’t know what the hell we’re doing.
2: Global warming – Stop existing. Seriously. Earth warms and cools on a fairly regular basis, killing species that don’t adapt. Yes, human pollution probably plays a role in global warming, but if it wasn’t us, it would be volcanoes. Or wildfires. Or the Sun inflating into a red giant and incinerating our entire planet. I know those poor polar bears sure look miserable, but they’ve already started breeding with grizzly bears in anticipation of the changing climate.
3: Environmental destruction – Stop all the wildfires from burning up the trees! Don’t let the otters eat too many sea urchins or the kelp will grow too tall! Use these twirly lightbulbs filled with mercury and plastic!
4: Species extinction – Go extinct.
5: War – Kill each other until the nearest enemy just isn’t worth the march.
6: Poverty – Accept that, as animal, humans are supposed to live as animals. What does a broke bear do? A wanting wolf? A starving chimpanzee?
7: Overpopulation – Poverty, war, and species extinction.
8: Immigration – Build a wall.
9: Multinational businesses – Mind your own business.
10: Workers’ rights and exploitation – If a worker feels exploited, they have a right to quit their damn job.
11: Tax evasion – No taxes, no tax evasion. Taking money against your will, on threat of violence or imprisonment, is theft. Taxes are theft.
12: International organised crime – Well….Since a world government would be the epitome if international organized crime, I would recommend against a world government as a solution to any problem.
13: Sex trafficking – Legalize prostitution.
14: Drug trafficking – Legalize drugs.
15: Religious fundamentalism – Scientific mysticism.
16: Racism – Stop encouraging racial tensions by constantly ranting about racism.
17: Terrorism – Stop being so easily terrorized. Terrorism is meant to provoke feeling of terror. No terror, no terrorist.
18: Human rights – Don’t strip away the rights of most humans by ruling them all under one world government.
19: Tyranny – Don’t have a world government, because that would only be more tyranny.
20: Democracy – Keep governments and communities as small as possible, so everyone has a clear say, and the leaders personally know their people as individuals. No ballot-casting, no electronic voting. Cast your vote through face-to-face conversation.
21: Misogyny – Misogny is no longer a problem in most of the world. In many places, women have more legal rights than men. The real issue now is misandry: sexism against men.
22: Gross inequality – Accept that no one was created equal. If we were, we’d all be clones. The sexes evolved differently to fulfill certain roles in nature, the races evolved to adapt to different environments, and the classes stratified due to population growth and uneven resource distribution. Oops.
Well thank you for that highly detailed reply. Most interesting. I’ll address it point by point as it deserves.
1. We do know a lot about what we are doing. I agree that we need to stop putting out toxic waste. That is the problem. Many nations have woken up to the fact that the planet is finite and we are messing it up and bringing about mass extinctions, huge drops in animal population and climate change. They have legislated against this pollution. The trouble is the countries that are still polluting and the multinationals that ignore all this and put profit first. Without international legislation this cannot be controlled.
The conditions on earth when life evolved would be lethal to all present life that has evolved. Unless you are happy wiping everything out I suggest this is not a good idea.
Natural selection cannot possibly deal with the changes we are creating. The extinction rate is unprecedented.
Our knowledge, technology and power mean that we are guardians of this planet. We have the means to destroy it or put it right.
2. If you care about the wonderful biology of this planet you want to preserve it. If you care about humans then you would realise that we are part of that magic complex ecosystem that we are part of.
Yes there are catastrophes from asteroids, volcanoes and such and the sun, in a couple of billion years, will become a red giant and wipe us out. Those events are rare – millions of years between them – and they are disasters. We do not have to be a similar disaster. We can avoid it and life if too incredible to destroy wantonly.
3. Environmental destruction can only be controlled on a global basis with global legislation. It requires a planetary perspective.
4. For those of us who love the wonders of life extinction is a tragedy. It is not an option.
5. I think you speak as one who has never experience the horror, terror and tragedy of war or has not the imagination to see how terrible this would be. My father never fully recovered from his experiences in the Second World War. It traumatises and horrifies. War is abominable.
6. We are civilised humans who create a political system that is grossly unfair where some have more wealth than they can possibly consume and children play in sewage. We create that intentionally and exploit most of the world for our own needs. I want a fairer system with more equality. We are not wolves.
7. Rather than billions of people suffering and dying I think it is preferable to introduce social changes and contraception in order to deal with this huge problem.
8. Walls do not solve problems. They create problems.
9. Multinational businesses are exploiting, draining, polluting, tax evading and creating huge problems. They need dealing with.
10. Unfortunately most workers do not have that choice. There are not jobs from them to go to.
11. Taxes are not theft. Taxes pay for infrastructure, defence, security, education, health, social services, waste collection, sewage and hundreds of other essential services all of which are required in order to have a society that works.
12. A central government is not organised crime.
13. Yes legalise prostitution. But that does not stop women being coerced or exploited does it?
14. Legalising drugs would be a good move. One of the few sensible suggestions you have made.
15. Scientific mysticism neither makes sense nor solves problem of the nutcases of the Southern American evangelists and damaging creationists or ISIS, Boko Haram and the rest of the religious fanatics.
16. Not talking about racism does not make it go away does it? Confronting it, highlighting it and challenging it does.
17. Well I agree that we need to keep it in proportion and not be terrorised by it but that does not make it go away and people being blown up, stabbed and shot needs dealing with.
18. A world government would not strip away anybody’s rights any more than a national government. They merely have a global perspective. Why would you think it would remove any rights?
19. No I disagree. There is much tyranny in the world. A world government, properly constituted would protect peoples’ rights.
20. Yes keep local democracy for local situations and global government for global perspectives. Your idea of face to face voting is a recipe for corruption. It is precisely because people were threatened that secret ballots were introduced. I’d go for electronic ballots if we can ensure they are secure.
21. You are wrong. Misogyny is embedded in our culture. Islam is particularly misogynistic and all the Abrahamic traditions subjugate women. When there are equal numbers of women in powerful roles we may have dealt with it. While women are segregated, unfranchised and given demeaning roles, while they are abused, used as sex objects and relegated to minor positions misogyny is alive.
22. Yes we are all different. We are not equal. But we all deserve equal opportunities and a fair deal. That is most definitely not the case.
In summary I think your responses are glib and not thought through. Your reactions are callous and uncaring and unrealistic. You have no answers to these problems other that letting everything proceed to catastrophe. Not my cup of tea at all I’m afraid.
“Unless you are happy wiping everything out I suggest this is not a good idea.
Natural selection cannot possibly deal with the changes we are creating. The extinction rate is unprecedented.
Our knowledge, technology and power mean that we are guardians of this planet. We have the means to destroy it or put it right.”
It isn’t just about me. Or you. Or humanity. We are but one species on this planet, our history but a tiny speck on the timeline of Earth, and our tiny human brains will never fully comprehend the intricacies of our complex ecosystem. Even our technological advancement is a result of natural selection, as is the extinction of any species. Including us. If this planet no longer wants a certain species, if a creature cannot adapt to a changing environment, it would be ignorant and arrogant for us to claim “we know best” for the planet who birthed us. For every problem humans “solve”, we only make 10 more problems.
“If you care about the wonderful biology of this planet then you want to preserve it. If you care about humans then you would realise that we are part of that magic complex ecosystem that we are part of.”
And if you really believe that, you would understand why we have no more right or responsibility to parent our planet than any other species. We need the ecosystem more than it needs us. Whether we live for 10 years or 1000, we are a speck of dust in the greater universe. Nature doesn’t need our help. If our planet was so weak and fragile, we wouldn’t need dams to hold back floodwaters or drugs to keep our bodies from rotting too soon.
“Yes there are catastrophes from asteroids, volcanoes and such and the sun, in a couple of billion years, will become a red giant and wipe us out. Those events are rare – millions of years between them – and they are disasters.”
No, those events are simply a part of life on our beautiful planet Earth. A species rises up from the gene pool, makes a place for itself, does its thing, and is driven to extinction by whatever great force to make way for a new species. New life. If you really respect that magic complex ecosystem, you would understand how these “disasters” are responsible for such a wonderfully diverse ecosystem. We view these things as “disasters” because they threaten what is familiar. Most environmentalists don’t really care about the planet; if they did, they would open up the dams and let Earth wash herself clean. Humans just want to protect the environment that we as a species have adapted to.
“Environmental destruction can only be controlled on a global basis with global legislation. It requires a planetary perspective.”
No, the globalization of society is only speeding up your environmental destruction. Everything a world government would require to stay connected – air travel, satellites, massive servers to count those electronic votes – is all incredibly destructive from manufacture to disposal. Even large-scale recycling operations produce more pollution than they prevent.
“For those of us who love the wonders of life extinction is a tragedy. It is not an option.”
Is it so tragic that the dinosaurs went extinct? Should every human that ever lived be crammed together in high-rise apartments with velociraptors and giant mosquitoes? No? To be glib and callous, I’ll compare ecology to economics. Compare living organisms to modern currency. Ever heard of inflation? The more money you print, the less value it has. Likewise, the more animals crammed together in one space, the less quality of life for each individual. Including humans. Yes, we are a social species, within limits hardwired into our brains by millennia of evolution. But when any species reaches a certain population size, the health and happiness of the individual begins to decrease until the population itself begins to decrease. Then a new species can rise up and fill that niche.
“I think you speak as one who has never experience the horror, terror and tragedy of war or has not the imagination to see how terrible this would be. My father never fully recovered from his experiences in the Second World War. It traumatises and horrifies. War is abominable.”
No, war is our naturally violent primate nature when expressed as a group event, often wielding tools designed for hunting. Our chimpanzee cousins wage war on other chimps. Of course, any wrong committed will be seen as a “disaster” or “abomination” to the victims. But violence is a vital force that long predates humanity and will long outlive us. The act of conception itself is violent; the egg cell eats that one “perfect” sperm cell, leaving all other sperm to be killed by white blood cells or other microorganisms. War is simply that same violent nature expressed on a larger an more visible scale. If you don’t want war, don’t force people with opposing beliefs to live side by side. Or just unplug from global communication technology so you don’t have to hear about it every day. A world government would absolutely require warfare and mass genocide to ever achieve control over such a large human population, because there are way too many people who disagree with each other. But most agree that a world government would only escalate corruption and injustice.
“We are civilised humans who create a political system that is grossly unfair where some have more wealth than they can possibly consume and children play in sewage. We create that intentionally and exploit most of the world for our own needs. I want a fairer system with more equality. We are not wolves.”
People really need to stop this “civilized” shit, especially the “we” part. I am far from civilized. The concept of “civilization” is a modern human concept, all dust in the great winds of geological time. Just another way of asserting superiority of other cultures. We’re better because we’re human, we’re stronger because we’re straight, we’re smarter because we’re white. This “civilized” human shit is the main root of that “racism” you don’t like, an excuse for manipulating others because we think we know better than them. Wolves probably think we’re a bunch of dumb lazy savages. As for children playing in sewage, I guess you’ve never seen a “civilized” human baby in a nice sterile crib gladly smearing their own shit all over themselves.
“Rather than billions of people suffering and dying I think it is preferable to introduce social changes and contraception in order to deal with this huge problem.”
Billions of people is already too many. Especially if you want “social change” and equality for everyone, there are simply too many different people with too many different hopes and dreams. Even if we made contraception more widely available, people would still suffer, including from the dangerous side effects of said contraception. Especially hormonal birth control or any kind of intrauterine device. And even with a lower birth rate, the population is already too crowded until more people start dying.
“Walls do not solve problems. They create problems.”
If I want to build a wall around my home to protect it from hungry Hispanics or starving artists, that is my choice. Try to stop me. Honestly, I don’t give a damn about immigration, as long as they stay away from me and my family. The family unit should be the primary seat of government. As for the United States building a wall on the Mexican border, I don’t care either way. I neither vote nor pay taxes.
“Multinational businesses are exploiting, draining, polluting, tax evading and creating huge problems.”
Yes they do. And do you know who supports those businesses? Who makes money from those businesses? Government officials. Especially the biggest governments, the world superpowers who already act as a global government under the false pretenses of civil war and partisan divide. Every law, even the most sugarcoated eco-friendly law, is an excuse to exploit the people and our planet. A world government would only have any easier time doing this, all under the guise of protecting and serving the citizens.
“Unfortunately most workers do not have that choice. There are not jobs from them to go to.”
That, my good sir, is absolute bullshit. If you really believe the only “real” work is the kind that pays with a paper paycheck, you have a very limited view of human history. Where there is will, there is a way.
“Taxes are not theft. Taxes pay for infrastructure, defence, security, education, health, social services, waste collection, sewage and hundreds of other essential services all of which are required in order to have a society that works.”
And most of that infrastructure only “destroys” the environment even more. By “defense” and “security”, I assume you mean the military. A military that never wages war? If war is such an abomination, you should invest your tax money in the manufacture of white flags. Not the military industrial complex. As for education, why support a school system that teaches children so many things you believe are wrong? Government-funded schools, the government itself mostly funded by corrupt corporations, are only training children to be consumerist clones. Is brainwashing a good way to spend your tax money? Likewise, the healthcare system is basically a gang of glorified drug dealers. Not that drug dealers are necessarily bad. But while our life expectancy has gone up, the rate of chronic illness continues to rise. Your tax dollars give people cancer.
“A central government is not organised crime.”
Yes it is.
“Yes legalise prostitution. But that does not stop women being coerced or exploited does it?”
Men are coerced and exploited too. Especially in the US and UK. As a woman, I recognize my legal privileges, as well as my physical weakness. Sexual exploitation is not sexism. In your worldview, a man exploiting a woman is considered misogyny, but a woman exploiting a man is just exploitation. Or are you the type who thinks a woman simply cannot abuse a man?
“Legalising drugs would be a good move. One of the few sensible suggestions you have made.”
Even the drugs that harm the environment? And the drugs that cause death or suffering?
“Scientific mysticism neither makes sense nor solves problem of the nutcases of the Southern American evangelists and damaging creationists or ISIS, Boko Haram and the rest of the religious fanatics.”
Don’t you live in England? Then it the Southern American evangelists ain’t your fucking problem. Just stay in England. I live in the American South, and it really isn’t that damn bad. People really need to mind their own business in their own communities. Here where I live, socialists and globalists are the real threat. Evangelists are mostly just entertainment.
“Not talking about racism does not make it go away does it? Confronting it, highlighting it and challenging it does.”
To a certain degree, both racism and sexism are vital instincts hardwired into our mammal brains. Yes, genetic diversity and racial mixing allow us to adapt to different situations, but some genes are currently incompatible with each other. On a psychological level, this leads to conflict between vastly different cultures; the offspring of certain races are even more likely to develop certain health disorders. Too much “other” can be a bad thing. Hybrid plants may be infertile, while even dogs will discriminate between different breeds. Racism becomes a problem when different races, adapted to different environments, are forced to coexist without adequate time to mix smoothly. Often in a habitat foreign to both of them. Crammed together too closely in a stressful situation, most animals will become violent. Especially when they make up abstract concepts like “civilization” to justify their perceived superiority over others.
“Well I agree that we need to keep it in proportion and not be terrorised by it but that does not make it go away and people being blown up, stabbed and shot needs dealing with.”
Wildfire prevents wildfire. I’m telling ya, the only way to end this cycle of violence is allowing it to run its course. Only then, when humans no longer live close enough to so conveniently kill each other, will our health as a species finally recover. Until then, train yourself and your family in self-defense. Not just active defense like fistfighting or armed combat, but also escape, evasion, and hiding. Walk softly and carry a big stick.
“A world government would not strip away anybody’s rights any more than a national government. They merely have a global perspective. Why would you think it would remove any rights?”
Well….it would remove my rights to privacy and personal autonomy, because I don’t want a world government. Unless I just ain’t anybody. But most other people don’t want a world government, so it would strip away their right to….not have a world government. Come on, is that really so hard to understand? There would be millions of dissenters, if not billions. Would you imprisonment them all for the “greater good” of those few who support your grand scheme? Or re-educate everyone who disagrees and systematically erase all individuality? The more individuals a government body tries to control, the more dissenters they must….deal with. Usually by killing them. Or just breed them silly with bread and circuses, blinding them with the brightness of their gilded cages. National governments already have a “global” perspective. They strip away more rights every year, mostly in the name “global” and “international” goodness.
“There is much tyranny in the world. A world government, properly constituted would protect peoples’ rights.”
A “properly constituted” world government with 7 billion citizens is physically impossible, unless you and I just have different definitions of what “proper” means. There are too many people who disagree with each other, and too many who all agree that we cannot coexist under large central governments. Tyranny and war would be required to enforce a world government. I am evidence of that fact, because you would have to kill me for being a political dissenter. And I’m not the only one.
“Your idea of face to face voting is a recipe for corruption. It is precisely because people were threatened that secret ballots were introduced. I’d go for electronic ballots if we can ensure they are secure.”
If a leader threatens his people, those people have the right to overthrow him. If a citizen threatens their leader, maybe the he deserves it for being a bad leader. People have the right to disagree. There is plenty of corruption in secret ballots, but it goes underreported now. Because it’s a secret. Electronic voting will never be secure either, because hackers will always find a crack in the defenses. Electronic voting is probably the absolute easiest to corrupt.
“You are wrong. Misogyny is embedded in our culture. Islam is particularly misogynistic and all the Abrahamic traditions subjugate women. When there are equal numbers of women in powerful roles we may have dealt with it. While women are segregated, unfranchised and given demeaning roles, while they are abused, used as sex objects and relegated to minor positions misogyny is alive.”
Ooh, golly gee….I fucking hate this feminist bullshit….Abrahamic religions are only “misogynist” because women forgot their rightful place. Women shouldn’t be in business or politics, they should be at home digging in the damn garden. I say this as a biological woman. The most powerful role a woman can (or should) fulfill is the guardian of her own family. When most women are given positions of power outside the home, they drive their communities into both physical and emotional poverty. Not all women, because the lines between gender can be blurry, but most are simply not capable of leading. Protecting, yes. Teaching, yes. But not leading. The most qualified person should get the job, regardless or sex or race. And no one, man or woman, should have authority over millions of others. Women also commit more domestic violence, it just isn’t legally phrased as “abuse” because women have more rights than men. Woman-on-woman sexual assault is likewise underreported.
“Yes we are all different. We are not equal. But we all deserve equal opportunities and a fair deal. That is most definitely not the case.”
If you really believe in equal opportunity, you wouldn’t advocate special treatment for any sex or race. Natural selection is the only real equal opportunity. Demanding that women be in positions of power simply because they are women, putting their sex before their qualifications, is not equal opportunity. That would be equal outcome. And it isn’t just sexist to men, it is also sexist to women. It is sexist to assume that a woman needs help just because she’s a woman.
“In summary I think your responses are glib and not thought through. Your reactions are callous and uncaring and unrealistic. You have no answers to these problems other that letting everything proceed to catastrophe. Not my cup of tea at all I’m afraid.”
In summary, I think your ideas are short-sighted and not thought through. Your beliefs are contradictory, tyrannical, and unrealistic. You lack understanding of basic human nature and you see catastrophe in every possible situation except for your dream of a world government. Not my cup of coffee.
Hi Edith – thank you for your extremely lengthy essay. I will do my best to do it justice. It may take me a while.
No I do not accept your premise that we know nothing and can do nothing. The analogy I would make for you is that of Grenfell Towers. It was a tragedy. Accidents happen from time to time. An electrical fault caused a fire. The fire became huge. People were burnt alive. It was horrific.
Grenfell was a tragedy. There’s not many people who would shrug and say ‘these things happen. They’re natural. Let them be.’
Now what if Grenfell Towers was the result of deliberate arson? Or stupid behaviour that was reckless – such as deliberately starting fires? That is not just a tragedy with terrible results. That is stupid, evil and culpable homicide.
It is the same with the planet. An asteroid hitting the earth and wiping out life is a calamity on a scale much bigger than any Grenfell – a horror of untellable proportions.
For a species to create havoc on a scale approaching that of an asteroid is unforgiveable. That is precisely what we are doing. We are having such an impact on the planet with our numbers, technology and pollution that we are wiping out animals in huge numbers and driving them to extinction. It isn’t chance. It is a direct result of our actions.
Not only that but we can do something about it.
The speed we are doing this at is frightening. Soon there will no longer be any primates living free (Chimps, Orangutans, Gorillas). Many other iconic species are being wiped out – elephants, tigers, rhinos. The effect on our local habitats is even greater. The frogs, toads, lizards and snakes, the swifts, swallows, hedgehogs and butterflies that I loved and collected as a child are all disappearing. We are doing that. We are decimating the landscape.
The multinational logging companies are tearing down our rainforests and wiping out habitat. The petrochemical industry is polluting air, water and land. Many other industries are pouring out effluent. The mining companies are gouging out massive strip mines and polluting rivers. The international ivory trade is wiping out species through extensive poaching. It is all being done for short-term profit and there is no international control.
We are gobbling up resources and destroying the very thing we live on. We are laying the fires in Grenfell towers and going up to bed to wait to be burnt.
It does not have to be that way. We are doing it. We can live responsibly. It is greed that is driving this. We need international laws to stop it.
Yes we are one species. We’ve been here for a tiny bit of time. We will be gone soon I’ve no doubt. That does not give us licence to wreck the joint. By solving problems we do not create ten more problems.
We do understand how ecosystems work. They are not that complex. I am a biologist and I studied them. The problems we are creating are easily solved:
stop chopping down rainforest
Stop polluting air, land and sea
Stop poaching
Reduce our numbers so that we do not take over too much habitat
We’re not talking rocket science.
I am afraid that we live in a world which still has a long way to go before we can give up our military defences or police. Without them we would be in trouble. I’m all for peace and an end to war but I’m not daft. The world is full of people who want what we’ve got and religious and political nutters who want to control us. Without the military and police we’d be eaten alive. No thanks. I want security for me and my family. I want a world government to control fanatics, thugs and terrorists.
I worked in education for 36 years. It is not brainwashing. It is an enlightening, mind expanding experience when done well. I want it properly funded and run properly for everyone.
My elder son works in the NHS – he helps people and keeps them healthy. When you are ill I bet you’ll head for medical help. Yes – keep the drug pushing private firms out of it. Health is about making people better.
Racism and sexism are not hardwired. They are not genetic. They are learnt. Many societies work very well in multicultural situations. Racism and sexism do not have to be tolerated.
Likewise violence and war. Your daft idea of letting the violence run its course and kill everyone off is just daft. You’ll be saying a different thing when you’re being gang raped and your family and friends are being slowly cooked in front of you. It is different when it happens to you isn’t it?
Well I’m sorry to hear that you feel you’re such a second-class person. I wonder how you have the gall to argue like this with a man when you are obviously so inferior? Perhaps you should just go back to popping out kids, washing up, cooking the meals and looking after the house if that’s all you’re good for?
I do not advocate special treatment for any race or gender. I advocate a level playing field and fairness.
No. I think you are wrong. A world government would not strip away any of your rights and freedoms any more than a national government does. It would not be involved with matters at your level. That would be the jurisdiction of local and national assemblies the same as it is now. A global government would be the opposite of what you suggest. It would protect your human rights and freedom, create universal application of those rights that would raise billions out of poverty, violence and disease and stop them being exploited.
Yeah, well, I’ll fit a 5 paragraph essay on 5 lines if I have to. Did that make in high school, on a biology test. Wrote really really tiny so the teacher had to use a magnifying glass. Sorry, not sorry. Let’s just hope you’re an avid enough reader.
“No I do not accept your premise that we know nothing and can do nothing.”
Did I ever explicitly say we know nothing? I don’t think so. I said we know little, just a piece of the bigger puzzle. Humans are but one species on this planet, our history but a tiny speck on the timeline; our knowledge of nature will always pale in comparison to what the whole of nature knows of itself. The smaller box fits inside the bigger box. Our human brains are the smaller box, the experience of all life throughout natural history is the bigger box.
“The analogy I would make for you is that of Grenfell Towers. It was a tragedy. Accidents happen from time to time. An electrical fault caused a fire. The fire became huge. People were burnt alive. It was horrific.
Grenfell was a tragedy. There’s not many people who would shrug and say ‘these things happen. They’re natural. Let them be.’
Now what if Grenfell Towers was the result of deliberate arson? Or stupid behaviour that was reckless – such as deliberately starting fires? That is not just a tragedy with terrible results. That is stupid, evil and culpable homicide.”
An electrical fault is caused by stupid reckless behavior. Electricity is a ridiculously powerful force, and it was stupid and reckless for humans to harness such a force. No, this is not equivalent to intentional arson. Yes, an all-natural 100% organic lightning strike could’ve just as easily ignited such a fire. But those towers would’ve never been built so tall and difficult to escape without electrical aid, nor would there be as many deaths had the population been less crowded. The Grenfell fire was an indirect result of humans recklessly trying to harness the forces of heat and light. There have always been fires on Earth, ignited by both lightning strikes and and human heat sources. But the fires with the highest human death tolls have mostly been in crowded cities.
“For a species to create havoc on a scale approaching that of an asteroid is unforgiveable.”
Ever heard of the Great Oxygen Crisis? A mass extinction event on par with an asteroid impact, the fault of another species. Oxygen-producing microorganisms that poisoned the anaerobic microorganisms. Maybe that doesn’t matter to you because they were just microbes, but those microbes were our ancestors. And the ancestors of all those frogs and butterflies you like so much. We evidently both love the little creatures of the world, but where do you draw the line? At what point is one species worth the life of another?
“We are having such an impact on the planet with our numbers, technology and pollution that we are wiping out animals in huge numbers and driving them to extinction. It isn’t chance. It is a direct result of our actions.”
And you really think our technology can fix the problems it created? You really think humanity, after this exponential decline over the past centuries, can heal the harm we’ve caused? After so much violence and greed, we can make a heel-face turn and all live happily ever after?
“Soon there will no longer be any primates living free (Chimps, Orangutans, Gorillas). Many other iconic species are being wiped out – elephants, tigers, rhinos. The effect on our local habitats is even greater. The frogs, toads, lizards and snakes, the swifts, swallows, hedgehogs and butterflies that I loved and collected as a child are all disappearing. We are doing that. We are decimating the landscape.”
Again, where do you draw the line? When is one species worth the life of another? Those species are all iconic to us, but their time on this planet is limited like ours. The anaerobic microbes died to make way for the oxygen-breathers. The dinosaurs died to make way for mammals. When the current living species go extinct, including our own species, something new will rise up to take our place. Possibly something evolved from our cancer cells, mutated by prions and nuclear radiation into a creature that is fully capable of thriving in the harsh conditions we humans create.
The multinational logging companies are tearing down our rainforests and wiping out habitat. The petrochemical industry is polluting air, water and land. Many other industries are pouring out effluent. The mining companies are gouging out massive strip mines and polluting rivers. The international ivory trade is wiping out species through extensive poaching.”
Building the infrastructure to connect and support a world government would require even more logging, drilling,and mining. If we use electronic ballots to vote, large buildings for computer servers would be built to process that information. This would require plastics and rare earth metals, which are messy to produce no matter how you do it.
“It is all being done for short-term profit and there is no international control.”
Yes there is. The largest national governments, who would have the most influence in any world government, already control these industries. And profit from them. If you really think the government can be free from corporate corruption, I simply can’t put words to how naive you are.
“It is greed that is driving this.”
I never said we ain’t a greedy species. I only said these things are normal, to be expected. One of the less pretty spokes in the circle of life.
“I am afraid that we live in a world which still has a long way to go before we can give up our military defences or police. Without them we would be in trouble. I’m all for peace and an end to war but I’m not daft. The world is full of people who want what we’ve got and religious and political nutters who want to control us. Without the military and police we’d be eaten alive. No thanks. I want security for me and my family. I want a world government to control fanatics, thugs and terrorists.”
Yeah, you’re obviously afraid. Of the wrong things. The police and military are tools of a corrupt corporate complex, a corporate complex we call government, used to strip away individual freedoms and paint an image of false security. Rather than protecting us from the ravages of our own human nature, the police and military are simply professional outlets for animal aggression. No group should be given more legal rights than other citizens. From my personal perspective, you yourself are a political nutter.
“We do understand how ecosystems work. They are not that complex. I am a biologist and I studied them.”
Of course it doesn’t seem that complex to you. As a biologist, a specialist, you only study one tiny piece of the bigger picture. Little bites are easier to swallow. When you narrow your field, you narrow your mind.
“Reduce our numbers so that we do not take over too much habitat”
No matter how low the human birth rate becomes, many people would need to die quickly to mitigate our environmental impact. Our population is already way too big for the ecosystem to support us much longer.
“I worked in education for 36 years. It is not brainwashing. It is an enlightening, mind expanding experience when done well.”
In my humble opinion, this statement only further proves my point.
“My elder son works in the NHS”
Did you have your son before or after acknowledging the overpopulation problem?
“When you are ill I bet you’ll head for medical help.”
No, I actually don’t. I’ve independently studied ecology, biology, medicine, etc since I was a child. Reading college textbooks when I was 5 years old. I set my own bones, stitch my own wounds, and treat my own infections. Don’t “bet” me shit, because you are so over your head right now. I bet you’re a vegetarian.
“Racism and sexism are not hardwired. They are not genetic. They are learnt. Many societies work very well in multicultural situations. Racism and sexism do not have to be tolerated.”
You’re almost right. These factors are epigenetic, not solely genetic. An interplay between nature and nurture. There is certainly a genetic component in racism and sexism, because race and sex are genetic, but much can be said about the speed of cultural mixing. Just like making pasta, things get lumpy if you mix them too quickly. A habitat that both races can cope with is also helpful.
“Your daft idea of letting the violence run its course and kill everyone off is just daft.”
Of course my daft idea is daft.
“You’ll be saying a different thing when you’re being gang raped and your family and friends are being slowly cooked in front of you.”
That is much more likely to happen to your family. Me and mine probably have a better ability to defend ourselves than you or yours, better in both equipment and experience. You probably don’t even carry a knife on you. How good is your ability to fight unarmed? Even in an ideal world, where the police and military really do protect and serve, you still have to wait for them to arrive. Would you just let yourself be raped until the police arrive? Would you let your own family burn, just waiting patiently for police? I hope not. You are your own first responder. Honestly, such an emotional and inflammatory comment makes you sound like a 12 year old girl. Not the educated grown man you claim to be.
“Well I’m sorry to hear that you feel you’re such a second-class person. I wonder how you have the gall to argue like this with a man when you are obviously so inferior? Perhaps you should just go back to popping out kids, washing up, cooking the meals and looking after the house if that’s all you’re good for?”
I never said I’m inferior or second-class. I also explained that, while men and women were obviously created for different roles, there is also some overlap in biology and behavior. On average, women make bad leaders; I’m not trying to lead you. And I’m also an XXY, mostly a female with some internal masculine traits. That includes infertility from a hormonal balance and small uterus that does not support childbearing. And even if I were fertile, I would not contribute to overpopulation. My husband can knock up whoever else he wants though.
“A world government would not strip away any of your rights and freedoms any more than a national government does.”
Yes it would. Power trickles down, legal restrictions trickle down, from the federal to local level. At the very least, a world government would strip away my right to have a world government. Same for billions of others. The vast majority of citizens, when you get past divisive duckspeak they squawk out on repeat, want smaller government. Most people instinctively value their families over the international community. Most mothers, if given the choice, would rather help their son cover up a murder than call the police for any reason. Things things just go unspoken on the open air, because most people are afraid to speak out against the government.
Average citizens recognize that these institutions are powerful enough. Yes, civilian “thugs” and “fanatics” have fists, knives, guns, etc. These weapons are dangerous enough, but they are still accessible to average citizens. Corporate-funded government goons – the police and military – have better guns. Tasers, grenades, tear gas, tranquilizers, heat vision, helicopters, microwave heat rays, nuclear bombs….And every major government, from the US to the UK to Russia, is prepared to use these things against their own citizens or any others. They see no difference.
I know, the UK doesn’t have guns anymore. But do you really believe that? Even if police don’t carry firearms, they have guns and bombs in storage, ready to deploy. Even with the mass media, these things are easy to cover up. The corporations who control the media, who control what websites we can access, have always had close ties to the government. Even back in World War 2, news footage was already being faked.
The average citizens is afraid of the government. The average crime us out of fear from the government, in anger toward the government. Most rapes and murders are committed by the police and military, but are covered up, or otherwise unquestioned by civilians. Government footsoldiers have the legal right to kill, and we have no legal right to defend themselves against them. Even if they abuse their power. Civilians rape and murder too, but no more than soldiers or law officers. Most civilian crimes are petty theft and drug offenses, either out of real necessity, or to fulfill some perceived emotional need. Don’t let the “official” crime statistics fool you.
Unfortunately for you, this really is inevitable. Probably. As most populations get too crowded, they become unstable and begin to implode. This certainly seems to be happening with humans; that seems to be one thing we agree on, human overpopulation. But I believe cycles of overpopulation, environmental change, and extinction are a fairly normal, benign, and even beautiful occurrence, while you seem overly attached to our current environment and current species. By being so protective of these other species, you hurt yourself more than you help them. You pollute yourself with unnecessary emotional pain.
Yet this too is only natural. We see many of the same problems, but a combination of genetic and environmental factors produce psychological differences that result in different solutions to these perceived problems. Both solutions seem equally destructive and unrealistic to each other. My solution is to isolate myself and my family, protecting ourselves from the inevitable mass extinction event before us. You would rather entrust your health and safety to total strangers in an attempt to prevent the natural cycle of life and death. The funny thing is, both of us as individuals are insignificant in the course of things. We are all the architects of our own destruction.
Before I once again reference your “habitat” to give context to your worldview, you are from the United Kingdom, yes? If so, you were born and/or raised on a small island nation, a culturally homogeneous nation in comparison to the United States. The US is the mixing pot. The melting pot. The fiery Western underworld where the sun goes to sleep at night. One of the most multicultural nations in the world, but we still can’t make it work peacefully. Because it happened too fast.
You are also a man, unless you actually aren’t. I’m mostly a woman. I’m sure we can both agree, that despite other differences in opinion, that we really cannot understand the struggles of the opposite sex. All you know is what you see and what women tell you, while I only know what I see and what men tell me. I see my husband’s circumcision scar, because American men don’t have legal protection from infant circumcision, while female genital mutilation is illegal. Women in the US have more legal rights than men.
Of course, perceptions can still be altered. For example, my tone softens toward you when I consume certain medical herbs, and I become more “glib” and “callous” toward you when my mother or mother-in-law irritates me. But many things truly are hardwired into our brains, and the destruction of our personal perspectives requires the destruction of ourselves. A world government would only be another force of destruction. All things create, and all things destroy. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.