Would you be in Favor of a Global Government?

[nanook12]

Personally, I would be in favor of it because many of the problems we face today, such as Climate Change, require a united world in order to battle. Imagine if a global minimum wage was established or a global tax code for corporations were set in place? Then corporations could no longer use shady tactics to dodge laws and tactics because they would pay the same no matter where they go. We could establish global agreement on combating Climate Change. Hell we could even collaborate for a global space colonization program instead of always fighting each other.

However, the bad side is if corruption seeps its way into a global government. So a global government has potential to do extreme good if function properly, but also extreme bad if corruption seeps in.

[randomnamegenerator16]

Hell no. I would love to see world partitioned into thousands of little states or no states at all. Fuck big, unified gov.

[nanook12]

You have to be trolling.

Brah globalization is continually increasing. With that in mind, the advent of a global government seems eventually inevitable.

[Jibjub]

Hey. I have an idea. Let's try to control the ENTIRE world, with thousands of different cultures and customs and philosophies with one single monogovernment ... because whats good for one group is good for the rest, right?

This is absurd. You can't get get 3 people in room together, who had the same parents, that will agree on everything -- and you want one government for 7 billion people??

[Independent voter]

Yes, if it was just like the US government but worldwide.

[Aeula]

No. Never. Absolutely not.

When a Government and their laws becomes shitty (like in my country) you can always move somewhere with better ones. Can't do that if it's the same government everywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, if it was just like the US government but worldwide.

Trump for god-emperor?

[Endus]

I think a global government would be problematic if it were run like most nations currently are, because as you expand the legislative boundary, you include more variation that warrants a closer focus in terms of legislation. If I were to want a global government, it would basically be in expanding the UN (or some similar concept) to something that A> establishes certain basic legislative principles all nations are bound to (basically, the treaty system that's already in place), and most importantly B> actual teeth to enforce the above. And that's where it would end. Trade disputes between nations would still happen, but could be arbitrated at that level, if issues are not deemed to be human-rights related or similarly fundamental, then local legislation should be fine, etc. There's no reason, for instance, that a global government should be either establishing or attacking the right for citizens to bear arms; the USA goes one way, Canada goes another (to pick two nations), and that's fine. But on human rights issues, there should be some commonality and some firm enforcement protocols available at the international level, since right now it basically boils down to a frowny finger-wag by the UN.

Basically, take the state/provincial and federal divide, and add a third global category over federal, which has even less mandate to legislate than federal governments. Pretty much just over international disputes and human rights issues.

[nanook12]

Hey. I have an idea. Let's try to control the ENTIRE world, with thousands of different cultures and customs and philosophies with one single monogovernment ... because whats good for one group is good for the rest, right?

This is absurd. You can't get get 3 people in room together, who had the same parents, that will agree on everything -- and you want one government for 7 billion people??

Government and culture can certainly be mutually exclusive things. Look it is in our constitution " "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." just apply that idea to the entire world.

[Muzjhath]

Yes, the world is global and society is global.

We need more layers to keep track of things.

Am I saying "dissolve everything under it"? Absolutely fucking not.
Things need layers for stuff.
Municipality -> County -> Nation(state in the case of the US) -> EU, US, National Union of size (you get the idea) -> Global rule-set.

The last set would in this ideal practically only cover shit like contract law, tax evasion, monopolies, trust-bursting, patents and technology. Making sure that unethical corporate shit doesn't happen in poor countries.
I'd want most of "current national services" to stay national. As that makes them more responsive (on several things in Sweden I'd want things more on a local level, while some things that ARE local ought to be national).

The idea here is to establish things so that Netflix US and Netflix Canada doesn't have VASTLY different programming. Or that stops me buying something from a store based in the Netherlands because of some obscure contract law that the EU hasn't yet fixed.

So do I want a "global layer"? Yes, but it's one that'd be a light touch for most "everyday" stuff. One there to police actors that work on a global layer to stick up for those who don't.

[zenkai]

Personally, I would be in favor of it because many of the problems we face today, such as Climate Change, require a united world in order to battle. Imagine if a global minimum wage was established or a global tax code for corporations were set in place? Then corporations could no longer use shady tactics to dodge laws and tactics because they would pay the same no matter where they go. We could establish global agreement on combating Climate Change. Hell we could even collaborate for a global space colonization program instead of always fighting each other.

However, the bad side is if corruption seeps its way into a global government. So a global government has potential to do extreme good if function properly, but also extreme bad if corruption seeps in.

No, I can't even stand rep from states on the west cost much less countries with some fucked up morals telling me how I should live.

[nanook12]

I feel like most people are ignoring the obvious future and the historical perspective. At first we had tribes, eventually those tribes mixed and formed a town, as towns grew they eventually mixed and formed a state, then a nation, then a continent and so on. Government grew bigger along with this natural processes of expansion of our species. If we are ever going to grow into galactic civilizations, then we first need planetary unity.

I think that we are going to become a planet hopping species, and with that comes the inevitability of global and even galactic sized government.

[nanook12]

Yes, the world is global and society is global.

We need more layers to keep track of things.

Am I saying "dissolve everything under it"? Absolutely fucking not.
Things need layers for stuff.
Municipality -> County -> Nation(state in the case of the US) -> EU, US, National Union of size (you get the idea) -> Global rule-set.

The last set would in this ideal practically only cover shit like contract law, tax evasion, monopolies, trust-bursting, patents and technology. Making sure that unethical corporate shit doesn't happen in poor countries.
I'd want most of "current national services" to stay national. As that makes them more responsive (on several things in Sweden I'd want things more on a local level, while some things that ARE local ought to be national).

The idea here is to establish things so that Netflix US and Netflix Canada doesn't have VASTLY different programming. Or that stops me buying something from a store based in the Netherlands because of some obscure contract law that the EU hasn't yet fixed.

So do I want a "global layer"? Yes, but it's one that'd be a light touch for most "everyday" stuff. One there to police actors that work on a global layer to stick up for those who don't.

Um we have a federal government yet also still have state governments. I you implying that all other government institutions would disappear with the advent of a global government.

[Deleted]

I would if it worked as an extra layer: common policies of a more abstract nature, such as human rights. But letting each subdivision have their own particularities.
Not sure how that could be created. Massive confederations?.

[Dark-Zarupia]

Isn't that what the Illuminati wants.

[Muzjhath]

Um we have a federal government yet also still have state governments. I you implying that all other government institutions would disappear with the advent of a global government.

Read what I said. I implied the exact opposite.

[alzoron]

The problem with one world government is that if it becomes corrupt you're pretty much fucked. Can't leave, can't ask another country for help. Your only options are to suffer or hope you can start a successful rebellion against a government that has the military/policeforce, production ability and economic power 100 times stronger than any currently existing government.

[nanook12]

Read what I said. I implied the exact opposite.

Ah I see not. The outer most layer of the onion.

[minteK917]

Global Government is inevitable anyway. Probably when a global crisis gets too big or after world war 3, which ever comes first. Global Government doesent mean there is no other government. The federal government of your current country did not remove the representative from your province, state, county, your city mayor, etc. You get the idea. They simply over rule above for a bigger picture. For example in a crisis, one state might need more funds to help, which is taken in the others pocket, sure they might prefer it to not happen, but when its their turn, they are glad. Same goes for a global government. It will end alot of stupid shit people bitch about right now, job loss due to uneven global currency and salaries out sourcing jobs. Easier control of immigration. possibility for easier uniformed tax laws.

I dont think we are close to that, but its literally impossible it doesent happen unless human are just erased off the map. Just like federal government did, global government would end up with the entire military of the world, therefore just like states, counties, town cant wage wars against one another on a military scale, neither would countries anymore. Which is why its a move that is unabled by something catastrophic or ww3.

[JohnBrown1917]

Global gay space communism.

[Schattenlied]

Trump for god-emperor?

Obviously not, because if the whole world were voting he wouldn't have won.