Is it time for a system of global laws?

[Total Crica]

Everything involving "gloabal laws" or a world government gets a giant "Hell no" from me.

i think trying to get along with everything and everyone is a much better solution then war the moment someone or something disagrees with you so im for global (universal eventually) laws

i say we work together to find common ground for everyone and everything

[Daelak]

I often read on these forums many of the general problems facing humanity such as diminishing resources, poverty, environmental/bio diversity loss and over population are debated. These sorts of problems seem to be very difficult to solve with existing systems like the U.N and Treaties between so many diverse nations.

I realize many nations are addressing these problems themselves and some problems like population affect countries to different degrees but to give a an example what if all the developed nations got together used a portion of their GDP and bought the remaining rain forests with the aim of doing nothing just conserving them for the future of humanity under global ownership.

Though it sounds a little "New World Order" is it time we bring in an overarching system of laws that apply to all nations with the aim of beginning to address the problems our civilization faces?

Yes, I think there will be a set of laws for all corporations and major emitters of carbon will have to abide by. We are reaching the limitations of what a sovereign country can do, so this is the next logical step.

[Gheld]

Not only does globalism need to go fuck itself, but we need to run out of oil as soon as possible (before 100% viable alternatives come to fruition) thereby isolating the continents from each other again.

[Release]

You assume for some reason that a global government will agree to restrict reproductive rights and fight climate change. Why?

Everyone who wants this global state are always assuming the state will have THEIR ideals, but no one ever explains how that's anything else than a ridiculously unlikely dream. Looking at the entire world today, do you think most people agree with your politics?

Or are you suggesting a military dictatorship?

Firstly i'm not really dealing in "ideals" i'm dealing in climate change and use/conservation of resources. We are stilling living through the next great extinction and if the temperature keeps increasing as it is every single living thing on this planet is going to feel it blue, green, white or black. These are cold hard realities unfortunately so It doesn't matter if your a Muslim cleric in Iran or a fundamentalist Christian in Texas we are going to have to deal with this problem somehow.

I understand the criticism however, this wouldn't be my wish particularly either but under the current system what have we done to address any of the global problems in the past sixty years? If anyone has any other alternatives aside from keep going and hope technology bails us out i'd love to hear them.

Secondly i'm not advocating some sort of global fourth reich. Though it has many flaws and drawbacks the EU shows diverse nations can cooperate on the sort of national level this undertaking would require. It obviously helps all European nations began with Western ideals but were not a million miles from countries like Turkey joining so it shows we can cooperate if the desire and will is there.

[Revi]

Firstly i'm not really dealing in "ideals" i'm dealing in climate change and use/conservation of resources. We are stilling living through the next great extinction and if the temperature keeps increasing as it is every single living thing on this planet is going to feel it blue, green, white or black. These are cold hard realities unfortunately so It doesn't matter if your a Muslim cleric in Iran or a fundamentalist Christian in Texas we are going to have to deal with this problem somehow.

You believing you don't deal in ideals, doesn't mean everyone else will agree with you. Have you seen the climate debate in the US?

So why do you think on a global level that the majority will agree with you that climate change is a problem, and agree with you that we should deal with it?

And what makes you think the majority of the earths population would agree with you on a reproduction limit?

The problem with a global state is that you can't have it and think suddenly things will improve the way you'd want it. If you can't even get your own country to agree with you many things, why would you think expanding the electorate to include all the populations with different cultures and socioeconomic circumstances would suddenly improve your chances?

[Azadina]

Sure. Let's decide on them by global majority vote then. Will completely fuck over LGBT rights, women's rights and welfare, but that's the democratic way. And to enforce them we've need drastic sanctions, making us suffer until we bend to it, or weapons to wage global war on everyone who won't give up western values.

What could possibly go wrong? :|

This, really... No thank you on global laws.

[Independent voter]

TPP, the Pacific Rim trade treaty has a lot of laws concerning treatment of workers, etc. It's the start of something like global laws.

[Zapgreen]

A set of global laws would never work though because the thing about laws, while some do in fact protect human rights, a lot are created just to maintain status quo and to protect their right to be in power. That is the true purpose of both government and religion, to control the plebeians. I mean shit, you ask anyone on the street what they think of ANY politician and you'll get some variant of the word "corruption". I wonder, just who would be in charge of the world... If we give it to the hegemon, USA is now in charge of the world (sweet), I bet the Middle east is just thrilled. we all know how well they're reacting to LGBT right atm.

Say what you want, but humans are, historically, a very violent species. Just look at shit like the coliseum or public lynchings. Yes, we're a little bit more progressive now and find "safer" ways to get our violence on, but for real... we find the most retarded excuses to hate/kill each other, "you look different" or "you think differently" and my favorite, "my god can beat up your god"

...There is a very old and cliche saying, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". Humanity well never unite under one banner until we have a new, more different enemy (extraterrestrial). Something that will make us look at our (global) neighbors and realize we're not so different at all.

[Release]

You believing you don't deal in ideals, doesn't mean everyone else will agree with you. Have you seen the climate debate in the US?

So why do you think on a global level that the majority will agree with you that climate change is a problem, and agree with you that we should deal with it?

And what makes you think the majority of the earths population would agree with you on a reproduction limit?

The problem with a global state is that you can't have it and think suddenly things will improve the way you'd want it. If you can't even get your own country to agree with you many things, why would you think expanding the electorate to include all the populations with different cultures and socioeconomic circumstances would suddenly improve your chances?

You keep bringing up this global state. I never said I wanted a global state I actually explicitly said I didn't want a global state. I'm British and we live within certain rules governed by the EU this hasn't caused some super tyranny and has helped Europe address certain problems that transcend sovereignty. Is the EU perfect? No but like I said it SHOWS what can be done with the will.

What would be so wrong about the planets developed nations coming together and buying the rain forest to halt its destruction for instance? I think its universally accepted destroying the rain forest is a bad thing detrimental to our planet but If everyone owns it then nobody owns it would be the line of reasoning.

[Revi]

You keep bringing up this global state. I never said I wanted a global state I actually explicitly said I didn't want a global state. I'm British and we live within certain rules governed by the EU this hasn't caused some super tyranny and has helped Europe address certain problems that transcend sovereignty. Is the EU perfect? No but like I said it SHOWS what can be done with the will.

What would be so wrong about the planets developed nations coming together and buying the rain forest to halt its destruction for instance? I think its universally accepted destroying the rain forest is a bad thing detrimental to our planet but If everyone owns it then nobody owns it would be the line of reasoning.

Buying rain forests and then having the owners decide what to do with it, is not global law. The EU works, somewhat, because it's voluntary. We don't force countries into it, countries decide to apply. The countries in it, for the most part share values. Do you really think Saudi Arabia, for example, would join the EU and submit to it's rules?