One World Government

[grannywils]

Marharth, the reason that I feel as though I have entered an alternative universe is the following: We were discussing a fairly serious topic regarding one world government, and suddenly I found it inundated with clips from television programs.

 

Silver has used a quotation from Douglas Adams, an author that he and I both admire. May I use another, as follows: "Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. "

 

[JimboUK]

 

That says more about you than it does me.

 

It goes both ways. And I am Belgian, so please don't play my advocate. As long as we are unable to adopt the ideal American feeling we are doomed to sink into insignificance, economically and politically. Already realized that the bulk of our exports, and most of the EU countries are export orientated, flows in the EU?

 

Be that as it may we have reached the real causes behind the difficulties of any peaceful unification under a single flag:

- historical reasoned regional patriotism

- regional authorities to decide on high level

- different forms of legislative

- different culture and religion

- asymmetric life standards

 

The latter is still good visible in the case of Great Germany, even after a generation since the Acta Kohl: a rich West and a not that rich East. The level of private indebtedness is much higher in the former Communist part of the reunited country, consequence of an aiming at the high West German life standard as the only true one.

Such a financial asymmetry we find again on a higher level in the PIG countries of the EU, now largely supported by the local governments with an increasing indebtedness of both the public and the private hand, the state bankrupt is the final result of a living beyond one's means. It might take a few generations though to compensate the given asymmetry without new debt even if the authorities of the national governments would ever be reduced to US state level or the like, showing Chancellor Merkel reduced in size as congresswoman or Governor of Germany in the United States of Europe for example. Fiction? Perhaps, but Europe has no workable alternative. The age of the old national states is over, the time of the Europeans has come, one way or the other.

 

Not before we have found solution approaches for a united Europe we might talk about the big picture - the united world of striking asymmetry in buying power that directly calls for a matching of the different life standards - and a relativization of culture and religion as well.

 

What we all might learn from the Trekkie universe is the willingness to share table fellowship with our former enemies - the aliens of old. Today we either row in the same team boat or we have to swim for our survival, alone in the dark. Good luck.

 

The U.S works because it has a common language, a common history and a work ethic seriously lacking in parts of Europe, anyone who thinks Europe can emulate the U.S is living in cloud cuckoo land. Europe should just be a free trade area, there is no need to destroy national identities in a rush to create a superstate. Nation states outside the E.U are doing just fine, better in fact because their businesses are not tied up in E.U red tape.

 

I can understand why nations who profit from the E.U like it so much, what is in it for the taxpayers of net contributors? Why should taxpayers in the U.K who are suffering spending cuts throw Billions into the black hole that is the E.U? As for Star Trek that fits quite nicely, those behind the great European project are certainly living in a fantasy universe.

[Pyrosocial]

Less war, sensless killing, better living conditions for poverty stricken areas, a better economy...what's not to like? If we could succesfully do this it would be the best humanitarian achievement since the forming of the UN.

 

 

 

Why would any of that happen? You don't need separate governments for people to start fighting, better living conditions for others means lower ones for us as resources are finite and the economy in some areas will be worse than others as one economic policy won't suit all areas, the Euro is a perfect example of that.

 

Simple, you don't leave the country you conquered to govern itsself, you assign a viceroy or something. Said person will want some of the things he had back home, so it will be built, roads will be paved ect.

The exact thing happened with great Britain.

[HeyYou]

Trouble is, if you have to conquer territory....... as in, force them to join your world union..... you are going to have rebellions everywhere. Even if you have a benevolent government, that raises the standard of living for them, the fact that they are no longer self-governing will piss some folks right off, and they will take up arms against you. Learn from the Roman Empire........ forming a government at gun-point, is ineffective. Especially if you want peace.

[DeTomaso]

As for Star Trek that fits quite nicely, those behind the great European project are certainly living in a fantasy universe.

 

Much better than living in the imperial past, exclusively thinking backwards.

Thus the question who might be the much greater fantast is already answered.

Edited June 12, 2011 by DeTomaso

[ginnyfizz]

A rather cheap and pointless shot, since I haven't seen anyone harking back to Imperial days...except those who are behind the great European project perhaps. Last time we in Britain got to vote we voted for a European Common Market, in other words a free trade zone as Jim_uk describes. What we didn't envisage was the European Union. We also, in our touching naivete, assumed that everyone else would play fair and we solemnly apply every regulation they impose, however crackpot, however many miles (I beg your pardon, kilometres)of red tape they generate. Turns out that everyone else in the EU thinks we are terribly funny for doing this, or they did until it dawned on us that we were actually paying for a lot of this lunacy. All of a sudden, when we insisted on getting our contribution cut, we were, once again, perfide Albion.

 

Jim_uk is right, it simply isn't necessary to subjugate nationhood and national identity in order for us to do well in trade and business. Nor is it necessary in order to live in harmony - we have to acknowledge our differences "vive la difference!"and work through them.

 

The EU is the perfect example of why the One World idea is impractical and a Bad Thing.

[marharth]

A rather cheap and pointless shot, since I haven't seen anyone harking back to Imperial days...except those who are behind the great European project perhaps. Last time we in Britain got to vote we voted for a European Common Market, in other words a free trade zone as Jim_uk describes. What we didn't envisage was the European Union. We also, in our touching naivete, assumed that everyone else would play fair and we solemnly apply every regulation they impose, however crackpot, however many miles (I beg your pardon, kilometres)of red tape they generate. Turns out that everyone else in the EU thinks we are terribly funny for doing this, or they did until it dawned on us that we were actually paying for a lot of this lunacy. All of a sudden, when we insisted on getting our contribution cut, we were, once again, perfide Albion.

 

Jim_uk is right, it simply isn't necessary to subjugate nationhood and national identity in order for us to do well in trade and business. Nor is it necessary in order to live in harmony - we have to acknowledge our differences "vive la difference!"and work through them.

 

The EU is the perfect example of why the One World idea is impractical and a Bad Thing.

The EU doesn't have the best idea of government either.

 

Saying that the EU is a perfect example of why a one world government would be bad isn't really true.

 

If the world government was going to be the same as the governments in the EU, then fine. Its completely different if you have a different system.

Edited June 12, 2011 by marharth

[ginnyfizz]

Nonono, Marharth, you aren't reading what I typed, I said that the EU is a perfect example of why a One World government would be a Bad Thing. Ie it is a perfectly bad example if you like, a textbook example of what can go wrong (and has gone wrong). Please don't twist my words.

[marharth]

Nonono, Marharth, you aren't reading what I typed, I said that the EU is a perfect example of why a One World government would be a Bad Thing. Ie it is a perfectly bad example if you like, a textbook example of what can go wrong (and has gone wrong). Please don't twist my words.

Should of made my post more clear, edited it.

 

I typed...

 

"EU is a perfect example of a one world government."

 

I meant "EU is a perfect example of a one world government would be bad."

Edited June 12, 2011 by marharth

[HeyYou]

Nonono, Marharth, you aren't reading what I typed, I said that the EU is a perfect example of why a One World government would be a Bad Thing. Ie it is a perfectly bad example if you like, a textbook example of what can go wrong (and has gone wrong). Please don't twist my words.

Should of made my post more clear, edited it.

 

I typed...

 

"EU is a perfect example of a one world government."

 

I meant "EU is a perfect example of a one world government would be bad."

 

I think what she is trying to point out here is, the EU is a prime example of just why a one world government won't work. With all the diverse ideas of how things 'should' work, very little actually gets done, and what DOES get done, might be good for some, but, for others..... not so much so.