one world government

[reyam200]

will we ever have a One world government? i don't think its possible, unless everyone was turned into mindless drones. (like the borg)

 

people just choose not to get along, pety bickering.

like the israilies and the palistines, they've bein fighting over the land for several millenia, reminds me of two children fighting over a toy, shouting "MINE! MINE!"

[ydoaPs]

with all the different forms of government around and all of the wars and such, i don't think it will happen anytime soon.

[Nevermore]

Actually, taking over Switzerland would be quite benaficial, seeing as noone wants to fight with them, because everyone wants to bank with them.

[Phi for All]

As we move towards more economic specialization, I can see the necessities of international trade forming more cohesive governance. I see it coming in stages, naturally, given the current state of society and no major shifts.

 

If China becomes the economic giant they have the potential to be it could shift power drastically, and I can see them being a one world power. If they lead by economic example instead of by economic might, it could be a bloodless takeover.

 

Imo, without one faction making war on everyone else, or a global natural disaster, a one world government can only happen because it's required economically. When war between opposed governments is less profitable than combining resources to maximize earnings potential, we could spend the war budgets on research into energy, health sciences, underwater/offworld exploration, and any of a thousand more useful things.

[CPL.Luke]

I would say that whats going to happen is that china is going to become the economic superpower in the world while the US retains its ability to balance against china in international deplomacy as we will most likely maintain our army come hell or high water.

 

some nations near china might combine themselves in similar ways as the EU in order to prevent themselves from becomeing communist. Most of the nations between china and europe that were formerly communist will most likely combine into the EU (if there allowed) as the people already know the dangers of communism.

[Pangloss]

I would say that whats going to happen is that china is going to become the economic superpower in the world while the US retains its ability to balance against china in international deplomacy

 

Ok, I'll bite. How are we going to retain our ability to balance china diplomatically if they're holding our national debt, comprising the lion's share of our imports, consuming the lion's share of our resource exports, and snapping up our struggling publically-traded companies?

 

How do you feel will that work out to anything other than China handing us orders, and us asking "how high"?

 

Just curious.

[CPL.Luke]

The US could maintain its ability to fight other nations abroad with a large force even if the army was downsized by 200,000 (totally made up statistic) men. The Us still has and probably will continue to have the technological edge on china and other nations, essentialy the US will be able to make it very very expensive for china to fight any war with us. (especially considering were building small mini nukes for tactical purposes (for regular use))

 

some interesting statistics.

 

In iraq american tanks destroyed 75 iraqi tanks to every american tank lost. (the ones lost were mostly due to friendly fire as well)

 

to date only 1 american stealth aircraft has been lost. even then it was just by the enemy pouring anti-air fire into the sky where they believed the planes were coming from.

 

there are a bunch more that I know of, but I would be worried about my memory failing me.

[Phi for All]

some nations near china might combine themselves in similar ways as the EU in order to prevent themselves from becomeing communist. Most of the nations between china and europe that were formerly communist will most likely combine into the EU (if there allowed) as the people already know the dangers of communism.

I can't see the words "China" and "dangers of communism" in the same sentence without laughing. They can throw off the cloak of communism in a heartbeat and be the biggest capitalist nation in the world, comprising more wealth and manpower than the former Soviet Union with none of its transitional problems.

[CPL.Luke]

they still have commune like things

 

I would definatly not want to work there (in a factory)

 

even though china does seem to be leaning further towards the capitalist side of things, every government in the region will desperatly try and avoid becoming like them.

[Pangloss]

Accidental double-post there, btw.

 

Unfortunately the American military approach is based on massive spending. So dealing with a reduction in force doesn't really address the issue. How will we be able to afford the latest smart weapons when we can no longer afford to spend half a trillion dollars per year on the military? That number is, coincidentally, in the ballpark of what we spent last year on debt upkeep (interest payments to China and all the other debt holders).

 

I'm not trying to predict gloom and doom here. Just pointing out that it's not as simple as you might think. We're in bed with China now. It's going to be very difficult to, say, stop it from invading Taiwan (if they ever develop that capability). Put another way, we say "we will stop you from invading Taiwan", and suddenly ever Wal-Mart in the country declares bankruptcy (because they have no goods to sell), putting 680,000 people out of work and slapping the economy with a $300 billion/year hit. THEN they start waving trillions in federal bond notes in our faces.

 

It's a new world out there. The old rules don't always apply. We have GOT to curb spending, become competitive, stop whining along ideological lines, and smell the globally produced coffee.

 

Otherwise the new, rebuilt gulf coast is going to be the most emergency-prepared, technologically-advanced, poverty-free, and safest province in all of China.

[Phi for All]

I used to envision a day when 50 PRC soldiers would suddenly hop out of each COSCO container in every railyard in the US. Suddenly we have a million Chinese warriors on our home turf, mixed in with the public so most of our smart weaponry and hi-tech gear was useless. Bingo, instant takeover.

 

But China wouldn't need to use force now. Economics will decide any future major world government. And like Pangloss, I don't see gloom and doom here. Most people picture a world government that dresses everyone the same and turns us into mindless worker drones. Any world government that's smart enough to rule the planet (China or whoever) would understand that keeping people happy and prosperous is going to be a big part of the juggling act. Destroying individual cultures is the surest way to stir up rebellion. Efficiency is the key, and I see major centers of commerce specialization popping up, maximizing productivity by mass production and service centers. People will be happy because they will be prosperous and won't be worried about terrorism and nuclear war.

 

The biggest hurdle is going to be the multinational corporations who sell military materiel and have the political machinery in place to influence their governments. They need to see more profit in global peace than in war. Personally, I don't see that happening in my lifetime.

[Pangloss]

An interesting, if a little bizarre, scenario. You're gonna be the next Tom Clancy, Phi. (grin)

[mike90]

I find it hard to envision China trying to keep people happy. Theirform of government has traditionally been a little heavy handed. I could see them some day having the wealth, but not the diplomacy for world takeover

[Phi for All]

I find it hard to envision China trying to keep people happy. Theirform of government has traditionally been a little heavy handed. I could see them some day having the wealth, but not the diplomacy for world takeover

Many conservative people, especially in the US, would view a more "heavy handed" approach as being long overdue. More discipline always seems to be the older generation's solution to the problems of the younger generation (throughout history, not just now). Diplomacy takes a back seat if people are prosperous and processes are well-ordered and firmly run.

 

If effective global leadership comes through a more regimented approach, I think many people in the world would view it beneficially. Concessions would need to be made to unite the world in peace under one government. As long as it keeps the trains running on time, even a dictatorship can be efficient and win the public approval. Oppressiveness is in the eye of the beholder.

[Pangloss]

Boy, if there's any government in the entire world that's more afraid of their people (and therefore more interested in keeping them happy), I cannot even imagine what it would be.

[CPL.Luke]

communist governments have traditionally been unconcerened with the happiness of the people (as long as they aren't rioting). There was that one time that the chinese sent tanks into tienemann square to stop a group of protestors.

[bascule]

It's possible.

 

Step one: Admit that we are all fundamentally working on the same problem.

 

We'll never get there. People will have to discard the pathological memes with which they are infected first. Short of memetic genocide, I don't see this happening... ever.

 

Step two: Figure out what that problem is.

 

If you though step one was hard...

[-Demosthenes-]

If there weren't as many governments working very well I think it would be more likely for a world government to be created, but there are many populations contented with their government as it is. However in a time or war, or some other kind of extreme situation I can see some sort of work government coming out of the works. Countries after past wars have tried.

 

But I don't know if I agree so much with a world government with a lot of power though. But you know how I am.