Many theories of one world government involve conspiracies.
I’d like to suggest that the erradication of national borders, a unverisal language, a shared currency, and a shared culture would end some of the major justifications for war. Now if you think that war would then be between world citizens and the world government, let’s hear your opinions on that. I can only see that if information was at stake, which it very well may be.
As it stands now, when the president says God bless America, and that America is the greatest country on Earth, I think someone in Romania feels the same national pride that lines his land with an invisible shape on a map.
Yes, I would miss international football, maybe even the Olympics and the Miss Universe pagent, but I see strife as orginating from the clash of cultural expectations, one usually built on different languages and the myth stories that use that exclusive language.
Is national pride overrated? If national pride became worldwide pride, would we stop seeing differences in people as way to say they are less than human.
Maybe the only way humans will be united is if we have to fight robots, together. Or maybe artifical intellience when linked to human minds will create a universal god like mind.
I would say in the Greater scheme of things yes I am for it, but I don’t think we’ll see it any sooner that 5 centuries at least and even then most likely brought about by wars.
In the Meantime i’ll be here spreading the word of Unification and Empire.
Also Nationalism wouldn’t necessarily be abadoned, it’d be similiar same as regional pride is today, but uh…bigger.
A universal language would take three generations to establish. One to institute it, one to slowly adopt it, and one to live it, as if it were always so.
Yes, massively. But that isn’t a reason to replace national governments with global ones. It’s a reason to replace them with much smaller, more local institutions.
Is it more likely that I would be a better family member if I stopped governing myself?
“One World Government” seems to be about obliterating the ability to govern at a multiplicity of scales. As opposed to that idea (I’m completely against it), I do think that the are currently vacuums of healthy governance at certain scales. Our inability to govern on an international scale is a big problem, for instance environmentally. We also seem to have vacuums of governance at more local scales.
Let it be known, an anarchist started this thread. One suggestion doesn’t work or seem likely, nieghborhood chiefs, the extreme other end comes into focus. We are still taking about the concentration of power.