TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

A Global Government, A Global Democracy

We need a global government. But how do we launch such a Leviathan

A global government to focus on issues like, Global Resource Management, Environmental Conservation, Human Rights Laws, Preserving the Human Race.

An organization like the UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY, except with the sovereignty to actually make decisions stick. If democracy is in the best interest of the human race, then why isn't the UN democratic? Why do 5 countries in the Security Council have the ability to veto decisions made by the General Assembly. Why can the decision of 1 or 2 countries, prevail over the consensus of 152 countries. Why can't the International Community successfully prevent the human rights abuse, war, and environmental degradation that plagues society?

A global government could potentially work. It could be a representative democracy. It could have the ability to enforce decisions made by the International Community. All countries would have to agree to the creation of this sovereign government, and then comply to enforcing its decisions with concrete actions.

This global government would need to be backed by a large enough military power, or have the ability to sanction effectively, so that no one or two countries could possibly ignore or defy it. With complete International cooperation, it is possible.

And who would rule such a Leviathan and carry out its many tasks? It would require so many people. It would be a massive organization. We'd need an online, global Voting System. Only one political party, the International Community itself as a whole. Through a global voting system, each person from any country on the planet (over 18) could have access to a vote online. This is entirely possible over the Internet.

It would have to be free of corruption and voter fraud of course, but there must be a way to make digital voting 100% secure and transparent. This can work if the whole world agrees to work together. But how do we convince every country to participate?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 17 2013: All I say is, forming a global government would be difficult!
    The whole national interest vs global interest debate.
    I mean it reminds me of a Japanese myth, where two brothers seek peace. One views humans are by nature violent, and decides that power ( with the use of deterrents) can bring about global unity, the other brother believes an increase in empathy and love can bring about global unity. Then in the mythology this leads to an endless war between the two brothers!
    I say :
    Launch the leviathan, as one massive deterrent, to end all deterrents!
    It is wishful thinking to assume global unity will ever be achieved!
    I hope I'm not too much of a pessimist!
    Thanks,
    Bernard.
    • Apr 17 2013: it is wishful thinking, but honestly, what could be more fair than a global democracy, even if unity isn't achieved, i would hope the greater good would win a fair democratic voting process, then again this does depend on the education of the voters
      • thumb
        Apr 17 2013: Exactly. People don't know what they want! Choice isn't a guarantee of happiness.
        The best government would be a global benevolent dictator!
        Define 'fair'?
        Thanks Bernard. :)
        Or maybe a democratic dictatorship? Democracy on local level?
        • Apr 17 2013: There are already websites like AVAAZ.org that make online petitions that reach into the 100,000s. What they don't have is a venue with enough political power to take action. Sure 150+ countries in the UN General Assembly can agree to intervene on a human rights abuse, but if no one enforces it, or the Security Council veto's it, it's essentially dead in the water.

          I'm not suggesting an all-encompassing dictatorship, that would be more harmful than helpful. I'm just talking about enforcement on several key issues really, like preventable harm to people or the environment. What we need is a multinational sovereign entity with the power to enforce certain standards when it comes to basic human rights violations, or environmental protection.

          By "fair", i mean that if such a global decision making entity were to exist, every vote should be of equal value, and nobody would have the ability to VETO on a majority consensus.

          Also, the larger the sample data, the more representative the result is, so don't ask the ruling political party to represent an entire country's opinion with one vote, rather open the voting to all global citizens willing to vote. This could easily be done through a website.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.