TED Conversations

Trent Michaels

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

One Worldwide Government

Just picture this if you will, a world with no war, a world where everyone is provided for, a world that is. . . perfect.

Hypothetically speaking, if every individual country acted as if it were a state rather than many states combined, and there was one central government (similar to the U.N.) than that would allow for one "Super-Country" if you will. Thus, eliminating the need for big scale wars and global hunger. Everybody everywhere could be provided for. Every child could have an education. Religions would still be separate but have different Churches, Synagogues, and Mosques etc. One last and very important point, the political view. I believe, should become one of both Democratic and Communistic views, a mix of both. Now I'm not saying at all that the world should be a dictatorship or that i support that kind of stuff, but that I simply believe having every individual on the same social level is a wonderful idea. It would eliminate poverty! Though while at the same time still keeping a more Democratic way of doing things. (voting, electing representatives etc.) And on one last note, the economy might be a mixed economy, leaning more towards command than free-market, while still having most characteristics of a mixed economy. In many ways i think that life could be less. . . chaotic.

Please, let me hear your thoughts on why or why not, this would work. Give me your opinions and feedback, also. Feel free to help "add-on" or improve if you wish. (and please remember, this is just, for me, an ideal world. You don't have to agree.)

+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 26 2011: I'm pro a world government.

    How it should take form is a big question. Some forms are undesirable...
    I think the European model is a good not very bad, but it would need some adaptation.
    giving gradually more power to the UN might work, but would be less democratic.
    Maybe going from there and working towards a good constitution might be the first step

    And that constitution would need a huge consensus worldwide! tough but do-able
    • thumb
      Apr 28 2011: The milennium "Global Democracy" project tried to advance this idea specifically also looking to the U.N. ( more links on this at my post here "Foundations for a Global Democracy" . It was defeated by issues of soverignty..that is nations believe they have a right to self dtermination without outside interference even if their national policy explits children, engages in ethnic cleansing, degrades the air we breathe and theoceans that feed us. Is here in the first instnace a list of things we all agree to beyond national borders and religion that supersede national soverignty?
    • Comment deleted

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.