One World Government

My question to you is not if it is possible but, do you think that it would be a bad idea for one world government? Also where is the world going if not one government? Will it be content by sitting on this planet and leaving the fate of humanity up to chance." I think its bad with a one world government, so much land with so few leaders cannot be good, to much power at hand. I think we should do with smaller independent nations that actually work together for the greater good(in unions), with unions I don't mean that countries go together into mega countries but just work together for a common goal, we are all different, use it as an advantage. Just showing your Einstein quote again, and I think it would still matter even with only one government. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and humanity and human stupidity, and I"m not sure about the former." Albert Einstein If mega countries would emerge as you mentioned earlier(Basically as the foundation for a one world government) I don't think there would be peace and freedom that win. Superpowers works like big joints, they need something between the joints or they are going to grind against each over until something happens. This is what we saw in Europe during the cold war, misunderstandings almost started ww3 several times. Deeply rooted Cultural differences doesn't just go away over the years and is afraid that instead of peace we would see a cold war *2. But let's say a one world government existed, here are some of the problems(I go by one world government to be a single massive world country, otherwise it's just mega countries). 1 The highest leaders have no clue about your more local condition, they might have advisers but the people who make the final decision have probably no clue about the region. 2 People are different in different parts of the world. What makes people in one place happy might start the other group to rage. A few examples, the school works almost differently in every country, changing the way people learn in the entire world would be a hard task. Not asking what way is the right way as the way Chinese students and Western students have two totally different way of learning. 3 Open borders. As its just one country and people are free to travel in their own country allows poor people will mass leave to better places where the jobs are, which creates massive problems. http://rt.com... Also open borders would open up for really simple smuggling, with no border controls worth speaking of, drugs and weapons smuggling would turn into a massive problem. This is something which is very apparent in the EU, Eu members are free to move into other eu countries(or at least its easier) which makes poor people move into richer countries/regions. Also apparent in EU is the smuggling, with open borders into almost all countries its almost possible to load a truck full of guns and just drive past the border. http://www.independent.co.uk... 4 Who should pay for what. In the dawn of the "one world government" there are many poor countries and even pure conflict zones. For them to become something else than economic black holes an enormous amount of money and work must be made into these countries, something that will come at the cost of already developed countries which got a chance to backfire as people in those countries get mad because they feel they must pay money for something they have nothing to do with(not saying it's right, but people are sadly that way). Yet again this can be seen in EU, when the finance crisis came some countries were harder struck than others. Billions and billions of Euros were pumped into these countries just to prevent them to go bankrupt, this even put a strain on the better faring countries. Remember these were still developed countries, the cost for third world countries would be even higher. 5 Maintaining control. Just to make things clear, the world is a big place. Now we must have the entire world to follow the same laws, use the same currency, the same "everything". As I often have pointed out, people are not same all over the world, there will be poorer places where the corruption is running rampant, these places will be uncontrollable with weapons just flooding through the open borders. And even if you say opinion changes some people will always want to remain independent, this is something we have seen for hundreds/thousands of years and it will not change. People that have the same heritage will more often than not want to have an independent rule(aka their own country). And one thing people will oppose is when someone from the other side of the world tries to control the place your people call home. "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" Gerald Seymour. Also if we unite into one country everyone would want their system to be the ruling one which can be a bit problematic. "We humans are our own worst enemy. We have to unite under one flag or parish from our own self destruction. This is the sad truth of the human race. One world government is the best option for the continuation of the human people. It will not happen for a long time. The first thing that we have to do learn that we are human and we are in this together so we need to start acting like it." We are way too many to be controlled as one country, even today people with different culture have a hard time working together, just look at Shia and Sunni Muslims(and these are differences that are hundreds/thousands years old). Sadly you are not wrong that we are our own worst enemy but even if I think we should unite, forcing people into a single mold is wrong. Instead I feel we should embrace our similarities AND differences. Understand them and use them as an advantage. As individual countries working for the greater good, none with too much power. "Many might oppose mega countries, however at one point many people opposed desegregation. I know this is comparing apple and oranges put the point is that peoples opinion change over time. The world is always changing, and if it depends on the survival of the human kind (which it might )then people will change there minds." Yes, people changed their opinions about segregation, however it's like you say not the same as letting the inhabitants of one geographic region to keep control of their own region. Also the last part take it for granted that everyone thinks a one world government is the only way, which I don't think they will do. "The world government that I am thinking of is basically a copy of the United States. With the exception that the candidates would be anonymous, to prevent bias voting." You got good intentions with this, however having the candidates anonymous would perhaps do more harm than good. While it would prevent bias voting not seeing the candidates would make it harder to get the facts. Seeing the candidates is almost as important as their politics, I mean we can see if someone looks trustworthy in matter of seconds, the first impression is important. Also this means a candidate could be anyone, as long as he speaks good and got the right people behind him he might seem like the perfect candidate but when he goes out into the public he is shown to be completely different. "Companions would be strictly regulated to prevent the situation that our government is in now." Yet again, good intentions but how is this going to be implemented? The companies got lots of power as we speak and this is something that must be voted, and I d