- ... All those are very good questions, Pormadi. I think what we wish is a world without countries but with some sort of government. Our most basic instinct wasMessage 1 of 6 , Nov 30, 2007View Source
> From: jodemas2 [jodemas2@...]All those are very good questions, Pormadi. I think what we wish is a world without countries but with some sort of government.
> Perhaps better might be a world non-government, or as John Lennon put
> it, "Imagine there's no countries." Might not that be a better idea?
Our most basic instinct was that, if we killed our neightbour and impregnated his wife, we secured better the succession of our genes. The danger was that our neighbour had the same idea. It then made sense to join forces and kill and rape elsewhere. With the advance of civilisation, that boundary of 'join forces' extended to what we define today as nations.
Givet is a town in northern France, yet it looks very much like in Belgium. In the 17th century the French won a battle and kept the town. Is it normal that we still follow national boundaries traced by wars in the past centuries? Isn't it about time to ask people to form, in a democratic way, the boundaries of the regions they define according to geographic, ethnic or languistic reasons?
But this can only happen under an umbrella of a greater organisation. What is global, such as world peace, world economy and trade, and the environment, has to be controlled by a world organisation. What is local, such as languages taught at school, religious matters and traditional customs, has to stay local, within the democratic regions people want to be associated with.
For the past 40 years I have travelled in Europe, I have seen great changes. The European Union introduced a common market and common monetary unit. At the same time, regions have developped with incredible cultural autonomy. Today, when sailing (one of my hobbies) I see the Frisian flag on Dutch Frisian yachts, I see the same for the French Breton, the Spanish Basques and the British Cornish yachts.
In my opinion, we are already going toward a world government with many, many regions. But it is going very slow and we should do what we can to improve the pace.
- Hi I think the best argument for democratic world government being a good thing is the very fact that human nature is corruptible. Someone (I believe it wasMessage 2 of 6 , Dec 3, 2007View Source
I think the best argument for democratic world government being a good thing is the very fact that human nature is corruptible. Someone (I believe it was Locke) once said, that if men were angels, no government would be necessary. Government, and the force of law, is necessary precisely because people can not always be counted upon to do the right thing. They need systems of rules to restrain them; and that particularly applies to governmental leaders and bureaucrats. No doubt there will be times when the government grows corrupt and revolution will be necessary. Of course it will be possible to accomplish it on a world wide scale, because a world-wide revolution will be necessary to establish it in the first place. As to a Hitler-type character gaining in power, I feel that will be unlikely for three main reasons.
1. Hitler used the danger of outside threats to justify his usurpation of power – a President of Earth would not be able to use that excuse, at least until alien invaders show up.
2. Hitler used appeals to an ethnic majority’s “racial” pride to suppress an ethnic minority – A Republic of Earth would not have an ethnic majority.
3. Hitler used massive amounts of violence to repress internal enemies and attack external ones – since a Republic of Earth could only be established nonviolently, then there will be a public bias against the use of violence established within the population of the Republic by that precedent.
I too would like to see Lenon’s “Imagine” become reality. A democratic world government would be a step in that direction.
World Peace and Unity,
Gary K. Shepherd
--- In WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com, "ro-esp" <ro-esp@...> wrote:
>asked this before, but don't remember the answers) ? There's no doubt
> pormadi_ss@... sendis:
> >It is a good idea to form one world governement ...
> -WHY would it be a good idea?
> -Which problems exactly would it solve?
> -what powers would/should a world govt have ( I remember having
in my mind, that those powers must have clear limits.
>I'd like to know the answer to this, too. How do you know it will be
good? Maybe it is just good in theory but human nature being what it
is, it can never really work out right. Or maybe it is good at the
beginning but then gets corrupted, as power is wont to. What if it
gets totally corrupt and needs revolution. Will that be able to be
accomplished on a world scale? What if a Hitler gets the reins?
Perhaps better might be a world non-government, or as John Lennon put
it, "Imagine there's no countries." Might not that be a better idea?
Just some questions to ponder...