One World Government

JOHNSPILLANE

How do people feel about a united world, with a single government (United Nations) at the helm.

We had Gordy Brown urging the United states to acclerate the process in his speech last night.

Are we willing to hand over the few remaining powers to the EU and as a result the UN.

Are the populace that stupid?

humanji

Do you also feel that every county in Ireland should have it's own government so we don't have people from Cork having a say in how Dublin is run and vice versa?

JOHNSPILLANE

humanji wrote: »

Do you also feel that every county in Ireland should have it's own government so we don't have people from Cork having a say in how Dublin is run and vice versa?

Yes, thats the short answer to that. You see, then we would have accountability. Not government people living high on the hog.

tolosenc

Yeah, but where do you call a halt to the hair splitting? I mean, in a county there are many towns, should they all have their own local councils to decide how they're run. What about different neighbourhoods and streets?

It all gets way too beauraucratic(if it's not already), never mind how economically unviable that would be. World and European governments are the fantasies of the paranoid. The logistics of something on that scale are immense, and can only really be achieved by using some form of oppression.

tricky D

We're governed at lots of levels: the other half, the council, national gov, regional (eu) and global. It's the power, accountability and sovereignity at each of these levels we need to worry about. Personally, I'd be happier if the UN was given a bit more teeth.

humanji

And what level do we stop at? Each housing estate should have it's own government? Every street? Every house?

You're over simplifying the whole thing. It's not a matter of one world government and nobody except the 10 lads at the top have any power. Think about America. Each state is autonomous to an extent and they have a government overseeing all of the states.

edit: D'oh, beaten to it by obl. Damn my slow hands.

bill_ashmount

obl wrote: »

World and European governments are the fantasies of the paranoid. The logistics of something on that scale are immense, and can only really be achieved by using some form of oppression.

What is the EU?????????

bonkey

JOHNSPILLANE wrote: »

Are we willing to hand over the few remaining powers to the EU and as a result the UN.

Are the populace that stupid?

I do not believe the populace are stupid enough to believe that we have only a few remaining powers at a national level, nor that handing power over to the EU would effectively hand such power to the UN.

seamus

From a logical POV, setting up a heirarchical system of governance is a ridiculously simple prospect.

Or at least it would be, if you could standardise every level of the hierarchy. The problem is that someone always wants something different for their little part of the hierarchy. So while (for example), Dublin's overseeing council may go with the standard, the guys running Cork may decide that they want absolute power over their county without any subordinate bodies. And while Cork may accept all of the mandatory federal rules put in place, the guys in Dublin want an exception for some obscure tradition that they celebrate which contravenes that rule.

This is why any kind of one-world governance is a long way off IMO. Of course, it would make sense to work towards a loose federation, which benefits its members for joining. That is, in exchange for easier passage/looser taxation between members of the federation, each member agrees to be completely onboard with the ICJ, completely subscribed to the UN convention on human rights, and so forth. Those outside the federation suffer severe taxation and heavy restrictions on movement of goods and people.

The UN seems to make an attempt at this kind of stuff, but it has very little teeth because many of its own members barely recognise it as having any power and just do what they want.

bonkey

seamus wrote: »

From a logical POV, setting up a heirarchical system of governance is a ridiculously simple prospect.

Sure...as long as those who have are willing to share equally with those who have not.

JOHNSPILLANE

What a load of uninformed people we have here. Waken up.

The push has long been on for a one world government.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/04/18/british_prime_minister_calls_for_global_interdependence/

Heres Gordy spouting off yesterday.

You are all living in planet "good guy" where everyone is looking out for your interests. Catch yourselves on.

Wait for the north american union to be formally announced (at was signed in 2005), and the implementation of a NAU currency. And you were wondering why the dollar is in dire straits, now you know. Problem, reaction, solution.

JOHNSPILLANE

bonkey wrote: »

Sure...as long as those who have are willing to share equally with those who have not.

Heres a bit of insight for you.

When government such as Gordy Browns spout off statements such as "we want third world coountries to have the same standard of health care as the UK". There are two ways of looking at this. Theirs can be raised or the UK's can fall, both achieveing the same objective.

Think about that.

Manic Moran

And what level do we stop at? Each housing estate should have it's own government? Every street? Every house?

Why not? There are organisations such as homeowners' associations for groups of houses. My house has its own government. It's called "Wife"

NTM