Home > Politics, News & Issues > International Politics > International Politics (Other)
Results so far:
| Yes | 23% | 176 votes | Total: 759 votes | |
| No | 77% | 583 votes |
Yes
Created on: July 25, 2009
One-hundred years from now, the international system will be comprised of a single world government. This government will be democratic, federalized to a central authority. This form will be similar to the model of a federal republic, like the United States, in which countries will be states subordinate to a central government.
This is the historical pattern of government. The ancient Greek city-states formed the single country of Greece. In modern times, the countries of Europe formed the European Union. There have been discussions within the countries of the United States, Canada, and Mexico of forming the North American Union. In time, all countries will be united under a single authority.
The sovereignty of nations has been threatened for many years now, as international pressures increase on each nation. International actors, such as economic forces and human rights will force each nation to depend on each other for not only the survival of the nations, but of the individual people within those nations, as well.
Economic forces have already laid much of the groundwork for this one world government. The creation of the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund allow nations places to appeal to whose imports and exports are being treated unfairly and who need economic boosts in times of hardships. Granted, membership in each organization is voluntary and dependent upon international cooperation. However, as the recessions and depressions of the 1920s to 1930s, the 1990s, and even in the opening years of the new millennium have taught all countries, all economic systems are intertwined.
What affects the economy of one nation ripples towards all nations. The European Union has buffered itself to some extent by adopting a single currency, the Euro (with the exception of the United Kingdom). Multinational corporations, although lacking in real power as Niall Ferguson points out in his article, "Power," have broken down many barriers by becoming enmeshed in domestic economies worldwide. These corporations have become instruments of globalization through consumer goods, technology, and intellectual property rights and have been a factor contributing to the establishment of the WTO and IMF.
The North American Free Trade Agreement is the infant equivalent to the European Union. By streamlining trade policies affecting the United States, Canada, and Mexico, the region of North America has taken preliminary steps to the adoption of a single economic policy currently influencing the countries of the region of Europe. NAFTA is seen by many within North America as a precursor to the establishment of the North American Union. In 2002, fifty-three African countries united to form the African Union. As more countries realize the benefits of regional cooperation and protection, more will enter into unions. In the near future, the Mid-East Union and Asian Union will be created. Given enough time, regional unions will draft economic treaties and cooperate with other regional unions, forming inter-regional unions. As this trend continues, the entire world will unite under a single economic union for mutual benefit and survival.
Preservation of human rights can only be truly fostered and protected under a democracy. Human rights abuses are more common in authoritarian countries where people do not have a voice in their government. It is within these countries that terrorism flourishes. The repressive regimes of countries such as Iran, Syria, Sudan, and Cuba have been identified as countries which sponsor terrorism by the US Department of State. It is no coincidence that the governments of each country are repressive and notorious abusers of human rights in which people are not allowed a say in how they are governed, cannot participate in free elections, do not have freedom of speech, religion, press, state- sanctioned physical harm, and are not given the choices of a multiparty political system. Those denied rights- participation in free elections, freedom of speech, religion and press, representation in government, freedom from state-sanctioned physical harm, and a multiparty political system- are all hallmarks of democracy.
Within American history, our Declaration of Independence lists the abuses of an authoritarian power (Great Britain) and establishes the foundation for a fairer and freer form of government, free from rampant abuses of human rights. The abuses of human rights, such as denying representation in government, allowing military control of the populace, bypassing fair and due processes of law, destroying property, and killing and harming people at whim, are denied any legitimacy by declaring how people should be treated. Although, the word "democracy" was not included within the Declaration, the protections of human rights provide the framework for the democratic government which is formally established in our Constitution. Moreso, the first ten amendments of the Constitution are a bill of human rights protections. This shows that only in a democracy can human rights be preserved and protected.
To solve the problem of human rights abuses worldwide, only a world democratic government would ensure the necessary protection of human rights under law. These laws are absent in countries in which human rights abuses and terrorism go hand in hand.
The rise of global terrorism has forced many countries to band together militarily, such as the international War on Terror. Participation in the War on Terror represents a coalition of nations, including the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Pakistan, and Israel, and a military alliance of regional powers- the North Atlantic Treaty Organization- which is also overseen by and international union of nations, the United Nations. It is important to note that all member nations of NATO and many charter nations of the UN are either democracies or countries hosting many democratic attributes.
A major goal of both NATO and the UN is the protection of human rights. Recently, in the 1990s, both organizations combined to end human rights abuses in the disputed Serbian province of Kosovo through military and humanitarian intervention. Within the Sudanese territory of Darfur, both the United Nations and the African Union combined military and humanitarian efforts to cease the continuing genocide. This example will be among the first merging of unions on a global scale.
In the time of our great-grandchildren, one-hundred years from now, all nations will be united under the authority of a democratic world government. Each nation will act as states within a federal system, each governing themselves but subordinate to a central authority. Economic systems will have merged and all countries will enjoy the protection of human rights under democratic law.
Learn more about this author, Aaron Dollhausen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Created on: July 10, 2007
As single world government will not ever come about, for a number of reasons. I have listed what I think are some major factors which would prevent a single world government.
1) Cultural differences - cultural differences would play a huge role in preventing the creation of a single world government. For example, compare the daily life for the average American citizen with that of the average Brazilian, Laotian or Nigerian. Just that alone would make it almost impossible to impose a single government. Take into account religious differences, and a whole can of worms have just been opened. It's true that there are many multi-cultural countries exist all over the world today, but nothing today even compares to the scale of differences that would exist in a single world government.
2) Egos & Sovereignty - nobody wants to be swallowed up by a new or foreign sovereignty. The British don't want to be French. The Canadians don't want to be American. In fact, worldwide struggles like this occur even today. Just look at the Tibetan-Chinese conflict or, to a lesser extent, the move for independence within the province of Quebec. After all this fighting for sovereignty rights, do you really think China would give up her right to rule as she pleases? Can Israel and Iran really be ruled under the same government? Surely if peace has been so fleeting in the Middle East, single rule over the entire region would only prove to exacerbate it.
3) Nationalism - although this is somewhat the same as point 2, this has a different point altogether. Nationalism has proven to be a strong worldwide force. "Nations" generally wish to have their own state, for the purposes of promoting and protecting their cultural heritage, as well as deciding for themselves which laws and policies to enact. Nationalism over the past century has actually led to an increase in the number of nations worldwide. If this trend continues, there will not be a single world government, but quite the opposite in fact; there will be many more, smaller governments.
4) The Fall of Empires - all empires fall. It's been proven time and time again throughout history. Sometimes the empires fall into oblivion, such as with the Greeks and Romans, and sometimes the empires crumble into a much humbler entity, such as with the British empire. Regardless, they all fall. A single world empire would have so many enemies within, it would be impossible to fight them all. No matter how strict and careful the government is to weed out extremist opposition, the state would never be safe.
5) Democratic Problems - representative democracy is the corner stone of the Western governments. That is, the West would refuse to enter an institution without a clear democracy set up. Assuming that the other nations of the world were to agree to a democratic institution demanded by the West, the West would still refuse to join the single government because it would be highly under-represented in government. China alone has 1.3 billion people, while India has almost 1.1 billion people. These two countries alone make up approximately one-third of the world population. These numbers would assure that the Chinese and Indians would rule the state. Would Pakistan really give its sovereignty away to India? Japan to the Chinese?
These 5 problems are just some of the reasons why there will never be a world government. And while we all try to increase the amount of global co-operation, the ineffectiveness of the United Nations, specifically, and other global initiatives more generally, have proven that the World is not ready, nor willing to accept, a world government.
Learn more about this author, Kevin Ascott.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.