A United Earth

[Jon Snow]

I'm sure many of you have seen movies, anime, cartoons; maybe even reads books or comics where the entire Earth was united under a single banner. Whether that banner was one of a confederacy where nations were still sovereign but united in common goals, or if that banner was an entire planet's civilization living under a single rule.

 

The idea of the entire Earth coming under a single rule, or close to it, has quite a few pros and perhaps just as many cons.For example, the sheer amount of resources that can be pooled together towards a single goal would be immense and quite frankly, a tad scary if you think about it.

 

 

It did get me thinking though, with this being a geopolitics game, what do you think is in store for our world in the future? Also, which would you prefer? Please state your reasons

[Moloko]

Perhaps we'll be able to simulate what can be achieved with a single entity rule after this game's reset, all with the assistance of The >Bloc Party. 

[Drew Pickles]

I hope that we colonize other planets soon, because I want my own country. If earth becomes one nation, that will be impossible. Also, I like my guns, and I have a feeling that they will be taken if we become one big ole happy family

[Jon Snow]

not all that hard to stay on topic :/

 

its no wonder this forum was shut down to begin with. just a simple question with a complex answer...in your opinion, how will the planet Earth be ruled in the future

[Ikol]

I don't know, I think most of the planet (right now) is experiencing the most peaceful time in history because of self-determination which would practically disappear in a single world government. The success of the EU and the role of functionalism in modern politics shows how more regions very well might transfer legislative powers to a larger institution if they retain the lion's share of sovereignty. I think this will happen SA, Africa and SEA as regional hegemons seek to take power from the global hegemon (the US). Honestly I have no idea if this regionalism will just continually deepen though as there is a clear counter-reaction in places to the power of these institutions, just look to most of the EU after the euro-zone crisis.

[Grillick]

A worldwide federal government is the ideal endpoint for human civilization.

 

I don't think we'll reach it unless and until we discover intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy with whom we can conduct war and/or commerce, however.

[Hereno]

When earth is united, there will be no governments.

[PresidentRiley]

I like states that come together to vote for their president/leader/whatever wackey name the world comes up with. I like little nation states to be ruled by a federal government. it may be because I lived in that society for my whole life and have came to enjoy it

[Moloko]

I like states that come together to vote for their president/leader/whatever wackey name the world comes up with. I like little nation states to be ruled by a federal government. it may be because I lived in that society for my whole life and have came to enjoy it

You only enjoy it because you don't know anything else. 

 

You don't know true freedom. But there'll never be true freedom on Earth, only when as a species we take flight to the heavens and scatter off in every direction, so far from the elites and the ZOG and the illuminati that they won't be able to touch us. 

 

But we'll never live to see it. 

[PresidentRiley]

I live to love it

[Thanatos]

Nope.

 

You'd think with civil wars happening even in singular countries when there's a bunch of them, that the idea of a forceful takeover of everything else would be a horrible idea.

 

I guess such is hard to comprehend?

 

It might depend on the exact person leading, or the goverment type and all that.

 

But on a general simple idea scale, no, it'd just make everything worse honestly.

[Obongo the Paultifex]

I don't think humanity will ever be able to come together to create one unified state. Even the most progressive among us aren't nearly tolerant or tactful enough to ensure a stable world state for a long time.

 

Even then I'd fear a world state being a dystopian Orwellian dictatorship in the name of progress and stability, or if it'll be an artificial stimulated environment like Huxley imagined.

[Ayayay]

Unless I am the supreme ruler  I am going to have to go with state sovereignty. It is very difficult to transplant ones groups culture, ideals, and morals unto another groups. Look at the Balkans, despite being ruled by a (intermittent) succession of outside powers starting with the Romans and ending with the Ottomans (or Yugoslavia, depends on your definition of "outside power") for nearly it's entire existence, all it did was split it even more. Although one could argue that it was because of those powers that the region ended up the way it did, the only way that any sort of unity existed (again, Yugoslavia) was via oppression. In a single state one culture would ultimately end up being the "norm" while all other cultures would be "different" or "wrong" and even through oppression such a state would quickly collapse. In the modern age, authoritarianism and repression cannot last long, especially if only a few percent of the population fits the ideals of a nation. A single state would quickly revert to the age old way of achieving unity and stability, submit or perish.

 

But nationalism and self-determination are new concepts. Only going as far back as the United States of America(FIRST!!!!111one) or the Peace of Westphalia, if you are so inclined. Maybe in 50 years religion will become a unifying factor again after half a millennia of decay and neglect. Perhaps a new unifying factor will emerge, who knows?

 

 

Edit: I would hardly call the EU a "regional" power, a continent is a bit different from a region. A regional power would be more like a Central Asian Federation, or a United Arabia (Peninsula, Transjordan, and maybe southern Iraq)

[Aphelion]

A worldwide federal government is the ideal endpoint for human civilization.

It is not only ideal but it I believe it is the ultimate endpoint.

 

The death of the nation-state system will spark an age of regionalism, where we will see nations who share common cultural and economic ties mold into a single political entity. And from the foundations of regionalism will emerge a one world government system, which for me is humanity's ultimate political structure.

 

The real "end of history".

[Lambdadelta]

The question is academic, because if we don't form a unified front of some kind as a race, we won't survive long enough to do any kind of major space exploration and colonisation.

[Ikol]

Edit: I would hardly call the EU a "regional" power, a continent is a bit different from a region. A regional power would be more like a Central Asian Federation, or a United Arabia (Peninsula, Transjordan, and maybe southern Iraq)

 

I have no idea what you are talking about, Regionalism is an academic field in IR that examines regional institutions like the EU in global politics. As these blocs become increasingly integrated, who is to say that they are not significant actors in global politics? I think this is a lot more reasonable and feasible than a unified government that is close to tyrannical or just the low politics of individual sovereign nations.

[Ayayay]

 

I have no idea what you are talking about, Regionalism is an academic field in IR that examines regional institutions like the EU in global politics. As these blocs become increasingly integrated, who is to say that they are not significant actors in global politics? I think this is a lot more reasonable and feasible than a unified government that is close to tyrannical or just the low politics of individual sovereign nations.

Sorry, I thought you meant something else by regions.

 

The question is academic, because if we don't form a unified front of some kind as a race, we won't survive long enough to do any kind of major space exploration and colonisation.

Not necessarily, there is 2 (historical) reasons for national advancement/expansion

1. Economic

2. Military

 

If we have a single state than we would lose one of (albeit the weaker one) the primary reasons for (space) exploration. And as it is now space is an economic wasteland, the cost:benefit makes it worthless to invest in. Unless a nation sees space as a real military (or financial) asset, exploration will likely not happen. So if exploration does happen we would likely see races between the most advanced and rich powers (as in the age of exploration) while other nations fall behind. It also wouldn't be like a video game or movie where an entire planet is owned by a single government or entity, especially habitable ones. It would be a scattering of settlements (although some could take up half a planet). And then centuries later the colonial planets may end up with their entire planet under their control and declare independence from their far off oppressors on earth.

 

Or we'll blow ourselves up in a nuclear fireball a decade from now, either scenario is about as likely.

[Jon Snow]

I do see a single entity as an entirely possible reality. The next step from state sovereignty are regional powers. When those reogional powers get into conflict with other ones, some will expand. Eventually deals will be struck to make inter-regional powers and so on and so on until we have a body that represents the entire globe.

 

Albeit this may not be for thousand years +, but it is the most realistic possibility when humans outgrow earth. Moon/mars colonies will come into existence eventually, its just a matter of time.

 

 

And yes, economic and military are 2 great motivators, but you always have to remember how important land is.

[Ikol]

I do see a single entity as an entirely possible reality. The next step from state sovereignty are regional powers. When those reogional powers get into conflict with other ones, some will expand. Eventually deals will be struck to make inter-regional powers and so on and so on until we have a body that represents the entire globe.

 

I seriously doubt this will be the case with the presence of a global hegemon, all the actors both national and regional benefit from interaction between blocs (aka global free trade.) At worst you get flash points like Ukraine between vested interests which is mostly an internal problem than an international one.

 

And yes, economic and military are 2 great motivators, but you always have to remember how important land is.

 

Land is not really important at all to modern states it no longer represents the means of production for ruling classes and it would definitely not represent a catalyst for conflict unless overpopulation gets out of hand. Maybe I am following too much of a globalist line on these issues, but I think these are quite trivial reasons to expand, peace in Europe is not just a coincidence and there is a reason the US is not annexing Iraq.

[PresidentRiley]

tolerance and acceptance are 2 different things, I come to tolerate everyone's crazy religions, life styles, and other things. I come to accept many others like catholic beliefs or  American society "Get out of my way im more important than you" We would need everyone to tolerate or accept every religion, culture, society, and race to successfully unite the world under state powers, regional powers, a loose confederacy or a complete 1 rule. if not I believe intolerance of others would cause riots and mass crime that could spread from region to region, state to state that will break stability

[Lambdadelta]

If we have a single state than we would lose one of (albeit the weaker one) the primary reasons for (space) exploration. And as it is now space is an economic wasteland, the cost:benefit makes it worthless to invest in. Unless a nation sees space as a real military (or financial) asset, exploration will likely not happen.

The impetus for space exploration and development will be the need to get the !@#$ off the planet before it becomes unable to sustain human life.

[Ikol]

The impetus for space exploration and development will be the need to get the !@#$ off the planet before it becomes unable to sustain human life.

 

Helps that space explorations also provide us with some of the most important inventions of the recent decade to meet the demands of space. Once it becomes economically viable to explore/colonize space for private interests I am really curious what the impact will be for terran culture/economics.

[SoS]

Eventually, there will be one homogenous human race and one universal (lack of) religion(except for a few fanatics). Nationalism will probably be gone long before then.

[Ayayay]

Helps that space explorations also provide us with some of the most important inventions of the recent decade to meet the demands of space. Once it becomes economically viable to explore/colonize space for private interests I am really curious what the impact will be for terran culture/economics.

We're called Humans, this isn't Star Trek.

 

Eventually, there will be one homogenous human race and one universal (lack of) religion(except for a few fanatics). Nationalism will probably be gone long before then.

I actually disagree with this, we are a social species that evolved long ago through tribes and groups. Religion came into being in multiple areas and different groups of people and, whether or not all of them started from a single point or came about separate, the fact remains that all pre-modern societies had a high emphasis on a religion of some sort. It is second nature for people to want to belong to a group of some kind, it is why political propaganda reverts to a "Us or Them" mentality.

 

I would say more but I have better things to do right now.

[Lambdadelta]

the fact remains that all pre-modern societies had a high emphasis on a religion of some sort.

There's a reason for that - mystical sky wizards are an excellent way to hand-wave away things that a people lack a mundane explanation for (why the sun rises and sets, why the tides come in and out, why there are stars in the sky, why there is life on Earth, et cetera). As such, these explanations arose.

 

It also happened that they were convenient foundations for religious organisation, which was a convenient way to instil moral and social order to a species that had little other than survival of the fittest before the advent of such.