🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug11.180332.492@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>, bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
|> In article <archer.364@utkux1.utk.edu> archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
|> >
|> >I'm not interested in fuming patriots.  I'm more interested in why you think
|> >that world government is a good idea?
|> 
|> Same reason why it is better for the USA to be one country than 50

Common defense?  I don't think we really need to worry too much about
protecting our world from foreign invaders (at least not yet).

|> There would be no war and decisions would get made through democratic
|> process. 

No wars?  How do you figure?  We would have just as many wars, perhaps
more.  Wars happen because of differences of opinion (religious, social,
etc.)  A world government is not going to change that.  As far a the
democratic process is concerned, do you really want to be controlled
by what the Chinese people think is best?  (Note that this is not meant
to be deragotory towards the Chinese, I'm only indicating that they
are a large population with a vastly different culture than most
Americans are familiar/comfortable with)  Democracy works best on
a limited and local basis.  It doesn't scale well at all.

|> If the world government is democratically elected then there
|> would be no way around the will of the people and we would not have
|> to all sink to the economic lowest common denomenator in order to 
|> survive. 

What you would find is that local pockets of resistance to the
will of the 'people'.  These pockets would probably be quite
large (on the order of the size of a state or country) and would
probably result in the 'pocket' removing itself from the domain
of the world government.  The world government would then either
have to let it go, therby breaking down the whole concept of
world government, or it would have to use force to control it.


|> And on a more general emotional level belonging to an inside without
|> an outside appeals to me. I have always felt a universal patriotism to
|> ,and a sese of belonging to, the entire human race. Noone has ever
|> been able to explain this nationalism business. I simply can not understand
|> people getting so worked up about silly red lines on the map,funny different
|> coloured bits of cloth, purile regional ditties etc... If one is opressed
|> and not allowed to express ones own culture that is another matter but
|> this is not allways the case where these sentiments are the strongest
|> (The USA)

You may not get all worked up over silly red lines but many people do.
Having a world government isn't going to change that.  People will
still form into smaller units, countries, states or tribes.  People
will always support the people who are closest to them, either 
physically or spiritually.  If a world government were to come into
existence, it would only be through the application of force and
could only stay in existence through the continued application of
force against its citizens.  I think the world would be a far more
terrifying place if that occured.


James W. Howe                  internet: jwh@citi.umich.edu
University of Michigan             uucp: uunet!mailrus!citi.umich.edu!jwh
Ann Arbor, MI   48103-4943