World Challenge! All philosophers welcome!

[Kinglewisjtl24]

I challenge anyone to create what their view of an, "ideal" systematic "government", of the world would be like. Please try and include something didactic and also explain steps the world would have to take now in order to get there.

[pjkeeley]

I voted that it was possible, but I don't want one.

Simply put, the larger the population and area of land for which a government is responsible, the more that government is held responsible for. But so many of our governments today are irresonsible. So why would we want to give them more responsibility?

It's all very well to posit an ideal situation, but what use is that if it's not realistic?

[Patrarch]

I don't think that it is possible, at least while religion exists in the world. In that case it would still be incredibly difficult and still probably impossible. It really doesn't matter though either way, because religion will die with humanity.

[mencken]

The poll needs to be more specific. Is possibility adhering to the parameters of actually "working out", or are we accepting a mediocre form of government for the sake of unison on a global scale?

I do not believe that a global government would "work", and I believe its possibility to work had died out long before the dawn of imperialism. It is not a problem of numbers, and it is not a problem of economy, but rather a problem of culture. Before we can even dare validate this question and take it seriously enough to answer it the way I am sure we would all like to, we must come to grips with the realization that the world, as a whole, consists of regions so extraordinarily different from one another that cohabitation is inconceivable.

If we may put the possibility of the question aside, for a moment, perhaps we can permit ourselves to ask a question that seems to matter a great deal more: what are the benefits to having a global government as opposed to the systems in place now? And, is corruption avoidable? If it isn't, wouldn't it be MORE dangerous to give faith in a single governing body, with no refuge to those in disagreement?

[jayardia]

I voted 'yes'. A world government is 'possible'. I do not, however, think it would be desired by 'we the people' or that it would qualify as 'good government'.

Some may argue that we unofficially already HAVE one! -See: 'World Trade Organization', (brought together shortly after WWII as the GATT council, I think) and 'Trans-national corporations'. Something to consider, anyway.

[NSUSA]

I think it is more than possible. It's hard to imagine how a world government could be good though.