|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:31:57 GMT -5
If Kim-Jong-Un would have been king of the world he would have been dead at this point... But if Kim-Jong-Un would actually use nuclear weapons I'd rather have him as king of the world, yes.  Do you even know what it's like to live in North Korea? Yes I do., well not entirely but I could imagine what it would be like. But he wouldn't be able to hold that kind of power over the entire world, even if he had control it wouldn't be like North-Korea. And even if it was, would you rather have this world destroyed by nuclear weapons? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:33:33 GMT -5
Look, if you'd rather have a world without freedom or individuality than a world with war than I have nothing to say to you. I'd rather live in North-Korea than fight in a modern war. People went mad from the things they saw happening during wars, or get injured and damaged for life or die. |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 4, 2014 13:39:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 4, 2014 13:39:18 GMT -5
Look, if you'd rather have a world without freedom or individuality than a world with war than I have nothing to say to you. Keeping earth in one piece > Freedom > Individuality. But a world without freedom isn't a world worth living in. And how would one even conquer the world? War, Missiles, Death |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 4, 2014 13:42:02 GMT -5
Keeping earth in one piece > Freedom > Individuality. But a world without freedom isn't a world worth living in. And how would one even conquer the world? War, Missiles, Death But at least your live would be more certain in a world without freedom. And not if you take over a existing world government (Hitler-style). |
|
|
|
Post by Star on Jan 4, 2014 22:52:33 GMT -5
As nice as a united world all together would be, so many things could go wrong and the risks of bad things occurring outweigh the good ones. And the UN already acts as a sort of world government. Although many wars are still caused by the 190 some countries we have, they would still occur in a unified nation across the globe. And people won't wanna forget their past or abandon their countries for one big one. It gives the world a uniqueness. In a sense, all of the world is already united but each country is just a territory and the UN is a small part of keeping it together. Country leaders are another force.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Jan 4, 2014 23:27:02 GMT -5
As nice as a united world all together would be, so many things could go wrong and the risks of bad things occurring outweigh the good ones. And the UN already acts as a sort of world government. Although many wars are still caused by the 190 some countries we have, they would still occur in a unified nation across the globe. And people won't wanna forget their past or abandon their countries for one big one. It gives the world a uniqueness. In a sense, all of the world is already united but each country is just a territory and the UN is a small part of keeping it together. Country leaders are another force. I agree. If the whole world had just one government, or even just a few, it would essentially crush nations individuality right off the bat, or after a while. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 5, 2014 5:55:21 GMT -5
As nice as a united world all together would be, so many things could go wrong and the risks of bad things occurring outweigh the good ones. And the UN already acts as a sort of world government. Although many wars are still caused by the 190 some countries we have, they would still occur in a unified nation across the globe. And people won't wanna forget their past or abandon their countries for one big one. It gives the world a uniqueness. In a sense, all of the world is already united but each country is just a territory and the UN is a small part of keeping it together. Country leaders are another force. I agree. If the whole world had just one government, or even just a few, it would essentially crush nations individuality right off the bat, or after a while. And what's so bad about that? It's exactly why a world government would lead to more peace. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 5, 2014 6:43:46 GMT -5
The EU is the proof that a World Government would bring peace. European countries had been fighting each other for centuries, with short periods of peace (or even none at all). But after the foundation of the EU (and precursors) all of the countries in it, that used to fight each other all the time, have been at peace for 69 year.
I believe there will be a world government eventually, globalization is making in inevitable. But it probably won't happen within our life spans. But it will happen within now and a thousand years, I'm totally sure about that (unless we go extinct before that).
|
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Jan 5, 2014 11:06:38 GMT -5
I agree. If the whole world had just one government, or even just a few, it would essentially crush nations individuality right off the bat, or after a while. And what's so bad about that? It's exactly why a world government would lead to more peace.  Crushing nations culture? We're talking about trying to combine places like Afghanistan, NK, the US, and Brazil. I wonder what kind of "crushing" it would take to make that happen... |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 5, 2014 12:35:09 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:35:09 GMT -5
The EU is the proof that a World Government would bring peace. European countries had been fighting each other for centuries, with short periods of peace (or even none at all). But after the foundation of the EU (and precursors) all of the countries in it, that used to fight each other all the time, have been at peace for 69 year. I believe there will be a world government eventually, globalization is making in inevitable. But it probably won't happen within our life spans. But it will happen within now and a thousand years, I'm totally sure about that (unless we go extinct before that). EU didn't bring peace. Peace brought EU. Well you keep thinking that. |
|
|
|
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:36:05 GMT -5
Peace through what though? Oppression.
|
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 5, 2014 12:38:24 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:38:24 GMT -5
And what about when a Chancellor Palpatine comes along? World Empire. Yay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Jan 5, 2014 12:38:37 GMT -5
If western culture as it is now become dominant and spreads around the world (which is already happening) it's unlikely a king will rise to take all power. If we're all one nation, there'll be a small group that controls everything. Isn't that already happening now, especially in the US. |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 12:40:22 GMT -5
And what about when a Chancellor Palpatine comes along? World Empire. Yay. I'll become a Sith Lord |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Jan 5, 2014 12:41:03 GMT -5
To keep these great discussions going without problems, refrain from using "you" in the arguments. Keep it to "I."
|
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 5, 2014 12:41:06 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:41:06 GMT -5
If we're all one nation, there'll be a small group that controls everything. Isn't that already happening now, especially in the US. Yes, we have one person controlling everything. And it's getting worse. |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 12:41:23 GMT -5
Peace through what though? Oppression. I'd rather have a One World Government that keeps peace rather than a nuclear war. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Jan 5, 2014 12:41:53 GMT -5
Isn't that already happening now, especially in the US. Yes, we have one person controlling everything. And it's getting worse. I'm not sure, exactly, about the differences between US and Canada, but can't you stop it? Like, the citizens? |
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 5, 2014 12:44:30 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:44:30 GMT -5
The thing is, if this World Thing fails (Which it eventually would due to cultural differences, or a dictator coming along), what's left? There would be nothing to take its place. Nothing left of humanity. Nothing to stop the downfall.
|
|
|
|
Politics
Jan 5, 2014 12:45:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Spidyyr on Jan 5, 2014 12:45:50 GMT -5
Yes, we have one person controlling everything. And it's getting worse. I'm not sure, exactly, about the differences between US and Canada, but can't you stop it? Like, the citizens? If more people decide to do what is right rather than what is easy, we could. But that choice is the biggest problem in America. |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 12:47:37 GMT -5
The thing is, if this World Thing fails (Which it eventually would due to cultural differences, or a dictator coming along), what's left? There would be nothing to take its place. Nothing left of humanity. Nothing to stop the downfall. A dictator would not come to power, not a human one anyway, since a world government would take some time to implement, it's unlikely humans will rule it. In about 30-100 years, when machines surpass human intelligence, just install a robot as world leader if there is a world government, robots don't have negative human traits and don't crave power. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Jan 5, 2014 12:49:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure, exactly, about the differences between US and Canada, but can't you stop it? Like, the citizens? If more people decide to do what is right rather than what is easy, we could. But that choice is the biggest problem in America. How? It's different here, and better IMO. More political parties = more choices, and we have lots of rights. For example, we have the right to information, and all that stuff. On top of that, even in the House of Commons, there is the Opposition - makes sure there's a balance with the party in power. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 5, 2014 13:27:05 GMT -5
And what's so bad about that? It's exactly why a world government would lead to more peace. Crushing nations culture? We're talking about trying to combine places like Afghanistan, NK, the US, and Brazil. I wonder what kind of "crushing" it would take to make that happen... You don't have to crush anything. Cultures will merge over time since it's becoming easier to be in contact with other cultures. |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 13:27:31 GMT -5
I'm not sure, exactly, about the differences between US and Canada, but can't you stop it? Like, the citizens? If more people decide to do what is right rather than what is easy, we could. But that choice is the biggest problem in America. Dumbledore quote  |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jan 5, 2014 13:30:40 GMT -5
EU didn't bring peace. Peace brought EU. Well you keep thinking that. The EU was meant to keep peace. While you could argue that WOII caused the peace the EU made the peace more stable. Countries would never start a conflict with each other again because that would economically and politically destroy them. |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Jan 5, 2014 13:33:01 GMT -5
I'm not sure, exactly, about the differences between US and Canada, but can't you stop it? Like, the citizens? If more people decide to do what is right rather than what is easy, we could. But that choice is the biggest problem in America. “Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right." -Dumby  |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 13:34:52 GMT -5
If more people decide to do what is right rather than what is easy, we could. But that choice is the biggest problem in America. “Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right." -Dumby  Corrected, Incorrect Dumbledore used. |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Jan 5, 2014 13:36:06 GMT -5
Crushing nations culture? We're talking about trying to combine places like Afghanistan, NK, the US, and Brazil. I wonder what kind of "crushing" it would take to make that happen... You don't have to crush anything. Cultures will merge over time since it's becoming easier to be in contact with other cultures. Not likely. And what if you're wrong? That would leave the combined strength of all the military in the world under a few people's control. |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Jan 5, 2014 13:36:45 GMT -5
“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right." -Dumby Corrected, Incorrect Dumbledore used. I had to use the right pic.  |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jan 5, 2014 13:37:59 GMT -5
You don't have to crush anything. Cultures will merge over time since it's becoming easier to be in contact with other cultures. Not likely. And what if you're wrong? That would leave the combined strength of all the military in the world under a few people's control. Or when machines become more intelligent than humans (which will happen in the near future) make a robot the leader of the world |
|
Crushing nations culture? We're talking about trying to combine places like Afghanistan, NK, the US, and Brazil. I wonder what kind of "crushing" it would take to make that happen...
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself? 