Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
One Nation Earth?  
User currently offlineWhippy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 860 times:

Does anyone else think it's time for the US and UN to get together and create a one natione earth where we have a common government?
In todays global economy, it would seem to make sense, and that way wars and pestilence would end and all would be taken care of-provided it's at least a quasi-Socialist government.

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineReno_air From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 775 times:

I believe that a combined EU-US-Australia would work. The cultures are the same and most US and Australian ancestors come from the EU. But i would leave the rest out as they dont have the same cultures as we do.


User currently offlineBimmer202 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 757 times:

I don't think that all wars would end.

Who let the billy goats out? No serioulsy, who let the friggin billy goats out? This aint no joke anymore children.
User currently offlineMacair SAAB From Australia, joined May 1999, 335 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 744 times:

I agree with Bimmer202. Making Earth one big country wouldn't solve the problems that cause war. We'd just be making civil wars, with rival factions struggling to get hold of land, power and whatever else they might want.

Also, I can not see an AU-US-EU nation forming. Reno_air said that the cultures are somewhat the same, which they are, but each of the nations have their own identity and their own way of doing things. I know that many European countries would hate to go back to anything like 20 years ago when they had no choice but to be apart of other bigger countries.

If anything like this was to go ahead, I belive that the nations of the Commonwealth would come back under the power of the Queen, and the breakaway countries of other 'kingdoms' would come togeather. But this would set us back to the middle ages, with 'kingdoms' fighting each other for land and wealth, and could also bring about the reformation of Soviet Russia.

- Macair SAAB

User currently offlineSamurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2461 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 739 times:

I believe that the process of bringing Earth together under one government is not that far-fetched. We are actually heading towards that in the long run. Firstly, economic blocs have arisen like the European Union and NAFTA (Canada and the US are already even more economically integrated than you think). As for Asia and China, chances are that new ones will arise. The entire planet is becoming increasingly and inextricably interdependent, as technology advances rapidly.

Soon, Australia won't be the only one to have an entire continent for a country - North America and Europe will be the first, then maybe South America and Asia, as economic blocs become increasingly political and military unions. More and more, smaller countries unite, reversing a trend towards nationalism begun since the Cold War ended, as nationalism will backfire economically, as culture and declining population were among the main driving forces rather than economics. Yet people will cling to their ideals and cultural norms according to the region they live in or were born in. Eventually, you will see Earth under a single government, sometimes within 100-400 years. But I feel that the UN won't be the one governing body, rather it will be an ancestor to that.

User currently offlineNKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 738 times:

I'm absolutely opposed to such a thing. The UN has no credibility with me and is but a virtual "paper" beauracracy with no real "teeth" without the US. I don't buy the "global" plattitudes spewed by big monied interests either. It is what it is--and was was it was. Nations have always traded with one another and yet still protected their local interests and cultures/customs/laws. The inevitability angle by the elites pushing all this is but a long running propagandic ploy to desensitize nations and people into giving up sovereignty to further exploit people in deference to big buisness. Everyone is different...and that's a good thing. BTW, just how do you propose to meld so many different cultures and interests into one culture? Who's will dominate? Is that fair to the smaller countries? "Sorry, you can't plant rice in this paddy...sacred wetlands now!" or "Oh, I see you were a farmer in the "old world"--no,we have plenty in the new world--you're a servant now for the overclass". The whole boondoggle would create a "civil" war that would kill half the population.

User currently offlineSamurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2461 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (15 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 735 times:

Exactly! That's similar to what I feel about the UN! Besides, it doesn't matter if we had World War III or a civil war on Earth under one goverment - the result would be the same.

There is the historical trend - at first, there were tribes during the Ice Age, then farming villages arose about 9,000 years ago. City-states started during the time of Mesopotamia, one of the oldest large-scale civilizations about 6,000 years ago. Finally great empires like the Romans and the Chinese went up about 1000 years before Christ. Nations as we know it began during the Middle Ages in the form of kingdoms in Europe, then later, the modern republic was born in the late 18th Century after the French revolution. So, now we are living in the age of a truly global but highly fragmented civilization begun during the late 19th Century, with truly global trade. Anyways, enough of this history lesson - hence the trend towards blocs and continental governments

This is why I voiced the trend I posted earlier - it's pretty logical - and a bit scary. Why? Besides a really big civil war, there's bound to be a coup, or an authoritarian government, God forbid. Even if Earth was a single global nation, cultural traditions and languages will continue to be protected to an extent and survive. In short, a one government Earth will not be one culture, but still a multitude! There'll still likely be individual and different nations, just that they're going to be all under one higher level of government. But Earth is heading towards an economic global hegemony, and it doesn't really matter whether big corporations and other monied interests or governments are responsible. Hell, a European from before the time of Napoleon would've likely thought the idea of a European Union, even as an economic bloc a bit crazy!

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Which Is The Largest Ikea On Earth? posted Fri May 29 2009 02:05:37 by United Airline
An Interesting Google Earth Find posted Wed May 27 2009 21:06:55 by Phoenix9
Capitol One: CC Or Auto Finance posted Mon May 18 2009 04:35:18 by Carlisle
Spotting On Google Earth posted Sat May 16 2009 06:36:48 by Ferengi80
NBA Conference Finals: One Team In! posted Mon May 11 2009 19:49:38 by Falcon84
English Historian: Scotland A Feeble Little Nation posted Sun Apr 26 2009 01:51:34 by Gkirk
Anyone Seen "Let The Right One In"? posted Tue Apr 14 2009 14:30:25 by Kaitak
The Most Exciting Places On Earth? posted Sat Apr 4 2009 18:25:51 by SXDFC
Any One Here From Malmo posted Fri Apr 3 2009 18:42:47 by Kiqaboy
The Most Interesting Places On Earth? posted Thu Apr 2 2009 08:18:21 by OA260