Is a world government inevitable? Are the efforts and struggles

>>136417547
If the U.S. is any indicator, it's hard enough to get separate ethnicity in the same country that speak the same language to work together, let alone multiple countries with different languages. Struggle between the nations is inevitable and the strong must not like the weak dictate terms when they can forcibly take them.

>>136417547
I honestly don't see it happening. I don't think that countries like Russia or China would want to have any possibility of their national interests being usurped by the international will, to say nothing of the US. It would also require a sizeable military force to enforce its rule, especially on first world nations. I really don't see it happening barring a third world war.

You can have a world government made up by nationalistic nations.
A world government is needed only for one thing: diplomacy with other worlds,may they be human or alien.

>>136417547
Such a structure wouldn't be stable in the long term. Political entropy would kill it faster than any individual nation state.

>>136418583
But the goal of nationalists is to prevent a world government (because it would be centralized and authoritarian), so that seems like a contradiction.

File: 2505de073fd12a30ac8df882190dd8130d9a55b40a9fe47613f2e99344cb81bd.png (762KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 1000x500px

Yes and yes.

>>136417547
when space travel is perfected we can start a white planet, it will be a beautiful thing

File: Li(26).png (1MB, 550x400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 550x400px

>>136419127
>nationalists are too retearded to know how federations and confederations work along delegation of power&autonomy

kek.

>>136419139
>when space travel is perfected
kek

When you look at the UN the answer is no. There's basically two ways it would go down.

1. Because of the diversity and non-compatibility of the cultures of the world, no laws or rulings can be made democratically, so no one would give a shit about the government. (Basically the UN right now)

Or

2. The world government tries to force some laws that too many disagree with, coup d'etat and such happen and the world government disappears. (See basically any African country that has conflicting cultures within it.)

>>136417547
nope. just look at the EU. it can't even get its shit together governing a bunch of cuck states

>>136419359
All federations are automatically authoritarian (some less than others), and if a world government ever came into existence it wouldn't be democratic, it would be totalitarian.

>>136417547
It would only be inevitable if we in fact we werent alone and there were aliens or other worlds to communicate with. In that sense, a divided Earth would not cope.

>>136419127
Nationalists appear to care about their land and their people.

Nationalists would try to prevent their land and people from getting screwed over, by people that do not care about their land and people.

A world government, if every nation was nationalist, would send representatives to work out the best deals not for themselves, or for some companies they are linked to, but for their land and their people. It would seem.

What if in the future we will see big nations conquer other small nations, and after that, the big nations will fight eachother for land until only one big nation remains?

>>136420058
No they are not, check out USA. secondly its far more likely that world government would be some sort of representative democracy with multitude of levels like EU.

Satan is establishing a world government. He is very close to this goal.

File: 1497061105307.gif (1MB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 499x499px

>>136417547
The world government is already forming, it is/will be a plutocracy that is completely separate from national governments. It won't be official, most people, probably most of the people in it, won't even know it's there. It'll be a complete shadow government. There will never be mass unification however, that is certain.

>>136420058
not a communist, but political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

sovereign nations would have to either disarm or hand over their militaries to a supranational organization. i don't see it happening

File: ....gif (10KB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 640x320px

>>136420357
But the EU is very authoritarian.
>>136420340
So 1984?

>>136420464
They already have done that in instances where UN forces are called.

>>136420602
EU is more democratic than UK for instance.

>>136420602

Seems countries closest to the equator are the shittiest ones

The only way to avoid it is to remove central banks in every country and hand the mint back to the governments of their countries

File: keep me posted.jpg (41KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 360x360px

>>136420696
hahlol

>>136420612
which countries specifically?

>>136417547

In 400 years, yes.

Not now.

>>136420696
I am skeptical about that. Is the UK controlled by unelected officials?

>>136417547
if it is inevitable, it's also inevitable that it will fall apart. we have nothing to fear in the long term from it. but we all live much too short, so we'll be stuck with it or with out it.

File: 1476680376875.gif (2MB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 512x384px

>>136420817

>>136420893
Does the Queen or house of lords sound elected to you?

>>136420830
Us,Chinese etc. they regularly lend their units to usage of UN in crisis sectors.

>>136421222
oh yeah, but not enough to significantly impact their defense i assume?

>>136417547
The World Government will come. No one will be able to stop that. It's over.

>>136423492
pros and cons?

You only lose to the globalists when you stop fighting.

>>136417547
I wish it would
Mankind needs more control and centralization to achieve greater goals

>>136417547
>Is a world government inevitable?
Yes, in the long run.

>Are the efforts and struggles of nationalists in vain?
Not necessarily. A world government doesn't necessarily have to be very centralized, so unless you absolutely cannot accept a world government, there's still plenty of ground to hold.

>>136417744
The US is a shit indicator, to be honest. The British have successfully LIMED most of the people they came across. Even the places in the middle east they used to have a heavy presence in are usually the least shit parts of the middle east.

>>136417547
People hate change, but they're willing to allow it during times of crisis. The only way a world government will be formed is if we have to defend our planet as a whole (e.g. alien invasion or a meteorite)

The world government will be formed, and promised as only temporary, but afterwards it will stay forever. Same shit happened with 9/11 and the "Patriot Act"

>>136430213
To be honest, it would be sensible to set up a highly decentralized one as soon as possible, simply to avoid a situation where a highly totalitarian one is set up through conquest.

>>136430633
>>136430213
The whole deal is, how can a world gov (I presume composed of each Nations The Peoples Representatives (this is the idea of the UN right?)) be trusted when The Peoples Representatives of their home nations gov have trouble being trusted to begin with?

What kind of things would a world gov be responsible for? What would it use its powers for? How can it be Good?

>>136417547
Don't you know? The nationalists will be the ones to create a world government. They will do so without realizing it as they battle the globalists to extinction.