Because to create a world government, a government has to completely alienate its own people to be possible.
And any democratic, non-authoritarian government takes its power from its people.
This is not possible in a world government, which must alienate to become existant.
Therefore, a world government must be authoritarian. It must also alienate its people somehow. In today's world, this could mean DNA alterations and RFID tracking chips, and intense propaganda.
"""I welcome any challenge to my proof above.
First Amendment: The difference between group of people must be identifiable, or an illusion of the difference must be implanted in the member's brain.
For example, Terrorist and non-terrorist. Both are essentially human and there are no biological or physical differences. However, the stereotype of it causes us to identify between these two groups of people.
Intel 6th generation CPU prices
-
Currently in the process of upgrading my parents' computer.
Zoom needs Intel i5 or above to use "background removal without green
screen". Sometimes, pro...
4 years ago
11 comments:
Hello, anybody home???
Wait, why must a world government alienate the people to exist? You're suggesting that a world government would be undemocratic too.
Can you just please clarify that bit please? Thank you.
because of my law of exclusion. You must have a bunch of comparable subjects/people to exclude to make your group stable and possible.
In a world without other biological organisms, you would have no one to exclude and hence your group will not exist.
But I thought you knew that already. I mean, how couldn't you?
ok, I set the boundaries to the game. Don't talk about aliens and animals and plants taking over our world. Only normal humans like the ones we are now.
Yes, I am suggesting that it will be undemocratic. Like 1984, only that people will enjoy it, because they are all plugged into i-pods while they are enslaved by a bunch of separate elite.
Also, I'm thinking about rebels that may have been formed during the creation of the world government. You could have rebels who may survive as a result of a world government created by war(physical, killing, that sort).
However, without enough resources to sustain a large rebel population, they may not make a large difference.
If there are rebels, no one will care about them anyway, due to the ipods and other entertainment devices (think Brave New World).
Yes, I agree that a world government will inevitably exclude the people. I mean, any government would, regardless of size. So create an entertainment-based economy so that people don't rebel (or don't notice their lack of involvement).
I never said that a world government would be benign or democratic. Just rather inevitable (or else have a nuclear war). Actually (this is off-topic) I would give direct democracy a try on a smaller level, as with our current electronic communication makes it more viable than before.
what do you mean by a direct democracy?
what will happen after a world government collapses?
How do you think a 1984-type government will end?
Firstly, I don't think (currently) that a 1984-style world government will take place, but rather a Brave New World style world government, where the important stuff is ignored and irrelevant rather than suppressed.
If a world government collapses, hmmm, balkanization would occur (due to communication problems) and technology will be set back by at least a few generations, due to global inter-dependance.
Direct democracy is basically mob power, where decisions are made by voting (nearly) every time by the people. History (ancient Athens) tells us that it works for communities of around/max 100,000 and (quite obviously) has diseconomies of scale due to communication problems. Good for a city, but if you're trying to govern an empire, people overseas will be unrepresented, and they wont like it (and thus rebel). Yeah, this is off topic, of course.
Amazing I'm still doing this even though it's exam time. Back to geo revision.
This diseconomy of scale is partially why we must have an authoritarian government.
A place that is too split up, like it is now and will be for at least 10 to 20 more years.
The thing is, I can't prove my law of exclusion. It's this thing that I noticed, not something I came up with, with deep roots in proof. It could certainly change, but never in the current state.
Finally, for the Eugenian plan for the World....
Comming out on December 22...for certain reasons.
This diseconomy of scale is partially why we must have an authoritarian government.
A place that is too split up, like it is now and will be for at least 10 to 20 more years.
The thing is, I can't prove my law of exclusion. It's this thing that I noticed, not something I came up with, with deep roots in proof. It could certainly change, but never in the current state.
Finally, for the Eugenian plan for the World....
Comming out on December 22...for certain reasons.
Sorry, double post.
Good words.
Post a Comment