One questions; under this model could one assume that China would dominate the political horizon or would there be some mechanics put in place to balance population representation?

The social mechanics for your proposal simply do not exist. Nations are absolutely protective over their sovereign rights and start wars over even the slightest inclusion on their territory. Your assumptions are totally unreal.

bkeene

The representatives of different govts of the present countries would in turn elect their President and other ministers in their global congress.

Its like building one more block over the existing political system. The country's govt. will in a way function as local govt. like govt. of Nigeria, China, USA or Russia under the policies chartered out by the Global Govt. All the local govts will have to reply to Global govt. regarding their progress in various issues.

The problems of the whole world would be put in one Global basket, suitable solutions are found by debating on them, policies are formed with mutual understanding and eventually put in action.

In a way, it is going to be exactly the same system which we follow in our local democratic govts today with the only difference of its scale.

The trouble is, the governments that currently exist do not want to lose any of their power. Why would a country like the US want to relinquish any of its power to another government?

impractical, unfortunately.

Dwane,

I understand. This is the ONLY problem otherwise the path is clear. But question is,

Is the idea worth giving a thought?

If we want( the public, the subjects, the voters ), Can we somehow give life to this thought and start some kind of movement towards it to pressurize the system move towards this direction? It may in that case atleast happen, no matter at which point of time in future.

Lot of movements in the history, originally thought as impractical and ineffective have proved otherwise like Non-voilence movement started by Gandhi and many more others.

Interesting, but the governing system would need to allow for people to pursue their cultural diversity without imposing economic hardships. A corporation could buy out an entire native community and destroy their heritage. A world government is possible, but the system must be inherently stable.

A world government would need ethical analysis as an inegral part of its governing system. Somehow we would need to keep our natural insticts to take advantage of one another in check.

(Follow up)United Countries of EarthThanx for understanding and encouraging this simple idea. Yes, the idea is pretty simple and the abuse and misuse of power by various govts around the world makes it even more desireable now.

Now, what happens is that everybody knows that things are not happening in a particular country as they should but you can not interfere because they simply declare it an INTERNAL MATTER and simply continue. With UCE, a global govt. you eliminate this barrier and involve in these so called INTERNAL MATTERS. Latest examples? Sudan, Iran, N. Korea, china( polution and human rights) and so many others.

UCE will be able to preserve the heritage of this world more efficiantly than todays govts.UCE will find more suitable, rational and quicker solutions to problems like poverty, wars, corruption, economical disparities, human rights, climate change, endangered species, rain forests etc. In this case all the issues are viewd globally, not regionally. All that is important and in the favour of mothert earth and its children, is executed and all that is irrational, harmfull is curbed. All the matters are discussed with all other representatives from around the world and solutions and suggestions are voted for and bills passed on the basis of fundamental democratic rules.

So, where is the problem? I really wonder, why people have only shown their sceptical view to this easy, democratic and revolutionay thought? Why can't we choose UCE representatives from the existing govts and discuss matters on broader scale( global scale)?

Whatever local political system or religion the countries might have, democtratic or communistic, Muslim or Christian, hardly makes any sense as long as they conform and comply to international rules( universal rules) which are framed in the common interest of the world and deliver positive results for common people.

UN was also an impossible thought once but it occurred and became a reality. In my opinion, we must see UN as our first experiment which has delivered at times but now, it has started loosing its grip and authority to a great extent and time and again it has expressed its helplessness in dealing with global matters. It has become a vulnerable and manipulative organization. It will remain so or only worsen, as long as it exists. Still it is a directory organization and can not interfere and virtually lead a nation in crisis. Todays requirement is a body, more drastic, more powerfull, authorized and able to handle the worlds problems by directly imposing on the defaulting countries and eventual take-overs with the mutual consent of the rest of the world. No wars will be fought in this case, no weapons are produced and sold, no nuclear tests are required, no terrorism will exist, no caste, religion or economic wars are fought. Only The biased powers are poised and the <killing instinct> of competition is subdued, not competition. All that is done is done with the mutual consent and joint agreement of all the countries of the world. All that is thought is thought in the common interest of the world.

I don’t claim that problems will come to an end and the world will become a heaven but the views are broadened, angles changed and the intensity of hate and selfishness causing dangerours consequences will disappear to a great extent. Their will be unrests and resentments but then they will be tackled on a totally different scale, perpectives and fashion.

The subject is vast and can not be explained on this web-site, therefore, I would end by saying that only a positive thinking can change this world and only revolutionary steps pave new ways.

The nationalistic tendency is very strong and would prevent such. Nationalism is a throw-back to the old cave-man territorial thing, like when a dog marks his territory and sniffs for evidence of intrusion.

I believe it will happen SOMEDAY, but much weeping, tooth gnashing, and many years of human evolution will have to happen first.