Will there be a one world government controlling the population of people one day ?

[Regiomontanus]

One thing for sure - if there was a single world-wide government as things stand, it would be a bureaucratic horror. Having worked for the Federal Government for a short time and big businesses, big = bureaucracy. The bigger the organization/government the bigger and worse the bureaucracy.

Trantor

foundation.fandom.com

 

[Twilight Hue]

Yep. About 5 years ago

Another milestone for Trump.

 

[Heyo]

That would mean the end of Democracy, since central planning means Socialism or worse, with leaders more interesting in maintaining and growing their own power, than in finding innovative solutions for all the minions who are below them in class, rank and status.

"Oneness" never works. In politics or anything else. Diversity is inherent in the universe as a whole, as well as in humans, specifically. Any attempts at "oneness" and "unity" are futile and doomed to failure. That level of draconian, authoritarian control is simply impossible short of robbing the entire species of its free will by installing forced behavioral chips in brains or something. You know, The Borg, basically.

I don't think that many of us would like one-world-government very much because it would be authoritarian by its very nature.

Why?
Why do you expect a world government to be authoritarian?
We already have countries, republics that follow the principle of subsidiarity. A world government would just add one more layer. It would effectively prevent war between countries. That alone would be reason enough for me to favour a world government, even if the rest would be as ineffective as some other big government of assorted states/countries.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't see it happening, and I don't see a need for it. Lots of governments get along already, and if that was expanded to the entire planet, we'd be good.

 

[Quintessence]

Why do you expect a world government to be authoritarian?

Fair question.

I suppose I assume such because in order for any world government to meaningfully govern - that is, make policies and decisions then enforce them - it would need to be endowed with some degree of authority. I don't see any way that would work in our current diverse cultures without there being an awful lot of strongarming going on.

Perhaps I can also ask you a question - what sorts of policies would you expect this one world government to make and enforce? And how would this government go about enforcing them? Perhaps more importantly, how do you convince the entire human population of the planet to pledge allegiance to this world government (aka, the buy-in problem)?

 

[Heyo]

Fair question.

I suppose I assume such because in order for any world government to meaningfully govern - that is, make policies and decisions then enforce them - it would need to be endowed with some degree of authority. I don't see any way that would work in our current diverse cultures without there being an awful lot of strongarming going on.

Perhaps I can also ask you a question - what sorts of policies would you expect this one world government to make and enforce? And how would this government go about enforcing them? Perhaps more importantly, how do you convince the entire human population of the planet to pledge allegiance to this world government (aka, the buy-in problem)?

My guess is that the vast majority of the population is either for a world government or doesn't care. The reasons we don't already have one are the local leaders, who are not willing to give up their power.
As I said, we already have layered governments. We have mayors, magistrates, governors, prime ministers and presidents and each one of those, except those at the very top, accept that they are part of a greater union and don't have unlimited power. In the EU even the heads of the countries accept a higher authority.
A world government would ideally regulate what the UN would do if it was a functioning organization with the power to enforce international law. It would enforce human rights, prevent wars and enforce treaties between countries.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

No, world government is a pipedream that goes against human nature. It will never happen.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

No, not ever. We humans will always find some way to distance ourselves from other humans, making them not as good as us.

 

[Sand Dancer]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

No. Too many differences between nations, especially the religious differences.

 

[InChrist]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

I don’t consider it to be a conspiracy theory, rather future prophecy which will occur and be short-lived, according to the biblical scriptures.
There is and has been for a number of years, a desire among some groups and/or individuals to see a unified one world government come into fruition. I don’t think it has happened because, as others have mentioned, there is simply too much diversity and disagreement among people and nations. I’d say it will take a dramatic major event which will cause such global fear and panic that everyone will be ready to give allegiance to a world leader who steps up and promises security and answers. I when Jesus calls up His church out of this world… all believers, as well as all children and babies, including those in the womb; an event otherwise known as the Rapture… will create such worldwide chaos and panic that all people and nations will be ready to accept a global leader and government.

Unity In A Satanic One World Government :: by Daymond Duck

I had one of those “revelation moments” this week. It’s something that happens to everyone who reads the Bible very much. I was reading a passage that I

www.raptureready.com

Does the Bible prophesy a one-world government and a one-world currency in the end times? | GotQuestions.org

Does the Bible prophesy a one-world government and a one-world currency in the end times? How will the antichrist rule over all the nations of the world in the end times?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Quintessence]

My guess is that the vast majority of the population is either for a world government or doesn't care. The reasons we don't already have one are the local leaders, who are not willing to give up their power.
As I said, we already have layered governments. We have mayors, magistrates, governors, prime ministers and presidents and each one of those, except those at the very top, accept that they are part of a greater union and don't have unlimited power. In the EU even the heads of the countries accept a higher authority.
A world government would ideally regulate what the UN would do if it was a functioning organization with the power to enforce international law. It would enforce human rights, prevent wars and enforce treaties between countries.

I can't say I agree with your perspective here - I see little to no indication of the "vast majority" (85% or greater) of the global human population being indifferent to or in favor of any sort of world government for all humans. And it would take no small amount of strongarming to enforce human rights (whose idea of human rights?), prevent wars, or enforce treaties. I don't think the buy-in you believe is there... is there. Until very modern times, humans have never organized in large groups like we have in the modern day. There's a reason for that - we quite literally cannot keep track of or have meaningful social interactions at large scales. And while a nested layer of hierarchy can be one means of combating that, it almost invariably collapses under its own weight and not everybody is a huge fan of hierarchical governance to begin with.

 

[Jimmy]

No

 

[Twilight Hue]

My guess is that the vast majority of the population is either for a world government or doesn't care. The reasons we don't already have one are the local leaders, who are not willing to give up their power.
As I said, we already have layered governments. We have mayors, magistrates, governors, prime ministers and presidents and each one of those, except those at the very top, accept that they are part of a greater union and don't have unlimited power. In the EU even the heads of the countries accept a higher authority.
A world government would ideally regulate what the UN would do if it was a functioning organization with the power to enforce international law. It would enforce human rights, prevent wars and enforce treaties between countries.

That's true. However to garner world dominance, it's going to require a MASSIVE world war provided it dosent result in confirmation of the Fermi Paradox by which advanced civilizations ultimately cancel each other out permanently.

 

[Heyo]

I can't say I agree with your perspective here - I see little to no indication of the "vast majority" (85% or greater) of the global human population being indifferent to or in favor of any sort of world government for all humans. And it would take no small amount of strongarming to enforce human rights (whose idea of human rights?), prevent wars, or enforce treaties. I don't think the buy-in you believe is there... is there. Until very modern times, humans have never organized in large groups like we have in the modern day. There's a reason for that - we quite literally cannot keep track of or have meaningful social interactions at large scales. And while a nested layer of hierarchy can be one means of combating that, it almost invariably collapses under its own weight and not everybody is a huge fan of hierarchical governance to begin with.

There are countries that have more citizens than there were people on Earth in the past. India 1.4 billion, China 1.4 billion, the EU 450 million, the US 380 million. And while not every country on that short list is exceptionally stable, most of their citizens still agree to be ruled under one government - but, except for the EU, they make the cut at the country level, for no rational reason.

 

[ChristineM]

To go even further and expect some sort of unified governance above and beyond that is all-out delirious.

It'll be called "USA , Unites States of All"

Or maybe "the EU"

 

[Heyo]

That's true. However to garner world dominance, it's going to require a MASSIVE world war provided it dosent result in confirmation of the Fermi Paradox by which advanced civilizations ultimately cancel each other out permanently.

We had a massive world war '39 to '45. At least it resulted in the UN - which could have been the world government if not some leaders weren't too power hungry to give up a bit of their power.

 

[Tomef]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

Only if AI eventually proves itself massively useful in planning and implementing the integration of practical state elements on a global scale, to the point where convenience overcomes local resistance. Humans organising humans has definite scales of diminishing influence over increasingly large and diverse groups of people.

 

[Balthazzar]

This is a favorite of conspiracy theorists but is it truly possible that this could happen one day in the future a new world order ? And if it is true then how will this one world government be implemented and will it be successful ?

After being invited to read a manifesto for a one world government, I waited over a year before I offered my input. I was asked to read it over and I suppose to help further develop the manifesto itself. I suggested we should live and let live. Beyond this, I'm not in support of any type of world government. Independence and liberty are important enough to acknowledge diversity and for us to honor it. Whether or not others are more ambitious than this, is beyond my knowing. Although, it wouldn't surprise me if efforts are being made to that end.

 

[Altfish]

Will there be a one world government controlling the population of people one day ?​

NO!

 

[Massimo2002]

Eh. I almost wish it could happen.

But no. No chance whatsoever. There are a myriad worse nightmare scenarios that are far, far more likely.

Such as ?