[macintologist]

Throughout the course of civilization, humans have become more and more centralized. Before there were countries, city-states, independent feudal kingdoms, villages, and expansionist empires ruled the world. Before the empires, there were only villages and city-states. Europe was one of the first areas to develop nationalism, a new way of centralizing a large group of people. Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the entire world population, once occupying thousands of independent sovereign villages and city-states has grouped itself into a little over 200 nations. Now Europe, the inventor of the modern nation-state, is moving towards multi-laterialism with the EU. The UN is also a world governing body although its relevance is slowly diminishing and its power weakening. In time, the UN will go the way of the league of nations, however, I also believe that eventually (beyond any of our lifetimes) the world will move to a single world government, as the course of our civilization throughout history dictates that we become more centralized.

[the_glassman]

It's going to happen sooner than you think. I'm going to lead this world to a new world order! Rivers of blood will flow of the non believers!

[CreepingDeth]

Wrong forum.

But to answer your question: no.
World governments are too big for their own good and collapse like red giant stars. In other words, they're failures.

[ReggieX]

Nope.

[brapper]

i would like to think not...
and i do.

[11011001]

I personally can't wait until the day when we, no, the world, welcomes our new machine masters.

[macaddict0001]

It won't happen because humans crave conflict that is the reason their are wars. Plus if it is one big country every last damn product will have every single language in its manual. Not to mention its packaging.

[Kilbey]

What about the United Federation of Planets?

[sideus]

Never.

[d4nth3m4n]

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:

and, no, i don't think it's possible to have one world government. at not with any of the current government models in practice at the moment.

[BasketofPuppies]

No.

For its member-nations, the European Union, like the United Nations, is a pay attention to it when it's convenient; ignore it the rest of the time organization.

China has enough trouble convincing the Taiwanese and Tibetans that they're Chinese.

Canadian provinces often have more power than the federal Canadian government and some French Canadians still talk about liberation. (Though it isn't likely under current conditions.)

Many developing countries are dividing into smaller countries based on nationality as their governments become democratically elected. (Don't be surprised if the northern part of Iraq becomes Kurdistan after the United States leaves.)

The current trend is more governments, not fewer.

[willed]

Will there eventually be a single world government?

No.

[moonmonkey]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
China has enough trouble convincing the Taiwanese and Tibetans that they're Chinese.

That's because they are not.

[Lancer409]

yes, eventually. as we expand from earth, i think we will start to have a global perspective on things, instead of nations and nationstates. just dont think we'll be around to see it... hopefully the human race wont exterminate itself before that time

[Apple Pro Underwear]

I don't think the human race will last for more than a 1,000 years

[Zimphire]

Yes.

[ambush]

No.

Not before long enough.

The UN is a joke. I went to a congress this weekend and I listened to International Politics conferences.

Did you know that:

1) The US don't pay a cent to the UN
2) The US does not care about the UN
3) The UN is NOT a democracy (veto of super-powers so something that the US does not want to discuss will never EVER get discussed at the UN)
4) The UN is too old (was formed by the most powerful countries after WW2)
5) The UN needs to be reformed
6) The UN has no budget
7) The UN takes too much time to intervene
8) The UN have no armed forces
9) The UN will only act if one of the 5 veto countries see a possible gain (political or economical)
10) See Darfur.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by ambush:
The UN is a joke.

Something we can agree on.

[Xeo]

I think it would be beneficial for the UN to have a bit more power. Each country could be similar to how the U.S. is run (states have power except for that which is defined federally). There will probably be a time when the world can work together as a single unit, while not imposing on the individual cultures that make it up. At least, that would be the ideal. If the governments were trusting of each other, and laws were actually upheld all over the world, then citizens would be more free to roam around it and tariffs wouldn't be needed. The world economy with a world currency would grow stronger.

But then again, I think we'll be meeting other worlds, too, and I'd like our world to be ready for that. It won't be if we all hate each other.

[BasketofPuppies]

Xeo, you've been watching too much Babylon 5.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
Xeo, you've been watching too much Babylon 5.

Na, Trek. The Federation is perfect right?

[sideus]

Originally posted by Xeo:
I think it would be beneficial for the UN to have a bit more power.

*choke*