Should we work towards a world government?
The idea sounds superficially attractive. No more national wars or territorial grabs. Living in harmony, settling things democratically and getting on peaceably as we all work towards common goals.
In practice, of course, it would be a disaster. Individual nations would have to give up their autonomy, leading to possible conflicts over cultural, political, and economic differences. Many people value national identity and self-determination, which could be eroded under a single global authority. Look what happened when different cultures and tribes were lumped together into nations.
Furthermore, a centralized global government would almost certainly be bureaucratic and distant from the people under it, making it harder for citizens to influence decisions. The model here is the EU. A single governing body overseeing billions of people would likely be slow, inefficient, and prone to bureaucratic gridlock. Decision-making processes could become overly complex, delaying responses to crises or important global issues.
A single governing body with unchecked power could become authoritarian, with no competing states to balance or challenge its authority. If a corrupt or oppressive regime took control, there would be no external force to oppose it.
To maintain law and order on a global scale would be difficult, as a world government would need an international police or military force. This raises concerns about how such a force would operate and whether it would suppress dissent unfairly.
How could a world government deal with the imbalance of world wealth? Richer nations may resist redistributive policies, while poorer regions might feel neglected or exploited. Toxic ideologies such as communism might take root among the poor, leading to the ruthless oppression that all communist regimes have exhibited.
A centralized global government would be a prime target for cyberattacks and technological disruptions. If a single system controlled crucial global infrastructure, a successful attack could have catastrophic consequences.
Most importantly of all, there would be no escape from it. There would be no low tax areas into which people could escape to flee the clutches of predatory politicians. There would be no friendlier countries to provide a haven from power hungry leaders. It is precisely because there would be no escape from a world government that many of its supporters advocate it.
Dr Madsen Pirie