What are the genuine arguments against a world government?

>Try not to reply if you're a half illiterate sub-human with an IQ of 85.
I guess this was too hard for the half-wits on this glorified subreddit.

OP here - you're an idiot.

Attached: you_dumbass.jpg (1688x1728, 319K)

Simply, there are too many different people with too many different problems for them all to be administered by one entity. The soviet union had this problem before it fell and the US is having this problem now, both operating on a way smaller scale

To be clear, you have no problem with global domination?

Having borders with different governments in different places allows for recovery when bad governments destroy their country. With a world government if something goes wrong, everything goes wrong. There is no support from neighboring countries because they dont exist.

100% achievable with laptop and phone

It isn't necessarily a bad thing to ask the philosophical question of whether global domination is a good or bad thing.

The reduction of the masses to interchangable consumer and work units with all possible identity eroded. The creation of a Huxley'esque slave underclass that are content with their servitude, because of Media and Hollywood brainwashing, while being exploited to work for their corporate Homo Globicus and watched over by the priestly class of SJW's for wrongthink. It's the same story of the tower of Babel where man wants to build something so unifying and the bestest best and biggest big on the whole world that he essentially fools himself into thinking he's playing God, to his own detriment, the tower of Babel falls and people are scattered to the multitude of languages. All civilisations that had died have gone through this last cycle of multi-culturalism and importing of immigrants, while their own people have low birth rates.

"Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigratin, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silwnt about capitalism, should do the same"
-Alain de Benoist

The tangible desperation ITT

Exactly what I was saying. OP is a bitch ass scammer.

Attached: 1549417412455.gif (162x226, 789K)

We are not the same person

none
only the capitalists give a shit because "muh property rights!"
who cares.

I agree, asking questions is never bad. I do think global domination is bad.

>You have the option to move.
Do you? I think only a child, or a fool, would argue that the average North Korean truly has "the option" for example.

Additionally, a world government could mirror the United States, e.g. here you have the city, the state, the federal. In theory, you could instead have it layered as the city, the state, the nation, the federal. A man who doesn't like gay marriage can live in Iran, the same as a Tennessean can move to Texas.

Meanwhile, how many of mankind's resources are being wasted in duplicative effort and conflict because of multiple competing polities? A one world government may be the only real way to govern certain issues, like preventing all of us from choking to death on methane in 50 years because China and India wanted to set fire to mountains of coal.

That's exactly what the same person WOULD say

The world is divided into 3 economic zones, the West, with Wall Street et. al, then China which has a strange symbiosis with the West, and then there's Russia which remains more an obstacle to globalisation.

all eggs, one basket.

never in my life has even my local mayor given a shit about its constituents let alone president, a world government would be an extreme version of that. I say a world government but what I really mean is a blatant world government, we've effectively living under one in actual practice for some time with efforts to keep an illusion of sovereignty. Once the mask drops its gonna be much more brutal than it is now.

Aren't you Jewish?

The people who would run it. If the EU is any indication, it would be all sick bedsheet politicians sucking all the life out of the world. Kind of like now, but more.

>The reduction of the masses to interchangable consumer and work units with all possible identity eroded.
You honestly believe you rate above a cog in the current nation states?

Unless you live in a tribe of twenty, you're just as faceless in the United States as you'd be in the United Earth.

Particularism has historically led to better results than those achieved by large empires. Under Ottoman rule, Istanbul was enriched at the expense of the land they conquered. The renaissance didn't come from a large state, it came from Italian city-states acting in their own self interest in a competitive environment.

Only when people within a local area control their own policy can they be enriched. Otherwise economic development will be stifled.

This isn't even touching on the lower efficiency of monetary policy for dealing with larger areas with different economic situations.

the scale of the possible mistakes. and the fact that the implication of universal rules in societies built on other rules leads to the destruction of institutions in general (whether they are acceptable to you or not). Which leads to anarchy. Which in itself is much worse than the existence of at least some established system rules.

implementation*

not implication

Yes. There is no soul, no spirit. All you cunts can talk about is economics, that's the only value of man. We're already so far out that you'll probably just laugh at this, but it's true. There is no higher goal in this Empire of Nothing. It will surely fall and give way to something else...

>the scale of the possible mistakes
We're seeing the scale of the mistakes made by individual and competing nation states now, and it's terraforming the Earth into something less livable.

The economic policy of China, by itself, can negatively impact most people on this planet, to the point of death even. We're long past the point of single nations making decisions that only impact those single nations.

Yeah, you have many countries with very different environments, people, products, sometimes right next to each other. You can't homologize all the rules like it's a fucking F1 race. Maybe in the minds of bedsheet politicians it sounds like a good idea, but in the real world it would be a disaster.

In what way is your soul and/or spirit being served by current nation states, in a way that wouldn't be matched by a supra-national authority?

A world government that is perfect and without flaws is a great fantasy and would be amazing in theory. However actual implementation from the state the world is in right now would be a nightmare, and there is no guarantee that the world government would mirror the United states. In reality perfection usually cant be achieved, and because of this having different countries is a bit better.
A world government sounds great to someone who thinks they will be in power and that they will have all of the correct answers to all of the worlds problems.

With only one government, you have a monopoly on government and therefore innovation for governments is reduced due to the fact that they're not competing.

half illiterate sub-humans with an IQ of 85.

this is not the main argument

They're really not, friend. They're not at all. That's why things really look so grim. Supra-nationality would surely only further erode any feeling of belonging, which it already slowly does.

It makes the assumption that all people are equal and compatible, this is however not true

Memeflag, hmm wonder who is behind this post?
sage

Attached: 1551695961256.jpg (607x582, 18K)

wow a world government sounds great if you assume that it is also going to do your bidding!

but what if you get your world government and they don't really care about your pet issues?

if I choose between anarchy and the death of half the world's population, then I will choose the second. because with anarchy I will not have any chance of survival and a predictable happy life.

Tower of babel nigger
Do you even philosophy?
Sage you fucking kike

Every time I see the UN logo it reminds me of the original Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six counterterrorism team’s insignia.

It would lead to r-selective people outbreeding and eventually killing out
K-selective people. Thus bringing us back to the sotne age or killing us with the great filter.
America is turning into a ring of hell. Democracy is horrible but a strong republic that fucks off from people's affairs or a benevolent dictatorship would be ok

what's wrong with corruption

The way things are, it would be China's pet issues that would be addressed by this world government. And then we could all have equal amounts of batteries and playing cards in every body of water.

Found the faggot

A world government is a large entity, that means that individually, we are harder to find. They are big and slow; we are small and fast.

Also man is naturally a nomadic species that likes to be independent of ruling powers yet still likes a local community. If we ever make it to Mars I would give it 100 years for the Martian humans to become independent of Earth and also balkanize among some sort of lines on Mars.

Wait until they develop even more heuristics to sort through all that data they're collecting. We're helping them create a piece of the prison every time we solve that stupid fucking captcha that's obviously being used for self-driving car programming.

kek

Attached: 1564418636350.jpg (605x586, 46K)

It would 100% be a Jew World Order.

What is it now?

World government would put you on the same level as sub humans.

>obviously being used for self-driving car programming
Glad I'm not the only one.

try to read
"Law, Legislation and Liberty" by Friedrich Hayek.it will probably change your opinion about this case if you are not dogmatic

An 80% Jew World Order

What are the genuine arguments against an interstellar government?

>What are the genuine arguments against a world government?
People don't like sharing power.

Lack of interstellar people to govern.

Should mankind ever settle other planets, eventually that question would have to be answered though. I guess the deciding factor would be speed of communication and movement, e.g. governing a body where messages take seconds is a different animal than governing a body where messages take years.

But that's neither here nor there in terms of a unified government here on Earth.

A world government would deny many groups from around the world their right to self-determination and is therefore a human rights violation.

Nonsense. They share it now, and literally all civilization is built on the idea. The city with the state, with the nation, increasingly with the corporation or supra-national cooperative. This is just one more layer.

Because if the world would be balkanized into countries with a population of 5-10 million, that would be perfect. Every country, even the African ones, are better off with a small population that's easy to manage.

Big countries don't work.

All the eggs in one basket is retarded approach.

Well put

Attached: 1548619611068m.jpg (725x1024, 120K)

Nothing? More efficiency overall, none of those unnecessary resource drains and abundant bureaucracy

Because our governments are efficient at the moment? You really fit the mark of a stupid as fuck Russian. Seriously jump off a building ivan.

poorly thought out folksy nonsense

Then whats the point of a world government, if not to maximize the profits of monopolists?

What makes you think a US of the world would be any less bloated wasteful corrupt and inefficient as the US is?

If there was any chance communism and world government was bad for the corporations and central banks, do you think they would be funding and supporting it as they do? They are all openly pushing communism, and want you to, too. Do you think that the worst robber barrons in history suddenly became nice overnight and now want to help the world? How disgustingly naive can you get?

Nice argument, faggot.

Attached: figgot.png (500x522, 127K)

no u

Youre right we need to nuke China, India too
To save the world
For the children

How would I petition, protest or depose a government sitting outside some building in New York? It's hard enough trying to do that locally. If there were any dissent they'd just send aircraft carriers and tomahawk me... oh wiat that already happened.

i dont think south africa or england or argintina or america should have a say in world affairs

You joke, but their entire populations disappearing in a blink would be a boon for mankind overall, at least in the short term until we over-populated again.

You forgot niggers.

I guess that's one way to get around the problem that they wouldn't vote for your fruity western global warming hobby

Giving one government control over the entire world is a stupid idea

If that government becomes corrupt and or totalitarian there is nowhere to escape to unless you’re going off planet

What are some genuine arguments in favour of a world government? I see very very few

>having such a poor grasp on science

When we're done with overpopulation, mankind would do well to start euthanizing retards, like yourself. We can't afford a society built to coddle people like you.

Attached: disgust.gif (330x166, 2.11M)

Nigger, behaving such way is what gets you rope in the future.

>The size of a government has consistently historically correlated with the scale of the atrocities eventually committed by that government.
>Let's make the biggest government ever. what could possibly go wrong?
I wonder.
>Saudi Arabia heads a committee on women's rights and gender equality
>Bunch of African warlords push gun control so the people can't overthrow them.
Sounds like a great idea.

>What are the genuine arguments against a world government?
People speak different languages. Alien threats don't exist. Endless layers of Bureaucracy would get entire continents stuck in red tape forever. Nowhere to flee when they start sterilizing all white men.

No check or balance against tyranny. Imagine a stalin, USSR type scenario, but literally no America to break it up.

One person takes over, starts changing the system and implementing forms of control to retain power and control the masses.

Many Nazis didn't want to gas jews, but by simply having a very controlled system where power is removed from the individual it was easy to accomplish.

The idea of having people rounded up and shot, and a one-world dictator destroying humanity seems far-fetched, but insanely simple if there is no check against it.

Also, it's not sustainable. Evolutionarily it's not preferable, nor will a group ever sustain a single identity which is what would be required to maintain such an overarching powerstructure.

Not only is it dangerous, difficult to achieve, but there's literally no point. You can accomplish the same shit with hundreds of countries as you can with one.

Also, and best of all, your tax would likely double, if not triple and all of it would go to Africa. But let's give a one-world government total power, because the government has always shown itself to be competent in the past hasn't it!

Rights for the individual won't exist due to one governing body representing only force in following a law.

Globalism would be the most fascist style government because it will be;
Absolutist
Totalitarian
Authoritarian
One Party
Syndicated

So you will never gain power and they will strip you of any right to question theirs.

>being obsessed with soft science
why not study real science? it's more interesting

Many people have escaped North Korea though

>"the average"
>responds with edge cases

Attached: retard.jpg (552x518, 46K)

Because all empires fall, put your hopes in a strong national state instead

Attached: kong.jpg (435x580, 23K)

It is also worth mentioning the reality of creating a centralized world government at a given time. How would you implement this plan? It's possible to achieve this peacefully only when the majority of individuals in each country for some reason begin to prefer collective tasks instead of their own. while the use of force can greatly degrade the quality of consensus between countries that have agreed to it. but perhaps in the distant future, such ideas will eventually become valid
.

In short OP, here is the skinny on a one world govt. All the world's problems become yours.

Fighting poverty in your home country by providing NEETbucks for people out of work? Now you have to provide NEETbucks for 50% of Saudi Arabia, the highest participant per capita of welfare in the world.

Education slipping in some of your urban centres? You have to now be responisble for every single school in the Third World.

You get their reasources, whatever that is worth, but you have to deal with them, police them, educate them, clean them up, imprison them, rehabilitate them, maintain them in every way.

The only possible way this could happen is with pic related, some kind of ultra-centralized ultra-fascist government with only one benevolent man at the heart of it all, with the will to nuke entire worlds (including all of Africa) for teh greater good and in order to access its precious resources.

Attached: 400px-Lord_of_Mankind.jpg (400x518, 77K)

Who will govern? How do I know that they are not malevolent towards me? Where will you run if one day world government will become malevolent towards you?

Jews

There's noone who can be trusted to lead it.

The West is Run by The Masons, who are a compilation of subtly-mutated, psychologically-bizarre normie mongoloids, and are the worst aids-criminals in existence.

Murder baby cows for profit. Grind baby chickens alive in mass. Intentionally design girls clothes to accentuate their buttox. Youth-target food products loaded with sugar & chemicals.

All these types of corporate entities are the same subtly-mutated, genetically-ambigious normie mongoloid trash who make up Freemasonry. These niggers need to be dethroned where they reign now, not given the crown & staff over the whole planet.

Attached: normiescum.jpg (960x640, 76K)