Merits and Demerits of a Global Government - Essay Example

What Advantages And Disadvantages Might A World Government Have? Introduction In a perfect world, there would be no conflict, hunger, floods or even death. People would all exist in harmony and peaceful coexistence. This is not the case today. There is a lot of disharmony and competing interests have ensured that there are rich and poor nations and people, and at the same time, some countries like Somalia and Democratic Republic of Congo have not known peace. This article, however, asks a crucial question about the state of world affairs today. It looks at a possibility of all the nations of this world submitting to one government and the ramifications of such a government. Arguments for a Central Global Government There will be numerous benefits of having the entire globe submitting to one government. One of these benefits is the more unbiased allocation of wealth among the nations. Currently, there is a very big and disparaging gap between the wealthy nations on one side and the not so wealthy ones on the other hand. The notion of Social Darwinism (Perelman 1999) which advocates for a laissez-faire, has contributed to the present state of affairs. The Darwinian Theory has encouraged the existence of a completion among the countries. It has led to those with the resources and power exploitingthe poor nations and taking away their resources. A global government would counter this exploitative trend by placing safeguards on how the resources will be shared equitably. A global government has the ability to inculcate the spirit of global citizenship as well as efforts to improve the global well-being (Yang 2011). This fraternity will be enhanced by the formation of a global government. In this government, the whole world is under one realm. People will be cultured towards the show of concern for their neighbours. In light with this, it is indispensable to argue that the term ‘neighbour’ has a relative connotation. It means that there is acloserrelationship due to the facilitation of the internet. A global government negates the occurrence of wars (Sarkar 2012). In the incidence that there is a global government, there would be a supreme arbiter at the global level, who can bring all the parties to a round table to iron out matters. As it stands, the issue of sovereignty, which then allows a nation the right to raise an army to defend its territorial integrity also creates the possibility that the particular country will possibly abuse this power to invade another country’s borders for selfish reasons, as is the case in a number of wars. Before the two major world wars occurred, there was no global accountability of nation states. All acted in the best interests of their nationals such as national pride among other reasons. This saw nations launch wars of conquest such as was the case with Germany in Europe. This trend resulted in the loss of a multitude of lives and wanton destruction of property. However, with the establishment of the League of Nations and later United Nations, a lot of these crises have been averted. With the United Nation acting as a mediator, there has been numerous occasions when war has been averted (Benjamin 2007). The modern day United Nations has the functions of what a global government will be expected to do. A global government will ensure that there is a cap on the nations attempting to engage in an arms race of any kind. It would also see to it that the nations of the world do not abuse human rights among other functions. This will to a large extent be possible through a policy that empowers the global government to call to account any state which it feels has been abusing its powers or rights. Unlike the United Nations which has no standing army, the global government will have the monopoly of force which will allow its voice to be heard its wishes acted upon by all the individual states (Benjamin 2007). The fact that there is as global government at the very top should not be interpreted as negating the existence of governments or political organizations at the individual state level (Pfaller and Lerch 2005). According to Pfaller et al (2005), the individual states will have a political organization that best reflects their individual needs as well as gives them an identity. This so to speak implies that the powers will be devolved in the format that will leave a lot of the political power to the individual states but the major issues like the army among others will go to the global government. Looking at the level of development, there will be accelerated development of the third world economies due to the easier flow of capital as well as new technologies in their direction (Johri 2006). This is because a lot of the restrictions that are places to the movement of the resources will be eliminated. This means that the nations will be able to interact more easily. At the same time, the ease with which people can move to any location in the world will allow them to spread this capital and the brainpower to create new technologiesthat will be of benefit to the least developed countries. The rise of the global government will also allow the growth of the influence of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). These have been charged with the role of checking against the excesses of the government in its power use (Vachani 2006).Since this global government has the monopoly of brute force, it has a lot of authority in its hands. This means that if left alone, it will run roughshod over the innocent and defenceless citizens. The NGOs will therefore come up with enough authority to act as checks to these powers which must not be left unregulated. Arguments against a Global Government While this writer admits that forming a global central government is a noble idea, there are a number of issues that act as obstacles of this vision. A central global government would be fashioned along the lines of the globalization trend where the entire world is in a sense a global village. With this in mind, there are a number of follies to such a move. Among others is the fact that the poor countries will lose out further on the sharing of resources (Siebert 2003). This is because the wealthy countries will continue to dominate the resource distribution since it is not going to be trouble-free to share resources equally. At the same time, according to Siebert (2003), the wealthy nations will also be stuck with a more enlarged social responsibility to the poor nations. As in any nation, the wealth will generally flow from the wealthy regions to the poorer regions. This will entail taxing these regions more and subsidizing the poorer regions. As per the teachings of Darwin, they will be of the opinion that the world is for the fittest. All others should be left to feed solely and if they cannot make it they should be left to behind. It is this notion that will lead the wealthier nations to oppose the formation of such a government being formed. On the issue of the distribution of resources, there is the possibility of the existence of rogue states that will refuse to fully comply with the requirements. Lack of a strong enforcement policy will allow some states to benefit more than others. It is correct to assume that all the states will not get an equal peace of the pie so to speak (Siebert 2003). There will be those that will demand more than others within the government. This means that there will still be disparities among different states’ level of development and growth of the economy. One problem that will arise from the establishment of the global government will be the location of the seat of power. There are those who posit that this seat will be in the United States of America (Pfaller and Lerch 2005). This is an obvious cause of concern because the positioning of the seat of power will bring with it the influence that the capital city of a country has. The location of the seat of power is a contentious matter that will most possibly derail the entire process. It is sad to note that among the many academic works, there is little mention of the African continent (Ferguson 2006). This indicates the fears that the same continent will not get the attention it requires in the case of a global government. Africa has a number of problems namely disease, hunger, poverty among others. This explains why it is easy for those who envision a global world to relegate the entire continent in the background. As a continent the Africans will not be expecting to have a change in the status quo. Conclusion The article above has shown the merits as well as the demerits of a global government ruling over the entire world. The nature of the human beings mean that they cannot be ruled out in terms of coming up with one such working government. This means that the negatives aside, a global government is the place that the current world is headed to in the near future. There is immense potential that the global government stands to achieve if it were formed. Bibliography: Benjamin, R., 2007. Necessities and Benefits of a Global Government. Accessed on Wednesday, 28 November, 2012 from: http://govglobalvillage.com/Necessity.htm Ferguson, J., 2006. Global Shadows: Africa in the Neoliberal World Order. Durham: Duke University Press. Johri, J.C., 2006. New Comparative Government. New Delhi: Lotus Press. Lesage, D. & Vercauteren, P., 2009.Contemporary Global Governance: Multipolarity Vs new Discourses on Global Governance. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang S.A. Perelman, M., 1999.The Natural Instability of Markets: Expectations Increasing Returns, and the Collapse of Capitalism. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Pfaller, A. & Lerch, M., 2005.Challenges of globalization: New Trends in International Politics and Society. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Sarkar, P. R., 2012. Benefits of a Global Government. Accessed on Wednesday, 28 November, 2012 from: https://sites.google.com/site/proutistuniversal/benefitsofaworldgovernment Siebert, H., 2003. Global Governance: An Architecture for the World Economy. New York: Springer. Vachani, S., 2006.Transformations in Global Governance: Implications for Multinationals and other Stakeholders. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Yang, U., 2011.Global State through Democratic Federal World Government: How The World Works Better: Hidden Benefits of a New World Political Economy. Central Milton Keynes: Author House UK Ltd. Read More