To keep it simple, a real secular global government (not just something like the UN, but an honest-to-goodness global government) is asking WAAAAY too much of mankind. Especially because of that "secular" part...
Because there would be no higher power or higher standard this type of government would answer to, this government would have to lean extremely heavily upon what they believe is the "goodness in all mankind".
However, since we all know how well THAT works...imagine then, leaning upon such a fallible principle, and applying it across hundreds of cultures, worldviews, economies, climates (and subsequent industries, some based upon particular natural resources), and levels of production (third world, first world...etc). Wow, aint NOBODY gonna be happy! I'm sorry, but there's no way a global government could make everything equal and fair across such a range of people. I admit, to even have a global government in the first place, many of those differences would have to be eliminated, but that would mean much more than just telling people what to think - Entire countries would have to be turned on their heads. Not only would that be alooooot of hard work, that would sacrifice so much beautiful diversity! Not only of people, but of entire landscapes. Doable, I'm sure, but even more lamentable.
Were this achieved, most everyone would also have to buy into this movement's grand scheme. Depending on this government's ideals, buying into their message would more than likely mean that religion would have to be put aside. Some would do this, but the reality is that many would not. Especially for Muslims, this would be a huge issue, and probably result in war. But even if religion could be set aside, the only plausible "grand scheme" that would provide "ideal" equality for everybody that would be supported by the masses is a system of socialism. However, since different regions of the world provide different opportunities and resources, some areas of the planet would need to give more of certain things than others. The many ways that could go wrong...keeping the balance between socialism and communism is gonna be quite the feat.
If somehow the global government was successful, the world as we know it would be wholly and completely different. Quite literally, nothing would be the same. Choosing a leader would be interesting too...hm..
Smaller, area-based governments would more than likely become necessary, corruption rampant, greed and inequality glossed over with empty promises. Government would probably go beyond broke, their validity questioned when they cannot cure all hunger and sickness (haha, surprise!). People will become disillusioned and dissatisfied. New ideas would be quashed if they did not coincide with the larger agenda. There'd be no such thing as national pride, and racial pride would probably be discouraged. The attempt to make life "more equal" on a world-scale would only leave people more frustrated, especially since religion would probably have to be accounted for instead of set aside.
This could basically be another Alexander-the-Great situation. With no geographical location or culture to control the psyches of their peoples, the individual will have to look somewhere else for an identity. Actually, this could be a great opportunity for Christianity, as it was during AtG's time. His empire not only covered distance, but it turned that entire area into a collective culture where communication allowed the individual to understand that he could move about anywhere in that kingdom and still be part of the same machine. Being no longer tied to a unique language, geographical location, or set of ideals, the individual began to question life on a more grand scale. Budding Christianity offered hope, meaning, and answers. That is a pretty neat thought. Of course, the government would retaliate. But whenever Christianity is persecuted, it tends to grow. I suppose active Christians are in for a dark future if a global secular government were to come into real power.
Depending upon the strictness of the global government's policies, there could be a lot of different directions the world could take. Strict, hands-on controlling government would irritate people. Laissez-faire government would mean that the ideal "equality" would suffer. And people would get mad.
Is it obvious yet that I really don't have much of a clue? We'll probably all just get blown up via secret nukes held by an underground sect of Communists that still hate the west. yay violence.
No comments:
Post a Comment