United Earth Government

KenSwee

Ok, so this is barley Star Trek related but I'm curious to see how others feel.

And it's an integral part of the ST background so I thought I bring it up.

Putting aside the obvious technical and administrative issues such as language barriers, what do you think of the idea of an United Earth Government or United Earth Federation?

With our financial problems causing ripple effects across Europe and the rest of the world, would it be a bad thing to move towards a more united political federation with a goal to have (yes the scary term!) a 'one world government'?

What amazes me is that the idea of a united government, apart from ST, is portrayed in such a negative way. With the likes of Jim Corr going around saying that there is a secret government in place already, the whole idea seems to have such negative connotations. Yes I know the UN is all screwed up but it came into being as a reaction to a world war and and has always been corrupt since it's inception. It's not a government and it has no teeth so it's is flawed.

Personally I think it's inevitable, if a long way away. I also have no problem with the idea. Modern politics are now either vaguely centre right or left with no real alternative, apart from the usual lunatics running pocket countries. Also most of the successful countries have been federal with local areas or states running day to day issues while the national government looks after such matters as finance, defence and international relations. You only have to go to Germany, Canada or even the USA to see that most cultures, ethnic groups and nationalities are still retained and still quite independent despite being part of a larger government administration. A one world government does not mean a one party government either and this is where I believe that the bad press incorrectly portrays the idea. Many federal based political systems have multiple options when it comes to parties in government. The federal system relies on this for it to be successful. Despite the fact that most of the parties in a democratic system are very alike, you still have an option to change who is in charge. A united earth government is a not a one party government. The world is much smaller place today and you can talk to somebody in Alaska, go to Brisbane in a day, do business with a vineyard in Chile or mobilise an army to travel 10000kms in two days. Most of us drink Cola, know about different foods, take the same medicine, want the same things and the majority of us accept different religions, customs and ethnic backgrounds.

So what is the general opinion here? Accepting that most of us who post here are keen ST fans, is the idea of a one world government a good idea?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_government

Apolloyon

I think it is in essence inevitable that a World Government will arise with this century. As to what form an EU style model or other remains to be seen. As for whether this will be a good thing or a bad thing is at this stage impossible to tell. The reality is that it will like any government be a bit of both hopefully the good outstripping the bad.

I think many people and by definition the governments that represent them have a hard time accepting the plain truth that no one country stands alone anymore. Economically we rely on other nations as they do on us. From the goods and services that are produced, to the entertainment we watch, read or download - we all depend on another like it or not.

As to what happens - erosion of individual cultures, the lost of sovereignty, currencies changing, this is not a new thing. Any history book will report this. It's how we cope with these changes that will set the tone for what future government emerges in my opinion.

AndrewS

I think its an admirable idea and something that should be worked towards. However, I don't think that its something that I will witness in my lifetime. And I also believe that there are a couple of issues and obstacles that could and probably will prevent such a thing from occurring.

1) Location: one must consider where such a global government will be based. One suggestion would be a place in continental United States, and thats something that a number of countries will object to. Because they will see it as a situation where the American people are exerting control, or too much control over policies and so on.

2) Fanaticism: sadly, this is still a huge part of modern life, no matter where you go. Fanaticism and extremism would need to be eliminated for the better before anything like this could become reality. And Im not suggesting that the global government simply eradicates all those responsible for such extremism.

3) Fairness: if such a government is to come into existence, then we are going to have to help to eliminate the extremes of wealth in modern society. This may enrich certain peoples and somewhat impoverish others. With the Federation, money is not used any more and to quote Jean-Luc Picard, humanity is no longer obsessed with the aquisition of wealth. Humanity needs to focus more on the betterment of society and providing for the needs of the population in terms of food and education.

4) Religion is still a major driving force in 21st Century politics, diplomacy and society. The OP suggests that the vast majority accept differing religions and philosophical viewpoints. With respect, I must disagree. Religion is a significant causal factor in most, if not all of the major conflicts that have occurred on the planet. And, its fair to say that religion could be held responsible for many of the extremes of poverty and wealth seen in the world today. IMO, we as citizens of the world need to stop talking about being understanding and accepting and actually practice what we preach.

This may seem overly cynical, but in all honesty, until the matters of conflict and mistrust are resolved by diplomatic means, then quite frankly the notion of a global government just wont work. Im all for it and think it would have a huge impact, but its going to take a very long time to bring about. You also need to remember that its not just governance and political systems that need to be put in place. You are talking about unified defence, healthcare, education and fiscal systems too. And with the state of the planet right now, I honestly think it will be well into the 22nd Century before its fully implemented. That doesnt mean that we shouldnt work towards it though.

nyarlothothep

Highly unlikely that humanity will ever have a one world government, I think most humans are still far too much in thrall to their primitive impulses.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Highly unlikely that humanity will ever have a one world government, I think most humans are still far too much in thrall to their primitive impulses.

Agreed, the only driving force in most governments is economics & political gain. Exploration, is sadly not a factor. Besides, half the world is still blowing the cr@p out of the other half, despite what we've 'learned' from two world wars. We've a loooong way to go yet.

Manach

Unless there is an outside force that would effectively force co-operation between nations [the classic alien threat], in spite of the positive colleasing force of religious organisations, a world government is unlikely.

Myrddin

Manach wrote: »

Unless there is an outside force that would effectively force co-operation between nations [the classic alien threat], in spite of the positive colleasing force of religious organisations, a world government is unlikely.

Well it's possible, more likely trigger an arms race, heightened tensions, fingers on the button, cold war-esque stuff. Remember, it's humans we're talking about here :pac:

nyarlothothep

Well, lets start a world government here, we can all agree to agree can't we? I call president of the world.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Well, lets start a world government here, we can all agree to agree can't we? I call president of the world.

I call Vice.

ChocolateSauce

Is it desirable? Given the right conditions- a liberal, secular, multi-party, transparent, democratic government - yes, it is desirable.

The devil is in the detail though.

Although I have a somewhat simple way of getting around the location problem- don't have a capital of Earth. There is no single location, city or country on Earth which deserves to be called the capital. Rather, have maybe 6 locations (one each in N, S America, Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia) where the government could sit, and move the seat of government every time there is an election.

Johnny Storm

A world govt would be a necessity if we ever make First Contact (I mean when....)

nyarlothothep

Johnny Storm wrote: »

A world govt would be a necessity if we ever make First Contact (I mean when....)

I could well imagine the most powerful nations walking over smaller ones to do commercial deals with the aliens. The Americans and Chinese would compete to sell their resources, probably their citizens as slaves to the aliens in exchange for advanced weapons tech or a free ride across the galaxy. The aliens would either regard this as silly and primitive behaviour or would be totally indifferent to the ethical dilemmas presented therein and would happily accept human slaves to do the hard work of scrubbing ships etc.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

human slaves to do the hard work of scrubbing ships etc.

Beats the dole. Where do I sign up?

norrie rugger

EnterNow wrote: »

I call Vice.

Vice president or dept of vice?

Myrddin

norrie rugger wrote: »

Vice president or dept of vice?

Nylars copy of vice city, he won't be needing that as prez

PeterIanStaker

I call junior vice president

goose2005

EnterNow wrote: »

Agreed, the only driving force in most governments is economics & political gain. Exploration, is sadly not a factor. Besides, half the world is still blowing the cr@p out of the other half, despite what we've 'learned' from two world wars. We've a loooong way to go yet.

That's not really true, most powerful countries are either allies or mild economic rivals. Can you foresee an EU-China war?

Myrddin

goose2005 wrote: »

That's not really true, most powerful countries are either allies or mild economic rivals. Can you foresee an EU-China war?

Could you have seen a US-German war in 1938? Political alliances are very delicate, solidified with economic alliances. Ironically, MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) has probably prevented more wars than anything else.

hogflem

I recall captain Picard ,telling a visitor to the Enterprise something along the lines ,that money and material possessions were obsolete on earth,and that they were able to build a better world as a result,so,how do we go about making money and material possessions obsolete??????

Myrddin

hogflem wrote: »

I recall captain Picard ,telling a visitor to the Enterprise something along the lines ,that money and material possessions were obsolete on earth,and that they were able to build a better world as a result,so,how do we go about making money and material possessions obsolete??????

Of all things Star Trek, humans leaving their own greed behind is probably the most fictional element of the whole show.

hogflem

Don't forget,those humans left they're greed behind in exchange for,replicators,holo-suites and the like.If it were actually possible for such machines to exist,money would'nt be such a big issue,anything you could possibly need, would be there for the asking!!!

Myrddin

hogflem wrote: »

Don't forget,those humans left they're greed behind in exchange for,replicators,holo-suites and the like.If it were actually possible for such machines to exist,money would'nt be such a big issue,anything you could possibly need, would be there for the asking!!!

But who would build a holodeck without getting paid, and who would install a replicator for free? There's personal gain behind everything we do, I can't see that ever changing.

hogflem

Im finding it hard to disagree with you,but,human natures a funny thing,lets keep our fingers crossed!!

Myrddin

hogflem wrote: »

Im finding it hard to disagree with you,but,human natures a funny thing,lets keep our fingers crossed!!

By all means, & lets hope things move in the right direction...but to be honest I don't have a lot of faith in human nature these days. Maybe thats what happens when living in Dublin :rolleyes::p

Cookie_Monster

The Good That Men Do mentions that Australia is the last country to join up to the world government. Thought it was an odd one, that one of the more backward dictatorships like North Korea didn't hold out longer

Jaafa

hogflem wrote: »

I recall captain Picard ,telling a visitor to the Enterprise something along the lines ,that money and material possessions were obsolete on earth,and that they were able to build a better world as a result,so,how do we go about making money and material possessions obsolete??????

I believe that was because they had mastered the making of nano machine factory's which can make anything out of anything. Thus removing the need for money or material gain.

Denerick

Long way off, and far from inevitable. A united Earth government could only come about when technology becomes so advanced that it makes independent nation states become infeasible.

hogflem

Jaafa wrote: »

I believe that was because they had mastered the making of nano machine factory's which can make anything out of anything. Thus removing the need for money or material gain.

Sounds good to me,as long as nano technology is used for the greater good,otherwise you end up with thing's like the Borg!!:eek:

onion rings

i know its an old thread but i alwalys thought global communism...

i typed it into google and got this, tis interesting reading
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Trek-Marxism.html

constantg

But who would build a holodeck without getting paid, and who would install a replicator for free? There's personal gain behind everything we do, I can't see that ever changing.

People (myself included) often derive great satisfaction from doing something or building something for no reason related to personal gain or ambition. Surely we've all done some deed and stood back and said to ourselves 'a job well done is praise enough'

We need to get to that level. And more importantly we need to bring others. If i say that after a day's work, then i still need to eat, i need to sleep somewhere, i need to socialise and interact. So the person cooking or preparing food for me needs to feel that their effort is valued also. The person serving the drink needs to feel satisfied also.



Also I call Chief of Secret Police....:D

Kiith

It'll never happen as long as there's Religion in the world.

constantg wrote: »

Also I call Chief of Secret Police....:D

You mean Chief of Section 31 don't you :pac:

Myrddin

constantg wrote: »

People (myself included) often derive great satisfaction from doing something or building something for no reason related to personal gain or ambition. Surely we've all done some deed and stood back and said to ourselves 'a job well done is praise enough'

Yeah but quit your job & spend your whole day getting high on satisfaction from helping others. The after 8/9 hours come home, & try to pay all your bills with satisfaction. I'm sorry but our whole society revolves around personal gain/profit/economics. Nothing short of an asteroid will change that, & even then, I bet it'd still be "I'll trade you this half eaten mars bar for your piece of broken mirror".

That aspect of Star Trek that depicts humanity doing away with money, & Earth being a utopia for every man, woman & child....is the biggest piece of sci-fi in the whole show.

constantg

EnterNow wrote: »

Yeah but quit your job & spend your whole day getting high on satisfaction from helping others. The after 8/9 hours come home, & try to pay all your bills with satisfaction. I'm sorry but our whole society revolves around personal gain/profit/economics. Nothing short of an asteroid will change that, & even then, I bet it'd still be "I'll trade you this half eaten mars bar for your piece of broken mirror".

That aspect of Star Trek that depicts humanity doing away with money, & Earth being a utopia for every man, woman & child....is the biggest piece of sci-fi in the whole show.

Ah yes but you missed my point about the cook didnt you? The point extends to the service providers and so on and so forth.

constantg

Kiith wrote: »

It'll never happen as long as there's Religion in the world.


You mean Chief of Section 31 don't you :pac:

I'm sure I have no idea what you're talking about......*indicates you to Section 31 operatives and indicates you're with the Obsidian Order.....*

Myrddin

constantg wrote: »

Ah yes but you missed my point about the cook didnt you? The point extends to the service providers and so on and so forth.

I didn't really miss the point, as I said its the most fictional thing in the Star Trek universe. There isn't too many people who'd get a kick out of service drinks for free, not when they could be the ones doing the drinking.

constantg

EnterNow wrote: »

I didn't really miss the point, as I said its the most fictional thing in the Star Trek universe. There isn't too many people who'd get a kick out of service drinks for free, not when they could be the ones doing the drinking.

And what's stopping them enjoying a few?

constantg

Case in point mod; do you get paid to mod this page? I'm guessing no, so what is it that motivates you?

Suppose it was your one job? Suppose I worked for the electricity provider and you got it for free. Suppose another poster provided food?

I'm not saying it would be easy, or right, just saying that it is possible....

nyarlothothep

I think it could work if the sh1tty jobs were rotational, everyone would have to do them at some point. This may require a kind of society modelled on the form of decentralisation present in the internet, people would be more willing to agree to this contract if it were for the good of their community which they would have direct input into and which would be largely an autonomous entity among a multitude of interconnected autonomous entities. There would need to be an inbuilt defence mechanism with respect to viral authoritarianism of course, ie certain communities attempting to exploit or dominate others. In addition the introduction of robots would in theory solve the sh1tty jobs dilemma such that rotational work would be irrelevant. I'm still baffled by the fact that the Japanese haven't built a robot that can cook with natural ingredients, it would solve the pre made but unhealthy foods vs spending an hour to cook a healthy dinner but which will be consumed in 10 minutes problem.

Myrddin

constantg wrote: »

And what's stopping them enjoying a few?

Who's gonna serve them? More people who get a kick out of mopping up spilled drinks for free? Where is the drink going to come from? Distillers who get a kick out of brewing it for free, brought to the pub by truck drivers who get a kick out of driving for free, in trucks fueled by diesel given to them by oil giants who used to control the world, but then decided it made them feel better to give away fuel for free? Somehow, I doubt it.

constantg wrote: »

Case in point mod; do you get paid to mod this page? I'm guessing no, so what is it that motivates you?

Suppose it was your one job? Suppose I worked for the electricity provider and you got it for free. Suppose another poster provided food?

I'm not saying it would be easy, or right, just saying that it is possible....

I don't mind doing it as it doesn't interfere with my daily job. It doesn't cost me anything to do it, I don't mind doing it as I'm generally on boards anyway...but it doesn't pay my bills at the end of the month. It's not possible, not while planet Earth has a class based society.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I think it could work if the sh1tty jobs were rotational, everyone would have to do them at some point. This may require a kind of society modelled on the form of decentralisation present in the internet, people would be more willing to agree to this contract if it were for the good of their community which they would have direct input into and which would be largely an autonomous entity among a multitude of interconnected autonomous entities. There would need to be an inbuilt defence mechanism with respect to viral authoritarianism of course, ie certain communities attempting to exploit or dominate others. In addition the introduction of robots would in theory solve the sh1tty jobs dilemma such that rotational work would be irrelevant. I'm still baffled by the fact that the Japanese haven't built a robot that can cook with natural ingredients, it would solve the pre made but unhealthy foods vs spending an hour to cook a healthy dinner but which will be consumed in 10 minutes problem.

For some reason I couldn't see the likes of Brian Cowen donning a pair of Dynarod overalls & getting stuck into unblocking something at the back of Harneys house, simply because its his turn. Its all fantasy folks. The earth's clock ticks to the beat of multi-billionaire corporates, nothing I can envisage will change that any time soon.

nyarlothothep

EnterNow wrote: »

For some reason I couldn't see the likes of Brian Cowen donning a pair of Dynarod overalls & getting stuck into unblocking something at the back of Harneys house, simply because its his turn. Its all fantasy folks. The earth's clock ticks to the beat of multi-billionaire corporates, nothing I can envisage will change that any time soon.

They're the excrement of their society I guess, for example we wouldn't tolerate individuals like Genghiz Khan or Beria or [insert random murderous authoritarian here] because our society has evolved to become more civilised, though we're way off civilisation yet. You are right though, multi billionaire corporations aren't dissapearing anytime soon but their existence is finite in that they are functions of a particular era in history.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

They're the excrement of their society I guess, for example we wouldn't tolerate individuals like Genghiz Khan or Beria or [insert random murderous authoritarian here] because our society has evolved to become more civilised, though we're way off civilisation yet.

Indeed, many now homeless London residents would agree with that.

nylarothothep wrote:

You are right though, multi billionaire corporations aren't dissapearing anytime soon but their existence is finite in that they are functions of a particular era in history.

Well the resource might change, be it from oil to something else. But one man will always have what another man wants, and commerce is born. I don't see big corporations going away any time soon either, I in fact see them shaping the road the future takes unfortunately.

Also to bring the thread back to a Star Trek level, I think the alternate universe version of first contact is much more likely. A war ravaged Earth, filled with desperate, hungry people? I'd wager they'd kill & pillage the Vulcan & his craft tbh.

nyarlothothep

EnterNow wrote: »

Indeed, many now homeless London residents would agree with that.



Well the resource might change, be it from oil to something else. But one man will always have what another man wants, and commerce is born. I don't see big corporations going away any time soon either, I in fact see them shaping the road the future takes unfortunately.

Also to bring the thread back to a Star Trek level, I think the alternate universe version of first contact is much more likely. A war ravaged Earth, filled with desperate, hungry people? I'd wager they'd kill & pillage the Vulcan & his craft tbh.

.

If we last long enough as a species those pursuits may eventually shift to other ones. Farms could be equivalent to corporations but as technology improves we may not need farms any more, just as we didn't require the nomadic toolset when agriculture was invented. Not all people are interested in commerce or owning things which others have, instead they purchase things to serve their interests, granted there are a lot of people who aren't like this at all. I like to think of human evolution as a messy soup with different players influencing the future result. But at the same time I think a lot of change is directed from the top, so yeah corporations could be informing the future world of humanity and given their track record on the environment, social justice and so on, they leave a lot to be desired.

I don't know if things would really get that dystopic, I imagine there would be a lot of hysteria, inter governmental conflict and the usual human silliness followed by an acceptance of our alien overlords. It would just be the usual beige/grey business as usual set up from then on.

somuj

The only way that we are ever going to get a united earth government is if the governments step up and begin to control breeding. There should be certain criteria met before people are allowed reproduce.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

.

If we last long enough as a species those pursuits may eventually shift to other ones. Farms could be equivalent to corporations but as technology improves we may not need farms any more, just as we didn't require the nomadic toolset when agriculture was invented. Not all people are interested in commerce or owning things which others have, instead they purchase things to serve their interests, granted there are a lot of people who aren't like this at all. I like to think of human evolution as a messy soup with different players influencing the future result. But at the same time I think a lot of change is directed from the top, so yeah corporations could be informing the future world of humanity and given their track record on the environment, social justice and so on, they leave a lot to be desired.

I don't know if things would really get that dystopic, I imagine there would be a lot of hysteria, inter governmental conflict and the usual human silliness followed by an acceptance of our alien overlords. It would just be the usual beige/grey business as usual set up from then on.

Thats it really, and as the winds of profit change so do these guys. Always one step ahead of the game, always a new angle on profit. As long as its possible to be rich, you'll have class based society, & in a class based socity...you'll have the fat necked amoral banker at the top of the food chain, & the guys flipping burgers in chippers. No offense to any or either, but thats the way it is, & thats how its going to be for a very, very long time.

Your right though in that not everyone is so materialistic. There are those with vision, sadly though, the ratio of these to the above is so low it matters not.

somuj wrote: »

The only way that we are ever going to get a united earth government is if the governments step up and begin to control breeding. There should be certain criteria met before people are allowed reproduce.

There will never be a UEG, it would involve corrupt governments handing over soverignty & control of entire nations, to even more corrupt folks. I've said it before & shall again, the only things politicians for are money and/or conquest. The politician who actually does care on a moral/human level, either doesn't go very far before getting a taste for the high life, or doesn't go very far at all.

nyarlothothep

EnterNow wrote: »

Thats it really, and as the winds of profit change so do these guys. Always one step ahead of the game, always a new angle on profit. As long as its possible to be rich, you'll have class based society, & in a class based socity...you'll have the fat necked amoral banker at the top of the food chain, & the guys flipping burgers in chippers. No offense to any or either, but thats the way it is, & thats how its going to be for a very, very long time.

Your right though in that not everyone is so materialistic. There are those with vision, sadly though, the ratio of these to the above is so low it matters not.



There will never be a UEG, it would involve corrupt governments handing over soverignty & control of entire nations, to even more corrupt folks. I've said it before & shall again, the only things politicians for are money and/or conquest. The politician who actually does care on a moral/human level, either doesn't go very far before getting a taste for the high life, or doesn't go very far at all.

The guys at the top in th 19th century would be probably horrified by the all the freedoms we have now. Were they ahead of the game? I don't think corporations are these infallible all powerful institutions, they are based on a social contract.

Also I think the description of society would apply to many but not all societies. Its not the way it has to be if the culture were changed and the only way to do that is to get your voice heard. I bet in the middle ages the idea that there would be no more monarchies would seem absurd but yet here we are. If Star Trek teaches us anything it is to hope for change, so that change may come to pass, yay.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The guys at the top in th 19th century would be probably horrified by the all the freedoms we have now. Were they ahead of the game?

And the guys at the top today laugh at how little control was had in the 19th century, whats your point?

Monarchies have been replaced by other things mostly, but fundamentally, you have rich, middle class & poor just as it was back then. Names/titles may have changed, & our standard of living has obviously improved, but are we any closer to a Roddenberrry type society? Not a hope, if anything, we've gotten further from it. Ferenginar maybe.

nyarlothothep

EnterNow wrote: »

And the guys at the top today laugh at how little control was had in the 19th century, whats your point?

Monarchies have been replaced by other things mostly, but fundamentally, you have rich, middle class & poor just as it was back then. Names/titles may have changed, & our standard of living has obviously improved, but are we any closer to a Roddenberrry type society? Not a hope, if anything, we've gotten further from it. Ferenginar maybe.

I think we have more freedom to express our viewpoints, to control our own destinies, to protest at injustice, even to hold elites to greater account (yes I know this last one seems a bit ridiculous but I think relative to previous eras members of the elite are more open to being prosecuted) but I grant that its a pendulum which swings back and forth although in my opinion it has been swinging towards increased liberalisation and peace. For example I don't think governments in the West at least could get away with drafting entire populations into mindless wars and I would attribute these improvements to the fact that certain quarters of society have rejected irrational and flawed to their societies, have challenged hierarchy, and through their efforts have slowly chipped away at ingrained attitudes which lead to many forms of discrimination, prejudice and barbarity. Its a contested battlefield but simply to accept conditions as they are is defeatist.

I don't think its as simple as exchanging one set of rules for another. The actual relationship of power is different largely because of the efforts of those who sought to challenge authoritarian structures. I also think technology and an increase in living standards due to the more efficient harnessing of energy and resources may be attributable to this. Are you essentially arguing that power, domination and greed characterise human nature?

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

For example I don't think governments in the West at least could get away with drafting entire populations into mindless wars and I would attribute these improvements to the fact that certain quarters of society have rejected irrational and flawed to their societies, have challenged hierarchy, and through their efforts have slowly chipped away at ingrained attitudes which lead to many forms of discrimination, prejudice and barbarity. Its a contested battlefield but simply to accept conditions as they are is defeatist.

Well that's hard to verify one way or the other. Should the next Hitler ever arrive, & pose a threat to our very way of life, I don't think drafting is entirely something that we wouldn't see happen.

nyarlothothep wrote:

Are you essentially arguing that power, domination and greed characterise human nature?

I suppose I am really. Looking back on our whole civilisations recorded history, all it has ever been in a nutshell is one group killing another over religious belief or land mass conquest. What was going on since before medieval times is still happening today, albeit under a different guise. Sure there are uplifting examples of human character all through history too, but they are so heavily outweighed by mans greed its hard for them to shine through.

nyarlothothep

EnterNow wrote: »

Well that's hard to verify one way or the other. Should the next Hitler ever arrive, & pose a threat to our very way of life, I don't think drafting is entirely something that we wouldn't see happen.



I suppose I am really. Looking back on our whole civilisations recorded history, all it has ever been in a nutshell is one group killing another over religious belief or land mass conquest. What was going on since before medieval times is still happening today, albeit under a different guise. Sure there are uplifting examples of human character all through history too, but they are so heavily outweighed by mans greed its hard for them to shine through.

Yeah if the next Hitler or genocidal aliens appeared on the scene I guess the draft would be acceptable to many, it would be a matter of survival. But so many other wars which required the draft were completely silly and I don't think governments can get away with this now, eg Iraq war attracted demonstrations in Britain and a bipartisan split in the US, that's an improvement over the jingoism that typified many colonial adventures in the past.

I think human nature is undefinable in that it varies from person to person and even then its complicated by the fact that people will have varying ratios of positive or negative traits. When I look back at history I largely agree that its been typified by wars, hysteria, stupidity, irrationality, arrogance, greed, foolishness, insanity, eg the holocaust, prejudice, bigotry and so on. However the opposites of these traits can also be found. Maybe its confirmation bias. I think we're living in the best times yet for humanity overall if you compare it to previous periods in history although we have a lot of challenges, economic, political and environmental and we may lurch back into a new dark ages. Even then I think the achievements of the present could then be taken up in the future and built upon as with those of the ancient world in relation to the renaissance which was followed by the age of reason, the industrial revolution and the present day.

Myrddin

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I think we're living in the best times yet for humanity overall if you compare it to previous periods in history although we have a lot of challenges, economic, political and environmental and we may lurch back into a new dark ages. Even then I think the achievements of the present could then be taken up in the future and built upon as with those of the ancient world in relation to the renaissance which was followed by the age of reason, the industrial revolution and the present day.

There are many, in places such as Somalia who wouldn't agree. And in these places throughout the world, the reason is commonly warfare, & huge governmental debt which will never be paid off due to the colossal interest rates of which loans were granted. Conquest & economics, alive & well in 2011. No amount of charity or donations can help these places, & in fact many charities have spawned some truly rich individuals. I wouldn't even guess at how much money is owed to the US by African countries, & I can't even guess at the interest rates either.

You've half the planet in desperate poverty (India, Africa, Asia (parts of)), you've half the planet trying to kill the other half over a difference in religious belief, you've whole countries at war over who owns what land, you've countries invading other countries over natural resources, & god knows how many other examples. It may be the best time for humanity to date, but we've a lot of growing up to do. There's NASA about to become a passenger in space exploration because the funds arn't there to commit to scientific study. Yet they're pumping out Black Hawks, F18's, F22's & UAV's because apparently we can afford to go to war?

I actually think we've taken a few steps backwards over the last three or four decades.