Discussion Question regarding a one world government

[Lord_hierophantūs]

What say the lot of you regarding empires or men/countries that attempted to conquer the world? One story that always fills me with a sense of joy is the story of Babylon and how every man spoke one language and was of one culture, whether it is historically accurate or not, no one could deny that such an ideal imagination was thought possible, Rome, France, Britain, the Mongols, Imperial Japan, and all the nations of this planet in some way even the priest class wanted to dominate the world. What do you guys think? What would a world government look like? Or even to say do you support a one world government?

A man (though I do not know his name) once said " I would not mind a world government so long as it has our constitution" he was referencing the united states constitution.

 

[Deleted member 934]

 

[Riddler]

It's a shit idea because poor leadership would screw the entire world over but also probably impractical. Too difficult to manage so you end up with neo feudalism

 

[Lord_hierophantūs]

It's a shit idea because poor leadership would screw the entire world over but also probably impractical. Too difficult to manage so you end up with neo feudalism

Specifically leadership? Then management, anything in particular as to why leadership would be a problem and management difficult?

 

[Riddler]

Specifically leadership? Then management, anything in particular as to why leadership would be a problem and management difficult?

Leadership and management of somewhere like the US or the EU is already a mess. Try the whole world and it would require miracles of statecraft hitherto unseen

 

[Lord_hierophantūs]

One aspect I forgot to mention is philosophy, the reason why the world should unite under one banner. The thought of it could go as follows:

From the beginning man formed tribes and groups, it is common to see groups which before were not close in any way unite, in German not all Germans are Germans, but where from different city states, such as Bavaria. In Rome, she was not united but fractured into different tribes the Roman simply united all of them under one name. America was thirteen different colonies, different sects of Christianity, and yet when united under a central government they came together. In ancient Japan's Sengoku period all Daimios warred against one another, and yet to have one clan rule over others to become Shogun; up until the Shogun was replaced by the Emperor and had thus unified Japan, but what we always see is unification of many tribes into one identity, a standard of language and communication. Hence, all society moves towards unification, is not a one world government inevitable?

 

[Lord_hierophantūs]

Leadership and management of somewhere like the US or the EU is already a mess. Try the whole world and it would require miracles of statecraft hitherto unseen

Now here is the question:

If it is possible to manage one child is it therefore not possible to manage another?

If it is possible to breed multiple cattle and take care of them is it not possible to take care of more?

If I can manage one person is it not possible to manage another?

If government has managed persons well is it not possible for them to do it at a larger scale?

 

[Riddler]

Now here is the question:

If it is possible to manage one child is it therefore not possible to manage another?

If it is possible to breed multiple cattle and take care of them is it not possible to take care of more?

If I can manage one person is it not possible to manage another?

If government has managed persons well is it not possible for them to do it at a larger scale?

It sounds like sound logic on paper but no, this is a fallacy

Closest example i can give is the Square-Cube Law coined by Gallileo. When you increase an object in size volume area grows exponentially faster than surface area in size

Engineers have to take this into account. Larger vehincles tend to perform poorly. This is why humans are unlikely to evolve into giants with portportional strength. Larger animals are more sluggish. There's no version of a nimble ant the size of a rhino in nature because the bone mass required to support it grows exponentially etc

I'd argue the same thing applies to a one world government. Things don't just scale up like that

 

[Lord_hierophantūs]

It sounds like sound logic on paper but no, this is a fallacy

Closest example i can give is the Square-Cube Law coined by Gallileo. When you increase an object in size volume area grows exponentially faster than surface area in size

Engineers have to take this into account. Larger vehincles tend to perform poorly. This is why humans are unlikely to evolve into giants with portportional strength. Larger animals are more sluggish. There's no version of a nimble ant the size of a rhino in nature because the bone mass required to support it grows exponentially etc

I'd argue the same thing applies to a one world government. Things don't just scale up like that

Could you provide more examples of this principle which you have mentioned, I don't understand entirely what you mean.

 

[Riddler]

Could you provide more examples of this principle which you have mentioned, I don't understand entirely what you mean.

As a kid, did you ever imagine giant insects and wondered if we could have giant insects?

It wouldn't work because as the surface area of an object increases, the volume required to support said object increases much faster. A giant insect would require way more bone mass relatively speaking

If you or I could build a small mock building. That doesn't mean making a life-size skyscraper is just taking the same plans and applying it to a a larger building because the volume required to support a building with larger surface area is exponentially greater. That's why architects and engineers are paid so handsomely

In short, scaling up doesn't work in physics

So I'm saying. Just because we can manage a city doesn't mean we can manage a city scaled up to the planet

 

[Lord_hierophantūs]

As a kid, did you ever imagine giant insects and wondered if we could have giant insects?

It wouldn't work because as the surface area of an object increases, the volume required to support said object increases much faster. A giant insect would require way more bone mass relatively speaking

If you or I could build a small mock building. That doesn't mean making a life-size skyscraper is just taking the same plans and applying it to a a larger building because the volume required to support a building with larger surface area is exponentially greater. That's why architects and engineers are paid so handsomely

In short, scaling up doesn't work in physics

So I'm saying. Just because we can manage a city doesn't mean we can manage a city scaled up to the planet

Expect a reply, but wait for a response, I need to think on what you wrote.