3 ms·

I'm going to take issue with that taxation and states being the root of evil. They are an inevitable result of the way that we humans are. If anything is evil,

by ufmace 12y ago

I'm going to take issue with that taxation and states being the root of evil. They are an inevitable result of the way that we humans are. If anything is evil, it's human nature itself. There are always going to be people who want to form organizations, leadership cabals, and have control over things. Even areas already under the control of a strong Government still have corporations, criminal gangs, and various types of civil organizations, all vying for a little bit of that control pie. Essentially, there will always be some sort of government. It can be a single one that's powerful enough to be unquestionably dominant over anything it chooses to touch, or it can be dozens of little ones, all vying for control over various things in various places. That essentially looks like Somalia or Syria or Libya - total chaos, with constant risk of offending one warlord or another or some gang of bandits, and none of them will make the slightest pretense of listening to you. Avoiding that requires having one government with enough power to squash anybody like that. The best we can get is to have one dominant government, set up in such a way that it has some degree of obligation to listen to the population.

ekianjo 12y ago
> The best we can get is to have one dominant government You think that would resolve everything hey ? Don't you think one dominant government would actually have no incentive to listen to the population and could impose its right by might alone ?
- jahewson 12y ago
  Not really. Look at China, they have a hugely powerful government, yet even they find it easier to engage in popularism than domination. It's much easier to govern a country which supports you: logically any sustainable government should be interested in maintaining enough popularity that their position will not be undermined: but no more than that. European history is an excellent case study in the fall of dominant rulers who failed to satisfy their subjects.
  - zenocon 12y ago
    Wow, if you're looking at the Chinese government as a model for governance... Uniting all world governments into a single state scares the hell out of me, and I think it could very well be the worst idea, but suggesting China as a pattern is the icing on the cake, quite frankly.
- saraid216 12y ago
  It honestly depends on how it's set up. If it's American-style, where "the population" amounts to a jabbering know-it-all teenager with no real control over anything, then it won't work, no.
- ufmace 12y ago
  I'm not sure what you think you're saying here. You might have noticed that in something like 90% of the countries on the planet, that country's government is dominant over the entire country? Dominant only means that nobody is capable of challenging them currently for the title of being in control of the country, not that they have total control over everything that happens there.
  - ekianjo 12y ago
    Yeah, but you always have the possibility to flee your country (legally or illegally) and go in a "better place" (how much better that is depends on where you come from) - but once you have a single government controlling every place on Earth, that possibility is removed.
chr1 12y ago
Sometime in the future there will be just one government for whole earth, and all the people will have equal vote in it. But until that having just one powerful government is very bad. It might have to listen to its own population, but it will completely disregard people of other countries who do not have a vote.
- ufmace 12y ago
  I hope and believe that there will never be a government for the whole planet until such time as there is some entity off of the planet that we need to negotiate with as a united planet. One powerful government per country might not be perfect, but so far, it seems to be better than anything anyone else has some up with. The alternative is not some imaginary perfect government, but a lot of little competing governments/militias that probably pay even less attention to what anybody not a member of them wants.
  - chr1 12y ago
    I think one government, or rather something like eu, but for whole planet, will be useful, and it will be possible when live standards for people in different countries becomes the same, and old feuds are forgotten. However that's not something to happen in near future and i do hope that mars will be colonized and become off of the planet entity long before that:) The problem with one powerful government per country is that different countries still have different powers and they like to meddle with weak ones, like US and Russia did in this case.

by ufmace 12y ago

ekianjo 12y ago

> The best we can get is to have one dominant government You think that would resolve everything hey ? Don't you think one dominant government would actually have no incentive to listen to the population and could impose its right by might alone ?

jahewson 12y ago
Not really. Look at China, they have a hugely powerful government, yet even they find it easier to engage in popularism than domination. It's much easier to govern a country which supports you: logically any sustainable government should be interested in maintaining enough popularity that their position will not be undermined: but no more than that. European history is an excellent case study in the fall of dominant rulers who failed to satisfy their subjects.
- zenocon 12y ago
  Wow, if you're looking at the Chinese government as a model for governance... Uniting all world governments into a single state scares the hell out of me, and I think it could very well be the worst idea, but suggesting China as a pattern is the icing on the cake, quite frankly.
saraid216 12y ago
It honestly depends on how it's set up. If it's American-style, where "the population" amounts to a jabbering know-it-all teenager with no real control over anything, then it won't work, no.
ufmace 12y ago
I'm not sure what you think you're saying here. You might have noticed that in something like 90% of the countries on the planet, that country's government is dominant over the entire country? Dominant only means that nobody is capable of challenging them currently for the title of being in control of the country, not that they have total control over everything that happens there.
- ekianjo 12y ago
  Yeah, but you always have the possibility to flee your country (legally or illegally) and go in a "better place" (how much better that is depends on where you come from) - but once you have a single government controlling every place on Earth, that possibility is removed.

chr1 12y ago

Sometime in the future there will be just one government for whole earth, and all the people will have equal vote in it. But until that having just one powerful government is very bad. It might have to listen to its own population, but it will completely disregard people of other countries who do not have a vote.

ufmace 12y ago
I hope and believe that there will never be a government for the whole planet until such time as there is some entity off of the planet that we need to negotiate with as a united planet. One powerful government per country might not be perfect, but so far, it seems to be better than anything anyone else has some up with. The alternative is not some imaginary perfect government, but a lot of little competing governments/militias that probably pay even less attention to what anybody not a member of them wants.
- chr1 12y ago
  I think one government, or rather something like eu, but for whole planet, will be useful, and it will be possible when live standards for people in different countries becomes the same, and old feuds are forgotten. However that's not something to happen in near future and i do hope that mars will be colonized and become off of the planet entity long before that:) The problem with one powerful government per country is that different countries still have different powers and they like to meddle with weak ones, like US and Russia did in this case.