Oi reckon there's buckley's chance of a one world government....just watch the break-up and disbandment when the sovereign debt problem in Europe finally reaches its peak.

The GFC didn't go away, it just got papered over. The closest we've come to a one world arrangement is the globalised neo-liberal economic model, and that is fast running out of puff.

A recent example of the tribal nature of humans was the break-up of Yugoslavia into its constituent ethnic tribes.

Nope, not gonna happen.

As usual, I agree with Pericles and Poirot. An utterly inane idea. What makes anyone think this is somehow a left-wing notion ?

Long live diversity, conflict, dispute, difference of opinion and bloody-mindedness.

Well that's OK Loudmouth, just as long as you recognise that it's that other lot, who are being bloody-minded.

Well then, and it quite possible, I AM A NUT.
All those reasons, our failure to agree on anything,is a reason others use to say it is needed.
What would the United Nations look like if the power of veto did not exist.
What was its true purpose when introduced.
It will not be the left,not Brown, but power.
And AFTER a war /financial crash or such.
And delivered as a promise.
I too loudmouth want nothing of it.
Lexi your possible future one is a dream,what a good one!
And unachievable.
If it was democratic China and India would ALWAYS HAVE THE NUMBERS
If after war the victors would have to fight everyday dissidents, like me.
The plans? nice and good folk truly, think it would save humanity.
One GOD, probably newly invented.
One bank one education one language in time.
Yes weird stuff but many want it.
How else they say,do we confront poverty/health education/food supplies name it some think one world will fix it.

Anthonyve:>> Watching how the European Union is struggling with twenty some members, watching any group trying to run the entire world would be downright hilarious.<<

They already run and own it and they have watered down nationalism to a great extent by social engineering, divide and conquer, have you seen the Muslim birth rate in Europe, and the projections. No France, no Germany, no England, multicultural melds with positive government discrimination on the new citizens.

You depend on nationalism as brake on OWG, I would counter that religion and one in particular is the biggest obstacle to servitude of the masses, Islam, they have as good as killed off Christianity in the first world, nationalism what a joke.

But Antonyve I will tell you a better joke.
If I said to an Aussie in the street in 1980 that in thirty years Australia would have:
only ten percent of the manufacturing capacity of today,
that the vast majority of food is imported,
that we no longer had a peoples bank,
that national household savings would be the lowest against GDP in the last fifty years,
that our national and personal debt had never been higher,
that our utilities would be owned fully or in part by foreign companies,
that there was no market place protection of local manufactured goods against cheap imports,
that a crap house in a capital city costs half a million dollars,

he would have said..."tell them there dreamin"

Anthony all this was engineered, if you do not see it, I am sorry for you.

Peter: <Squeers
If only you could tell everyone else in the world what to do and have, *then* what a Paradise it would be, eh?>
I'm just offering my opinion on the human problem, but I don't believe in paradise. Money is power, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Despite international accords, governments remain national and idiosyncratic, and there will never be one government to administer the world's culturally heterogenous masses--at least I hope not. Democratic governments are local, disputatious and even occasionally sincere in their administrative role-play--just as if they really had sovereign free will and self-determination beyond tokenism or domestic politics--such as banning visits of nuclear warships or allowing gay marriage. Just because countries have peculiar governments and institutions locally, it doesn't follow that they're independent or free to act even internally in any qualitative or radical way; that is independently of the economic mechanisms that do hold sway globally and govern how lives are lived. The popular idea of world "government" is naive, yet governed we are, effectively, by global economic forces and protocols, and these are presided over by a powerful cohort, no doubt including members of powerful governments. "Government" is messy, mundane and political; corporate governance is removed from that, it's the true "upper house". Our democracies are degenerate; merely a way to control the masses that's superior to oppression, rather than real democratic values "realised" by nations and institutionalised. We have semblances of democracies. A state based on the oppression of the majority is ultimately untenable and democratic capitalism creates the illusion of freedom. Our proto-world government holds effective control, but it's still geo-politically factional.
I would be in favour of effective world government if the economics was predicated on democracy, but it's democracy that's predicated on economics, and it always shall be so long as individuals can obtain massive wealth and power.