Two Views Of World Government

In my research on the topic of world government, I have found two very different narratives about it. 

  

Here is the most popular narrative:

  

Government is a restraining force in people’s lives.  Governments raise taxes and tell people what they can and cannot do. The less government we have, the better.

  

The last thing we need now is another level of government, over the entire world. Such a government could become a dictatorship, and there would be no other force in the world strong enough to stop it. It would control every aspect of people’s lives.

  

Since World War II, there has actually been a secret plan to create a world government, called a “new world order”.  This new world order would allow a small group of people to control the entire planet.  The United States, as we know it, would cease to exist.  Some Christians believe that the   “President” of such a new world order will be a godless Anti-Christ. 

  

Otherwise intelligent people have been duped into supporting such a plan.  You cannot believe anything these people say, including what you are about to read in the next several paragraphs.

  

Here is the World Federalist narrative:

  

In 1787, thirteen colonies in North America joined together to form the United States.  In doing so, they did not give up their identity.  Rather, they became states within a larger union.

  

The people within the colonies did not surrender their freedom.  Rather, they gained more freedoms, with the passage of the Bill of Rights.

  

Within the borders of the United States, with the single exception of the civil war, there has been peace.  Between the United States and other countries, there have been wars, and lots of them.

Within the United States, there is a framework of laws and peaceful means for resolving disputes.  Between the United States and other nations, no such framework exists. That is why there have been so many wars. 

  

The nations of the world today are in a situation similar to that of the thirteen colonies back in the eighteenth century. In order to solve the problems facing them, these nations need to create “a more perfect union”, complete with a Bill of Rights for all people. Until they do so, there will be continued wars, terrorism, and genocide.  Multinational corporations will operate freely, with no worldwide labor laws or other regulations to restrain them.  The nations of the world will never agree on the hard choices needed to save the environment. 

    

Such a world federal government need not be a dictatorship any more than the United States is a dictatorship. 

      

These are the two narratives. Which one you believe is up to you.  Personally, I believe there are warnings in the first narrative which should be taken into account.  No one wants a world like the one described in that narrative.  Fear of that outcome should not paralyze the world into inaction, however.  Rather, it should inspire the creation of checks and balances which would prevent such a worst-case scenario from ever occurring.   

My questions for opponents of world federation are these:  what are your solutions to global problems?  Do you think nations can solve them?  Or do you simply deny that they exist?