My theory, now I'm not sure if anyone else has ever thought of it before, but I came to it by my own conclusions and I would like some feedback on this theory.
"Diversity needs to be replaced by unification - order out of chaos if you will."
I came to this conclusion by thinking about where most conflicts come from - which is opposing beliefs/opinions/goals. How do people formulate these differing beliefs? Through knowledge acquisition throughout their lifetimes. I admit I do feel a bit of cognitive dissonance at my own conclusion, as my moral intuition tells me diversity is a wonderful thing.
However, I thought of the following scenario, which solidified my belief:
"If there were two beings of omniscient nature, what would they fight over?" Think deeply about this scenario!
They could fight over anything they wish to, because they know of everything that there is to fight about. They would know the consequences of their decisions, why they have made the decision in the first place, etc. It comes down to their wants, needs, and personalities.
Needs will be sourced from nature.
Wants and personality will be sourced from both nature and nurture.
Assuming two "blank" personalities, their decisions would be based solely on nature. Otherwise, results may vary.
With this in mind, I believe a One World Government is the best solution for the human race. And we have already taken the first steps toward unification, just look back on history, never before in all of humanities existence have we been so interconnected. The internet, vehicular transportation, phone lines - all sharing knowledge.
Problems I thought up, two main ones come to mind:
BIOLOGICAL FACTORS: this harks back to the nature vs nurture argument. I'm of the opinion that nurture accounts for the majority of our actions, with nature being the minority. That said, biological factors will continue to feed diversity; and opinions and predispositions may stem from there.
ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT: corruption is a big issue, I have no idea how this one world government would work - but if everyone starts getting taught the exact same thing at school - are they being taught the "correct" thing?
Too many factors to consider, too many variables. Outcomes are endless, infinite.
May succeed: if one-world government was established, assuming global agreement, assuming all peoples and persons satisfied, assuming no conflict.
Assuming in each nation, in each province, in each area, in each community, in each family: the children are satisfied in needs. Assumption level, family: assuming family is of satisfactory income, based on personalities and histories of parents, assuming family is satisfied from assumption no Chaos variables e.g. life-taking accidents, assuming no psychological-nature-nurture issues, assuming complexities of world economy managed under OWG, assuming economic management competence from OWG, assuming no natural disasters across Earth, assuming an infinite amount of resources for satisfaction of citizens, assuming all are citizens, assuming.
Assuming all citizens to treat each other fairly, assuming both nature and nurture do not present unique scenarios for a slippery-slope of certain people leading to Chaos variables, e.g. Hitler, Chairman Mao, etc. Assuming Earthspace is filled to the population max, assuming no conflict as a result, assuming space exploration, expansion, and sovereignty, assuming no pirates or black market, assuming...
Too many factors, variables. Impossible to determine.
Singular teaching? There would be no way to tell what is incorrect without stimuli on the part of what is incorrect. If something was incorrect and was recognized, a correction would be made in the education system to ensure it does not crop up again. Too many variables; assuming students' lives are uniform, assuming psychological and natural equivalence, assuming Chaos structures permit no rogue neurochemicals, assuming...
IMO, there are too many variables and Chaos factors for an OWG to exist. That is, assuming this OWG and its citizens are completely united. Thanks to finite resources, complex weather systems, complications in the maximum capacity of Earth, tectonic systems, and OWG would be very difficult to establish. I suppose we're a bit closer thanks to the UN, but there are still countries that are not a part of it. I highly doubt an OWG could exist with countries like North Korea still around, and simply getting rid of North Korea would not be favourable. That would be a mass genocide for the purpose of the human race, but that would devalue the individual. OWGs themselves sound to me like they would devalue the individual.
It looks good on paper. "We must sacrifice [x] for the good of the people."
It does not look good when you are [x]. Adjusting for variables: assuming universal socialist people, OWG would become either an evil executioner or a failure that must be usurped for a new OWG to prevent more human sacrifices. Assuming universal happy socialist people, forgives OWG, OWG may or may not permit trends to grow and continue, either way branching off into more decision structures.
An OWG might exist like the UN does, being an international "fair play" organization, but an actual government to rule over the world and provide competent leadership? I do not think it would be successful. Earth itself is diverse with different systems. "Eco-nations," bodies of government underneath the OWG would have to exist based on ecosystems, to deal with local problems to prevent bloating and stagnation of single OWG. Subset governments for subset problems based on Earth, assuming democratic OWG, too many different view points, Chaos factors, will eventually produce dissidence, let alone corruption. Assuming politicians are good and moral, pure, uncorrupted, which assumes good lives, assuming... too many factors, too many variables. Assuming autocratic OWG?
You're going to get a lot more dissidence by nature of autocratic OWG. So much, that I theorize would essentially dissolve OWG into a relatively weak UN-esque organization.
. Personally, unification is both appealing and unappealing to me. My subconsciousness tells me I long for unification and acceptance, my upper functions calls for fighting to the death to preserve my position of self-pity and misanthropy. I'm a living example of why an OWG is so unlikely. But, yea, it's not like it's impossible. We do have the UN. Maybe we could get something better. Maybe. Maybe. Too many factors, too many variables...
What you present to me is a "safest path." IMO, OWG would not be successful if it were too powerful. However, if diminished, OWG would be too weak. I find OWG flawed by basis (of single unification).