• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

True Globalisation

NeoCaesar

Registered Member
I had a thought today (that's right, just a single one...), that things would be vastly different if Globalisation was fully realised as more than just the liberisation of economies.

If we became one world united we could set into place instantly the framework to stop poverty and great injustice. We are already seeing a world where state sovereigity may become less relevant (despite the USA's continued unilateral approach).

The only problem I can see is that the developing world are so far behind us that they would suffer without FDI (which they wouldn't get as everyone in the world would be paid the same so there'd be less demand for foreign labour). However, (open to debate) it is our fault they are so far behind us. Like we climbed onto a roof with a ladder, kicked the ladder away then said 'join us'.

I have heard some daft conspiracy theories that the UN is trying to establish a new world order but why is that so bad? I imagine one world united and it excites me. We could put aside all the daft Realist ideas of warring nations and work together to make humankind something amazing to be proud of.

Do you think we should pursue an intergovernmental order to unite the world or should sovereignity be protected at all costs?
 

Wade8813

Registered Member
I had a thought today (that's right, just a single one...), that things would be vastly different if Globalisation was fully realised as more than just the liberisation of economies.

If we became one world united we could set into place instantly the framework to stop poverty and great injustice. We are already seeing a world where state sovereigity may become less relevant (despite the USA's continued unilateral approach).
I don't see any framework to stop poverty or great injustice. We can reduce both, but not stop them.

I also don't see anything making state sovereignty less relevant (or any unilateral action by the US for that matter).

The only problem I can see is that the developing world are so far behind us that they would suffer without FDI (which they wouldn't get as everyone in the world would be paid the same so there'd be less demand for foreign labour). However, (open to debate) it is our fault they are so far behind us. Like we climbed onto a roof with a ladder, kicked the ladder away then said 'join us'.
Globalization =/= everyone being paid the same. Unless you just mean there'd be an international minimum wage or something. But even in America where we have a national minimum wage, different states have different minimum wages (not to mention all the people who earn more than minimum wage).

And sure, some people climbed onto the roof and kicked the ladder. Of course, some people at the bottom shoved the ladder out of the way themselves. And some just had bad luck. And some at the top try to lower a rope down, but that was never going to work...

I have heard some daft conspiracy theories that the UN is trying to establish a new world order but why is that so bad? I imagine one world united and it excites me. We could put aside all the daft Realist ideas of warring nations and work together to make humankind something amazing to be proud of.

Do you think we should pursue an intergovernmental order to unite the world or should sovereignity be protected at all costs?
I think governments are obligated to serve the best interests of their nation. IMO that involves working together with other nations as much as possible as long as they don't sacrifice their own nation's interests in the process.
 

NeoCaesar

Registered Member
I don't see any framework to stop poverty or great injustice. We can reduce both, but not stop them.
Everybody in the world would be given the same rights and sense of belonging. Some great injustices happen because there is nobody the perpretrator answers to. A global government with legal bodies and enforcement would ensure everybody had basic level pegging. Why should I be infinitely more priviliged than anyone else -'you can't do that to me -I'm British..!

I also don't see anything making state sovereignty less relevant (or any unilateral action by the US for that matter).
I believe many of NATOs actions have been in direct conflict with respecting a nation's sovereignity. If we believed in sovereignity we would leave the Lybians to it also.

America has always pursued unilateral goals -especially with regards to enviromental issues and ratifying the Rome statute (surely two of the biggest Global forums that deal with the issues of a global world). I'll admit Obama's hinted at a shift in attitude.

Globalization =/= everyone being paid the same. Unless you just mean there'd be an international minimum wage or something. But even in America where we have a national minimum wage, different states have different minimum wages (not to mention all the people who earn more than minimum wage).
That is just one aspect I imagine would benefit everyone on a level playing field. It may not work in practice and some issues may be more beneficial. Improved human rights has to be the main goal here.

I think governments are obligated to serve the best interests of their nation. IMO that involves working together with other nations as much as possible as long as they don't sacrifice their own nation's interests in the process.
But perhaps if we put self-serving Realist ideology to the side we could do something amazing. The EU is a good example although not without flaws. Many of the EUs directives have gone against the good of member states yet they have continued cooperation.

The problem is although there are many international organisations working for a better world but there is too much bureaucracy and pussy-footing around. We need to create a global power to which we all answer. This may be useful for when the dominant power in the globe begins its decline.
 

Wade8813

Registered Member
Everybody in the world would be given the same rights and sense of belonging. Some great injustices happen because there is nobody the perpretrator answers to. A global government with legal bodies and enforcement would ensure everybody had basic level pegging. Why should I be infinitely more priviliged than anyone else -'you can't do that to me -I'm British..!
Sure, some injustices would be reduced. But that's a far cry from them being stopped altogether.

I believe many of NATOs actions have been in direct conflict with respecting a nation's sovereignity. If we believed in sovereignity we would leave the Lybians to it also.
That's not the same as their sovereignty being more or less relevant - just ignored.

America has always pursued unilateral goals -especially with regards to enviromental issues and ratifying the Rome statute (surely two of the biggest Global forums that deal with the issues of a global world). I'll admit Obama's hinted at a shift in attitude.
Having unilateral goals is not the same as taking unilateral action.

That is just one aspect I imagine would benefit everyone on a level playing field. It may not work in practice and some issues may be more beneficial. Improved human rights has to be the main goal here.
What's one aspect? Global equal wages? Global minimum wage?

But perhaps if we put self-serving Realist ideology to the side we could do something amazing. The EU is a good example although not without flaws. Many of the EUs directives have gone against the good of member states yet they have continued cooperation.
(I'm not entirely sure what you mean by Realist ideology)

An elected official has to do what they believe will be best overall for their state. There can be obvious advantages to cooperation, but sometimes there are some pretty hefty disadvantages. And you can't always know what the advantages and disadvantages will be.

The problem is although there are many international organisations working for a better world but there is too much bureaucracy and pussy-footing around. We need to create a global power to which we all answer. This may be useful for when the dominant power in the globe begins its decline.
Good luck getting rid of bureaucracy. In fact, it seems to me that the more international an organization is, the more bureaucracy it's likely to have.
 
Top