Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 24, 2019, 08:17:40 am
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: Gustaf, afleitch, Hash, Both Sides)
  World decides to form a strong world government. Constitution?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: World decides to form a strong world government. Constitution?  (Read 411 times)
Blue3
Starwatcher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,413
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 05, 2018, 12:59:44 am »
« edited: July 05, 2018, 02:16:59 am by Blue3 »

The countries of the world, after some big event, decide to form a global government (and would extend to any future space colonies). It wouldn't be like the UN, it would be a strong government, truly a single country.

And let's just say the international power balance and internal politics of these countries heading into this constitutional convention are the same or very similar to the present... it's just that something happened to change most people's minds on this one subject.
(Ex: discovery of an advanced alien civilization in the Alpha Centauri star system next-door, even if it doesn't seem to pose a threat to us in the meantime, nor will it trade with us or give us any tech, we just know they exist and we can talk with them even if they don't won't to say much).

The task falls to you (and some 200-300 other delegates from all the various countries, demographics, organizations) to write a World Constitution.


It has the following requirements:


1. it must be at least somewhat democratic... democratic enough to be acceptable by most of the people (this is just a minimum, just using this as one of the guidelines for your ideas). There also must be some kind of Bill of Rights or Declaration of Human Rights included in the constitution.

2. it must keep the peace, establish justice, and prevent civil-wars/revolutions/coups/separatism/crime/anarchy/ethnic-violence/religious-fundamentalist-violence/ideological-violence/terrorism

3. while all countries really want a strong democratic world government to come out of this convention, it can't be too weird, or too radical, or too unfairly de-powering to the people of a country (especially a powerful country), because they'll still need to sign onto it.

4. it's meant to truly be a single country... immigration and tariffs and customs are no longer going to be a concept since there will be freedom of movement... there's going to be one set of laws (one national tax code, one healthcare system, one social security/retirement system, one minimum wage for the whole country/world, one set of national environmental standards, one set of national labor standards, one set of national consumer protection standards, etc.), there's going to be one set of national education curriculum standards (whether it's strict or loose), there's going to be just a few official languages for the entire globe (probably a max of 3-5) for all official government things from documents to ballots to street signs to be printed in... etc. Get the entire world onto the same level playing field. Lifting up the undeveloped areas is meant to be a temporary endeavor, it's thought we can get every area in the world as developed as, say, current suburban USA, within 50 years max if not sooner.



So, how would you design a constitution that meets these requirements and leads to a functioning single country that stays unified, stable, and at least somewhat democratic enough to be acceptable by the people?




Some questions to perhaps ponder before designing...

1. Would something like an Electoral College or Senate be required, to appease the people in the US/EU/etc. who are afraid that China+India+Indonesia would have too much sway if the country was just perfectly democratic with one-person=one-vote ? Or do you think that wouldn't be a concern after  the world has transitioned to this government?

2. While it will probably need sub-units for governance (governors, mayors, etc.), though that's not required... should those sub-units have rights (like states' rights in the USA under a federal system, especially before the Civil War), or should they just have the power that the national government decides to delegate to them (like the UK, under a unitary system?)

3. Would the people demand that they be able to elect the chief executive of the government directly (like a simple-majority-vote presidential system), or would they all be able to accept a more parliamentary system? Or would there be more than one chief executive (for example: a triumvirate... or an elected cabinet where each minister or department secretary has a specific unique function with no constitutional leader among them, and they just form an Executive Council for issues that cross multiple departments'/ministries' domains?).

4. What would the 3-5 official languages be? Would it become mandatory in the national education curriculum that everyone learn at least 1 of these languages in addition, or all 3 or all 4 or all 5? Which languages would you pick (Spanish, English, Arabic, Hindi, Portuguese, Indonesian, Italian, Dutch, French, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, German, Malay, Tagalog/Filipino, Bengali, Punjabi, Urdu, Farsi, Telugu, Tamil, Marathi, Turkish, Berber, Hausa, Yoruba, Swahili, Latin, Esperanto)? How strict would you make the national education system? Would you make the metric system the global system of weights and measurements, or have it dual?

5. What type of economic system would be written into the constitution? More libertarian, or more social-democratic, or more like Russian/Chinese-style capitalism, or just silent on the subject so the legislature has flexibility over time?

6. What would be the criteria for amending the constitution? Would it be high enough to prevent a single demographic or two from potentially controlling everything and becoming dominant to game the system? Would it be low enough for amendments to be possible if desperately needed?

7. Would your legislature be unicameral, bicameral, tricameral, quadcameral? And how are they different? Or is there just an elected constitutional monarch who legislates as well as executes? Is there a direct democracy, or referendum, component? Besides based on population or based on land, perhaps one or more houses of the legislature are based on DNA haplogroups/ancestry groups of about equal population (so you have the same rep. wherever you move)... Or based on major demographics such as a Senator for all disabled people and a senator for all jewish people and a senator for all serbian people and a senator for all atheists and a senator for all gay people and a senator for all black people, etc.

8. How would you prevent ethnic conflict and separatism and religious fundamentalists and ideological radicals from seizing control of an area or all government, but keeping the military subservient to prevent any military coups or the military as an unchecked power? Also, what would be the rules for the military, in a world where everyone is a citizen?

9. What does the judiciary look like? If there's a Supreme Court, what's its role, and how are its members chosen? What does a civil trial look like? What does a criminal trial look like? Are there juries and judges or something "better"? More like common law or civil law?

10. What's the legal status of parties, are they written into the constitution, or are they allowed but the rules are left to the legislature and the parties since they aren't explicitly mentioned or constitutionally required (like in the US). Do citizens in this country vote for the party, or for the individual? Also, what about campaign funding regulations?
Logged
dead0man
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 33,715
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2018, 05:47:53 am »

You can't do something like that all at once without using a LOT of force (ie, killing a whole mess of people).  There are two ways a "world govt" could happen.  A superpower forces it on the world through violence and threats of violence or it just evolves into it, slowly, over centuries probably.  Starting with just a few states getting together.  In a perfect world (for me at least), that would be the US and we would have started it 200 years ago...and we kind of did, but then we stopped.  How much better would it be for everyone involved if all of Mexico was folded into the US after the Mexican-American War?  Or Cuba after the Spanish-American War?  Or Canada if the War of 1812 had turned out better?  That one less so as Canada is doing pretty good.  How much better off would Cubans be today if they had been American citizens for a hundred and twenty years?  The Havana Sharks would be in the AL East.  The Havana Pirates would be in the NFC South....good times would be had by all!


There couldn't be a single President in this system I don't think.  Hell, the US in 2018 is probably too big for a single human to be in charge of everything.  You'd need a committee.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,413
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2018, 11:33:30 am »

You can't do something like that all at once without using a LOT of force (ie, killing a whole mess of people).  There are two ways a "world govt" could happen.  A superpower forces it on the world through violence and threats of violence or it just evolves into it, slowly, over centuries probably.  Starting with just a few states getting together.

Premise for the sake of this thread, whether it's unlikely or not:

And let's just say the international power balance and internal politics of these countries heading into this constitutional convention are the same or very similar to the present... it's just that something happened to change most people's minds on this one subject.
(Ex: discovery of an advanced alien civilization in the Alpha Centauri star system next-door, even if it doesn't seem to pose a threat to us in the meantime, nor will it trade with us or give us any tech, we just know they exist and we can talk with them even if they don't won't to say much).
Logged
🅰 🦀 @k 🎂
CrabCake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16,290
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2018, 03:12:42 pm »

It would be a gradual thing. Ideally it would start a UN Parliamentary Body that takes over control of the various international and unaccountable bodies like the WTO, IMF etc in an effort to wrest control from the global elite and give it over to the world's people. It would probably start as indirectly elected and become directly elected over time. There would be basic stuff at first, like a globally synchronised system of wealth and financial transaction taxes etc.
Logged
MB
MB298
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,569


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2018, 04:52:51 pm »

Obviously I don't want a world government, I think it would be a terrible idea. But, it is a very fun concept to think about, so if one was put into place,.....


1. I'd divide the world into regions, here's a concept I came up with:
Img


U.S./Canada, Central America/Caribbean, South America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe/Central Asia (essentially the former communist bloc), East Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Oceania, Middle East, North Africa, West Africa, and Central/Southern/East Africa. This would serve as the main layout for the federation.

2. The former countries would still possess most of their rights, including the right to decide their own form of government (so long as it isn't totalitarian) and select their own chief executives, legislatures, etc.

3. There would be a collective presidency, one member would be elected from each of the above regions and serve a nonrenewable six-and-a-half-year term, the chairmanship would rotate every six months but serve as only honorary.

4. There wouldn't be any official language, business can be conducted in any language.

5. The countries would largely be able to choose their own economic systems and welfare systems, etc. but a guarantee of broad minimum living standards would be there.

6. The constitution could be amended only by a 10/13 vote of members of the presidency as well as a 2/3 vote of the legislature.

7. There would be a senate/council ten members per region, and a general assembly based off of population but with a guarantee that each country has at least one MP.

9. A supreme court made up of 13 members, one from each region; each judge would serve a 10-year term and would be appointed by that region's member of the presidency and confirmed by the legislators from that region.

10. Parties/factions are allowed in the legislature but not written into the constitution.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC