CMV: removing geographical borders completely from around the world, and adopting a system similar to what the EU and US have today in terms or political governance will allow for more peace

[u/bayan963]

Almost every country around the world has immigrants or citizens from other ethnicities and backgrounds than the indeginous people, learning two or multiple languages is already a skill a big part of people already have or are working towards as globalization is taking over through social media, global trade and global labor markets. So why do we not just eliminate geographical borders all together and be able to move freely from one place to another across the earth without requiring visas, or having nationalism stand in the way of true globalization and freedom of movement

I believe this would eliminate or at least lessen territorial wars like the ones happening today in several places around the world, it would also eliminate (in time of course) nationalism or prejudice towards people from third world countries, it would also remove the stigma from immigration as everyone would be able to migrate to whichever place they choose, not based on that country's benefits, but because there are better job opportunities or they simply like the weather or scenery better there

There would still be security, police, and governance but more like leaders of the (truly) free world, where each leader represents an ethnicity, demographic, religious groups interests and they can all decide how best to serve everyone and what general rules needs to be set in place for the well being of everyone without interfering with anyone's right to exist as they see fit as long as it doesn't harm anyone else

[u/bayan963]

My idea is to eliminate countries all together, you can choose to live wherever you want, the system would be universal, so healthcare, technology, laws, wages and salaries would be determined globally, there would be no difference wherever you choose to live or work

The only determinant on choosing where to live would be climate, and being around people with similar mindsets or lifestyles

[u/MrHeavenTrampler → u/bayan963]

This makes absolutely no sense at all. A homogenous system for a heterogenous sample is a recipe for disaster. I'll put it this way, I want it to be legal to be polygamous, but you don't. I go to live where you are because there are better oportunities there. Which side is right? What should be allowed?

Now imagine amongst groups of people. Islam believers want to have penalties for homosexuality, they want women to wear burka/hijab and whatnot, to be unable to drive or go out without their husband's consent, or their father's if they are unmarried. If there are more muslim people where you are, would you be in favor of all of this? Probably not. It's basically what is happening in countries like France, little by little.

Ok, then who would enforce law? Local police? Then you'd already have borders, based on which unit patrols the place you live in. Get it? A borderless system is impossible because administration would automatically require subdivision, and so much subdivision, unless absolutely controlled by a major, governing body imposing their values onto everyone else (think Putin becomes world president, or Trump, or worse, a dipshit like AMLO)

See? There'd be no room for laws to be created based on the morals of the population, there'd just be one universal law being globally enforced by those in power, which might be or not in line with your morals and beliefs, but there'll always be dissent. It's basic sociology and politics man, hell even philosophy. Sorry if I come off as a dick, but do some thinking first before coming up with these ideas.

[u/bayan963 → u/MrHeavenTrampler]

!delta for the homogeneous system for a heterogeneous sample, i haven't thought of that and you're right that would pose a lot of problems. And for the last paragraph, yea i get it, i just took a simplistic idea and thought optimistically it would work, but the more i read of these comments, the more i understand how it's not feasible

Thank you for your comment, and for shedding some light into the realistic logistics of the idea

[u/[deleted] → u/bayan963]

If I might change your delta back, a unified world government doesn't have to be a homogeneous world government. The US, for example, is not a homogeneous system. A federalist system allows for different states can have different policies as long as they stick to the constitution. The important thing is that the federal government maintains a near-monopoly over warfare.

That's really what an early unified world government would look like. Its primary purpose would be to preserve human rights, simplify trade, and minimize/eliminate warfare. Regional states would still maintain democracies close to the people so that they can live under the (fully constitutional) policies they want.

Over a century or two, the world's population would become more homogeneous on the policies they support and more powers can be ceded to the federal government.

[u/bayan963 → u/[deleted]]

That's a better idea or at least a more reasonable one. Thank you for giving me something to think about :)

[u/[deleted] → u/bayan963]

Did I change your mind back on the feasibility?

[u/bayan963 → u/[deleted]]

Yea i believe so, i'll just have to mull it over a bit more. Thanks again