We see a rapid Americanization in the Middle East, Africa, South America, and Asia. But it's usual not total. Brazillians listen to our music and brazillian hits on the same playlist. Iranians watch opera and eat mcdonald's, but won't wear our clad bikinis or become secular. I think eventually we'll have one uniform, mainstream, culture sold by corporations with some regional variations but an overall homogenous culture.
What I'm saying is right now in the US you have the most sophisticated democratic republic developed in 2000 years of trying, but it's rendered utterly incompetent by the foibles of man, pettiness, corruption, greed, laziness, religion (my judgement), the evolutionary imperatives of ego/reproduction/selfishness. The story last night was that we couldn't even spend $500 milion to insulate homes to save energy and create jobs because we are just so incompetent. We will get to a worldwide universal standard of ethics, maybe 50 years (I'm a big Kurzweil fan). But we would have to set up an objective system, take the individuals out of it, to get a system that works at scale, much less a world wide scale. I for one, welcome Skynet to run things, audit everything. When everything is transparent you can't cheat the system. But, the parameters for Skynet will be set by the will of the people, collectively.
No, you could stop the Karma. When mothers figure out that every birth ends in death and choose not to procreate, problem's solved. The universe goes on but without human value judgments. And if no one perceives the difference it doesn't matter anyway.
No, for the same reason the suburbs exist. It's easier to extract, retreat and rebuild than to contain, suppress and stratify.
My organelles may be a part of my complex body but my brain doesn't know what they are doing. If you had a 'World' government you might actually have a lot of individual freedom. It wouldn't care what you worship, who you marry, etc etc because it couldn't. It would have every thing it could do to balance trade, settle disputes, distribute food, and run the Soylent Green ethical suicide centers. There would be more freedom in the greater complexity of the organized super-system. (and I would say greater entropy or, less energy potential i.e. more stability)
The world is moving in the opposite direction in recent years. e.g. Yugoslavia with 1/3 of land area as Texas is now, what, 6-7 countries? South Sudan, anyone?
I think as long as humans even have preference or bias existing in them of any kind, it will lead to differentiation and delineation of some sort. It doesnt have to result in war and fighting, but it might be enough to change policies and constitutions. Some group is going to want to do things their own certain way. Like nudists and non-nudists. It can mean they just group together at a campsite every so often. It can mean a whole territorial boundary where the nudists can go kick it without restriction. I used to be bullish on the future, not so much anymore. Perhaps if the flying cars future would have come about 15 years ago as projected, perhaps now I'd be ready for my androidal makeover. But I'm really not for technological sanitation of the species. Kurzweil can suck it, hows that for eloquence and "humility". I don't think a One World Gov would be as bad as they make it out to be though.
I don't think there will ever be one world government, but I hope someday the world could adopt a universal bill of rights.
Yes but it's a long way off, thousands of years maybe. Unless concrete existence of alien life comes out, there won't be any reason for the human race to be united without something to be united against. Way to many economic and social issues right now to even fathom the idea. Although the internet has the world more united than it has ever been, and the UN is a start.
That's what I think too. These little countries don't have the potential to wage million death wars, though they can wage lots of border conflicts. Which is the more stable state? (it's always complexity aka chaos) How about the 99% vs. the 1%, that's a pretty universally uniting cause.
Totally...Governments aren't scalable. We're operating on theories/ideologies/processes created by people in eras where leaders had to deal with 100 or so other influential people who lorded over at most, thousands of people (maybe give take 3 or 4 iterations). Nowadays a politician can represent hundreds of thousands of constituents who have just as many opposing and complimentary interests. Can I individually know and keep track of a 1,000 people let alone 6,500,000,000? We're totally winging government as it is. All forms, whether it's Communism, Socialism, Authoritarianism, or Democracy. We'd have a better chance if we're running in the ideal, like some Rand Paulian utopia of rational automotons that doesn't lie, cheat, steal, or waste. A One World Government would reduce choice and diversity to simplify tough decisions, weed out meaningless fads from the dangerous ones, and to further increase the chances of its existence. The early Soviet Union had successes with this until cost of living conditions improved and its growing middle class wanted more choice in their products and totally bogged down central planning and bureaucracy. For Skynet to be even better, it would have to one helluva complex and powerful entity. At that point, we would reach singularity conditions. Would automation gain sufficient intelligence to reason without ditching us or weeding out diversity, or could we augment ourselves to streamline, parse, and handle information that is growing exponentially year by year? Those might be the best conditions as we enter a period of individual/cultural/regional complexity and uncertainty while we grow more in numbers and diminish in habitable area and resources.
Yeah, the machine scans every transaction, looks at all the crime it can, ferrets out scams....makes everything transparent (even hiding your black market money), maybe everything would be judged on an objective merit, but the algorithmic judgments are in constant adjustment. You have the precedent, what the original plan was written to, and the adjustments for changing popular norms, like wikki law, with instantaneous and constant world wide electronic voting (LIKE). But the basis would be some Prime Directive stuff, inviolable. Just keep the roid freaks and ego cases from trying to take over and screw all the pretty girls.
