can we make earth a single country?

1. 55

   pranav kposted 13 years ago

   wouldn't it be nice to belong to a single country?no boundaries,no restrictions,no discrimination.what would be its name if it was a single country?hmmm.....

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      NO, it would not be nice, and it most certainly would not be without restrictions or end discrimination in any case.

      replyreport
   2. 54

      (Q)posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Bizarro World.
      
      Of course, we have a problem with religions in that Islamic state systems would have to be abolished, in fact, most religions as they are today would have to be abolished as they set boundaries, create restrictions and discriminate people and cultures.
      
      Yes, Bizarro World is fitting.

      replyreport
   3. 59

      humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The name of the  - well not a country - could be WU - Worldean Union or perhaps THU - The HubUnion! Borders are not a function of the peoples that live in any particular country or state, they are just a convenience for the map-makers. Anyone in the US should be aware of this - how many states do not have a straight line as a border. Tribes and ethnic groups span borders. It is a political cell-wall that is all. The ruling classes wish to keep their thumbs to our throats and this is one way to achieve compliance.
      One could postulate that a one-world order could be achieved through a meritocracy that programmed real laws into a super-computer. Those real laws would be put forward by the common people and the commonality of ideas taken as the rule.
      We would be able to get rid of 99% of all laws that keep the down-trodden down.
      Real fundamental laws would be: Murder, theft (of any kind), manifested hatred and such like.
      We are already seeing the beginnings of the one-world concept - the European Union, the North American Alliance etc and the Governing bodies that have been set up in view of the one-world concept - WHO, NATO etc.
      All countries can stay as countries but they will wish and need to be included and would be the worse for exclusion.
      It may not be the best thing since sliced bread but one nation fighting against the rest of the world would be futile and therefore unlikely.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Unfortunately not a good model as this is all headed up for and by multinational corporations, or big business.  I don't think money itself would be very good as the head of a world state.

         replyreport
   4. 67

      goldenpathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well, it used to be before the tectonics shifted.  All land was one.

      replyreport
   5. 63

      Mishaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      jailand?

      replyreport
      1. 80

         earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
   6. 56

      leebertteaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I suppose it would be nice but I doubt it would end conflict. Humans like all other animals are territorial and will protect what we need to survive, be it food source or shelter, and family.

      replyreport
   7. 72

      mythbusterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I believe this theory would involve a huge amount of suppression and oppression...of every belief system save the one which supports the "one country."
      
      Right now, we can't seem to conceive very well of "tolerance" when many cultures/countries and peoples are proclaiming different beliefs which should not have to conflict with other beliefs...so I'm sure the "one country" is just an Utopian ideal...I'm definitely an idealist myself, but everytime I start thinking toward a "one best scenario" I remind myself that diversity would probably suffer and that "being one" requires a huge amount of co-operation - OR OPPRESSION to force people into the "one scenario."

      replyreport
      1. 51

         paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Hi friend mythbuster
         
         I agree with you.
         
         Thanks

         replyreport
   8. 61

      JulesGeromeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      And being a single class of slaves !

      replyreport
   9. 78

      BDazzlerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No, I don't think so. Utopian ideals seldom work well in practice.

      replyreport
   10. 0

       pburgerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Why would we want one country? Countries tend to form around two notions - nation and state. While neither concept is perfect, I cannot imagine a super-nation resolving any of the problems we face. The different languages and cultures of the world are important and I fear a single country, without decentralized autonomous government, would destroy our cultural diversity.
       
       Who would determine what language we use? French? English? Chinese? Russian? Seems to me like an imperial notion...
       
       Viva la difference!

       replyreport
       1. 78

          BDazzlerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Hmmm, perhaps you are correct ... prnav k seems to be echoing that great idealist who said, "Today Europe, Tomorrow, the World..."  This great idealist believed that there should be one world, no borders and a centralized belief system.  Everybody should work together for the good of the state.
          
          Unity was his big theme.  And everybody who didn't agree with unity, well ... just kill'em.  Anybody who made anybody uncomfortable ... just kill'em.  Find someone to blame for everybody elses' problem and  ... just kill'em.
          
          Yeah, parnav k seems to be in good company.   Once all of the people who disagree are with parnav k are dead, there will be harmony and unity! 
          
          If I remember correctly, that great idealist used evolution to justify their superiority as well!
          
          Excellent point, pburger.

          replyreport
   11. 61

       outdoorsguyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       " excuse me.. is that a well on your property"  .. " why yes it is"  " in the interesnt of fairness across the world, and those who dont have wells.  we are going to have to fill it in. on I notice that you also have a Whtie paint on your house.. in fairness to those in other places who dont have white paint....."
       
       
       one world country.. wow. paradise... wait it was started by A. HItler. but at least its equal opportunity genocide.
       
       my point being.. who would run it, who would decide whats to be fair and right.   maybe a southern Baptists. or a Sunni, or a Budhist.   maybe a Communist.   mabye Jon Doe, who is secretly a member of the Aryan brotherhood.
       
       its not possible, will never be possible.  just as Anarchy  can never exist.  some one will always end up in charge.  and what they say will go.  they might be racists, or bigots or anti enviromentalists. 
       
       we cant even agree on whats Legal and Illegal in Immigration. or religion and you think we can create a utopia.   LOL.

       replyreport
       1. 78

          BDazzlerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Awwww ... man, you actually named that "Great Idealist" I was talking about. Completely ruined my surprise!

          replyreport
   12. 61

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       "IF" man survives, the only way he will continue to exist is by functioning in concert with nature.
       After the reduction in human population, the resulting human creature will, hopefully, realize that as it existed before the reduction, it was destined for extinction. It will have learned, from surviving its infancy, that its only chance to succeed and become a viable life form, would be to create a 1 world gov't dedicated to its survival. Mother Nature is a demanding caretaker. The new "man" will have to understand this and bond with her like all other forms of successful life have done.
       Life on this planet would, then, truly be wonderful!

       replyreport
       1. 55

          Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          "its only chance to succeed and become a viable life form, would be to create a 1 world gov't "
          
          Um...NO.

          replyreport
   13. 52

       abhishek.sposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Very nice thought, i think that people should understand the importance of this thought, just imagine world without boundary's no barriers every one feel free that day this world called heaven and i am eagerly waiting for that day can someone tell me when that day come.
       bollywood movies

       replyreport
   14. 64

       RKHenryposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Horrible idea.  No.  Without boundaries, the human race runs wild.  Just look at Global Warming and Pollution.  That is something that the people of this planet have the same common bond in.  It is a tangible product created by "us" without boundaries.   How do you think we are doing on that score?
       
       Horrible idea.

       replyreport
2. 0

   ralwusposted 13 years ago

   imagine

   replyreport
   1. 60

      thirdmilleniumposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It would take a John Lennon to do that!

      replyreport
3. 61

   Lisa HWposted 13 years ago

   I kind of like the boundaries and restrictions. 
   
   In all seriousness, isn't it nicer to have distinct, individual, nations - each with its own identity?  Would we really want us all to be "one, big, non-descript, blob"?
   
   I think, when it comes to any nation, the strength of a nation hinges largely upon the strength and character of the individuals and families in each nation.  I'd think it would work the same way with the world - that aiming to enhance the strength (and I don't mean in a military way) and character of each, individual, nation would make for a richer and more peaceful world.  (Whether it's families, groups of friends, or nations - I don't think "blobs" ever turn out very well.)

   replyreport
   1. 68

      alternate poetposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There is no reason that a no-country earth would not have distinct zones, cultures etc etc - only the borders and restrictions are the issue I think.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Why would having one world move us away from individuality? Surely if that argument were true each of us would be an individual country. If we move to functioning over the internet as we do at HubPages then gradually there is no need for the things that cause all wars - greed, ignorance and envy.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            That is what I said I think ?   Many 'countries' have within them distinct groups, by definition these are sub-cultures and normally they are minority of some kind.  The issue with these is the same as 'countries' the main drivers seem to be a social trait to want to dominate others, the same issue that is the basic problem with countries.
            
            The idea of domination is what promotes most 'one world government' ideas, but it is the domination aspect that makes it so unwelcome.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I know but I was typing as you were posting.

               replyreport
   2. 59

      humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      But here on hubpages we could be that one world. Are we all alike? Are we constrained by borders? Do we get on with each other? Are we accepting of all views, all races, all sexualities, all ........ I think you get the picture.

      replyreport
   3. 74

      Research Analystposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      As Lisa mentioned: Would we really want us all to be "one, big, non-descript, blob"?
      
      Blobs just exist without any type of identity.

      replyreport
4. 0

   ryankettposted 13 years ago

   Nice ideology, but one which wouldn't work in principle. Who would lead this 'one world'? There will still be racism, bigotry, people will lose their identities and cultures. Religion would still exist, which means that different cultures would not be able to agree on the unitary laws. It wouldn't stop people fighting, in fact it will make every country a warzone, and the 'enemy' would be hard to identify. For a start, it would allow Al Quada to pursue their own twisted ideology for a 'muslim world'.
   
   Sorry, but that would lead to an epic fail. If anything, I currently support the opposite for my own country, I want us to take back independance from the European Union.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Boomer would rule at the emergence of WU.

      replyreport
   2. 59

      humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Little Britain Rules!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ryankettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you for your intellectually stimulating reply, it was really insightful. If you consider yourself to be 'worldapean' and despise the UK so much, then why not consider getting out and dropping yourself into the middle of the pacific somewhere? Or is our little plot of land a little too convenient for you sir?

         replyreport
   3. 53

      botf.lazarusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      wrong my friend the person will rule is an amalgamation of EU, NAU, SEAN, etc, etc....

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ryankettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         So I am wrong because an anagram which you don't even remember happens to exist?
         
         Sure thing.

         replyreport
5. 74

   myownworldposted 13 years ago

   While in theory, this seems like an idealistic notion, practically it could never work out. There is a fine line between racism and recognizing individual identities, and while it is important to give each person (no matter what his race) equal respect, you cannot negate the differences in culture, religion and  ideologies - and which makes it necessary to have separate countries where you can freely practice and live them.
   
   I have lived all my life in different countries and cultures, and have to say there are huge differences in all of them. For people who are willing to embrace and respect these, it's easier to fit into a new cultural ideology, but for those who can't, isn't it good to have that 'choice' to live in a country more suited to their life style and values? I for one, love the variety...!

   replyreport
   1. 51

      paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hi friend myownworld
      
      I agree with you.
      
      Thanks

      replyreport
6. 73

   Jeff Berndtposted 13 years ago

   If/When we discover intelligent alien life, then maybe we'll be able to let go of some of our homegrown xenophobia and consider ourselves all brothers and sisters together. Until then? I'm not getting my hopes up. I guess that's pessimistic, but if we're so enlightened now, as compared to the past, why are we constantly at war with each other?

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      "If/When we discover intelligent alien life, then maybe we'll be able to let go of some of our homegrown xenophobia and consider ourselves all brothers and sisters together."
      
      Who is "we," and do you think everyone today is a xenophobe or that contact with aliens would eliminate same?

      replyreport
   2. 59

      humagaiaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      because we are not all enlightened.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Lisa HWposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Jeff, a lot people (including me) DO think of everyone in the world as "brothers and sisters".  They (I) just don't think dissolving nations into that "one, big, blob" would be good.  I'm not saying this to get anyone to look for them, but in a couple of years of writing here and with a bunch of Hubs, somewhere in all that writing it shows very, very, plainly that I think of everyone as "brothers and sisters".  (My sister, however, lives in her own house, has her own business, her own family, and keeps her front door locked for a number of reasons.  I don't want my sister and me to start "all blending our families and lives" and turn the "standard" family each of us has into some new version of family.  Neither my real sister nor I would want to blend our personal, financial, business or something like our time with our own kids and friends.  She and I both gain by having the other's distinct, separate, life to visit and share with - while still not losing what's important to each human being/family.)  Believing this way comes from practical considerations and from understanding human nature and needs - not something ugly.
      
      So often, when someone doesn't like one idea or another, someone else turns it into being about "xenophobia"  or some other, ugly, thing.   Imagining that other people's thinking (that is different from your own) must come from something ugly is a matter of one of two things:  Either having ugly thinking oneself and believing everyone else is the same; or else believing one is the only "decent" person and superior, and others are inferior.
      
      That's not seeing us all as "brothers and sisters".  I give most of my "brothers and sisters" more credit than that.
      
      Getting rid of boundaries wouldn't get rid of the things in human nature and in people that cause wars.  Within one nation there are mugging in the streets, fighting and beating in homes, disputes among co-workers and neighbors, fights over property and money - and on and on and on.
      
      Besides, (assuming our combined six children were younger than they really are) if my sister and I decided to blend our families into one, big, family; and there were a decision to be made about one child's health (for example) - one mother is either no longer going have 100% rights as her own child's mother, or else the children get two sisters who have become co-parents - or else we agree that each mother makes decisions about her own children (in which case, we aren't really "one, new, blended, family", are we?  We're just "one family" on paper.

      replyreport
7. 61

   SpanStarposted 13 years ago

   I believe it will happen one day-when?  I have no idea because right now mankind doesn't have what it takes to bring about that kind of a change because we suffer from so many faults, lust, greed, hate,envy, etc. In the next age when people are led by Jesus.

   replyreport
8. 71

   Rishy Richposted 13 years ago

   I personally support the concept & believe that an ultra modern civilization of the future will create a world without boundaries. Although it will not solve all the problems of mankind however it will be able solve many of our political problems

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It will not happen and would only create many, many more political problems if it did.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         explain pls

         replyreport
         1. 55

            Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Regionalism, ceaseless civil war, and totalitarianism.

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Intergalactic communications, space travels & representatives of mankind not countries! Think Big!

               replyreport
               1. 55

                  Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Why not start by thinking realistically?

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     You mean pessimistically?

                     replyreport
                     1. 55

                        Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        No, I mean realistically. That's why I used the word.

                        replyreport
                        1. 71

                           Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Sounds pessimistically to me!

                           replyreport
                           1. 55

                              Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              Because you are not realistic.

                              replyreport
                              1. 71

                                 Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 Just optimistic!

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 55

                                    Sab Ohposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    Being unrealistic does not equate to optimism

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 71

                                       Rishy Richposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       what are the chances of extraterrestrial intelligence? I dont think u knw the figure! I dont think u knw wat most scientists blv! I dont think they will consider it unrealistic! Not anymore! & I dont care wat ppl like u think abt it!!

                                       report
               2. 0

                  Madame Xposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  
                  
                  see - http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/42755

                  replyreport
                  1. 69

                     Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     

                     replyreport
   2. 51

      paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hi friend Rishy Rich
      
      A civilization without boundaries is possible under a con-federal system, not under a centrally controlled one; first trust is to be built that everybody would be treated equally and equitably with justice and no Politics. People generally shun religion; but it is the power which will ultimately cement the people. Politics is shallow and temporary; religion is deep and with permanence. Ultimately religion controls the human beings. Atheism Skepticism cannot solve the complex human problems, I am sure.
      
      Thanks
      
      I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

      replyreport
9. 82

   timorousposted 13 years ago

   Variety is the spice of life, isn't it?  I like having many different cultures.  You can learn a lot about the world by studying other cultures.  It also engenders an appreciation and a tolerance for other's values.  Of course, cultures and countries are different entities. 
   
   The problem many people have is that they're closed-minded and adamantly refuse to accept another's culture's ideology or fervent religious values (usually perpetuated through many generations).  Until the cycle of intolerance and ignorance is broken, and these people are somehow 'enlightened', I'm afraid there'll always be wars. 
   
   Where's Cagsil when we need him? You should read his hubs to get a handle on ignorance and closed-mindedness.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hey Timorous,
      
      Did you ask for my whereabouts?

      replyreport
10. 58

    drstrangeposted 13 years ago

    If it was a single "country" then it wouldn't be a country at all.
    
    the idea of a single country is the same as the idea of getting rid of government and having no countries.
    
    once there is no government then there is no borders and no countries.

    replyreport
11. 79

    Uninvited Writerposted 13 years ago

    Ideally, it would be nice if we all lived liked they do on Star Trek. They still held onto their cultural backgrounds, etc. However, I don't think it's possible in real life. At least not in this century.
    
    Once we get past petty politics and realize we are all in this together then there will be a chance. It would definitely come closer after alien encounters.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       And that would solely depend on our advancement as a society, and whether or not, an alien visit would be destructive or beneficial.

       replyreport
    2. 0

       china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       There is nothing to stop cultures existing together peacefully - most of the issues of today are caused by individual governments for some kind of advantage. The example given earlier in this thread of Al Quieda illustrates this - they were formed with American funding and training to counter the soviets in Afghanistan - then turned on the US because of their support for Israel and starting to turn on Islamic countries.
       
       Before that the Soviets were in Afghanistan because of the 'cold war' and it was a border area for them.  And so on and so on . .

       replyreport
12. 69

    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    In the world most people are living in is not in any way, shape or form, anywhere near making Earth a single country.
    
    The likelihood or possibility or probability of it happening, when looking at today's society, would give you a high degree of it not ever happening.
    
    However, should only several issues be handled, then it would not be too hard to become a realization. There plenty of underlying problems/issues that first need to be dealt with.
    
    Just a thought.

    replyreport
13. 61

    ediggityposted 13 years ago

    I vote for Petoria
    
    http://www.spike.com/video/family-guy-cant/2795756

    replyreport
14. 76

    raisingmeposted 13 years ago

    We'd have to take the 'H' of the end of Earth and putting it at the beginning as Heart before that would ever happen!

    replyreport
    1. 76

       raisingmeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       oh and we would have to stop spelling live backwards while we were at it!

       replyreport
15. 64

    Greek Oneposted 13 years ago

    It's been ttied before, but the Russian winters are really hard to deal with if you are an invading army

    replyreport
16. 61

    manthyposted 13 years ago

    I do not think that is a possible, it would be  refreshing though just to start over with a clean slate and all people be equal, that would be awesome, I would love it

    replyreport
17. 55

    pranav kposted 13 years ago

    there might be differences already existing amongst the mankind in terms of culture, religion and ideologies as somebody pointed out but what are the boundaries doing to them? The differences are being exaggerated. May be we are evolving into different species...

    replyreport
18. 68

    Pearldiverposted 13 years ago

    Why would we Share New Zealand????
    
    It's close to perfect now!

    replyreport
    1. 61

       saltposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       thats true, most of the new zealanders are in australia. ... New Zealand is beginning to look like a good place to be.

       replyreport
19. 61

    saltposted 13 years ago

    not big on brothers and sisters together, that sounds like one belief system to me. New world order..
    
    I like to think we are many but we are one.. that is diversity is great. Having differences is good.

    replyreport
20. 86

    Shil1978posted 13 years ago

    Theoretically, its a wonderful idea. Practically, it ain't gonna happen. There are just too many interests at play. You have distinctions based on religion, wealth, culture, customs, laws, monetary policies, etc. to allow for that.

    replyreport
21. 62

    Wayne Orvisburgposted 13 years ago

    According to most conspiracy theories I'm aware of, the NWO would have to find a way (virus) to reduce the number of people on the planet. Then they could rule the remainders as slaves, in a financial sense.

    replyreport
22. 79

    LeanManposted 13 years ago

    Who would we play football against??
    
    What would happen to the olympics??
    
    We are tribal, we would find something else to fight about..
    
    Short people versus tall people,
    
    Fat versus Skinny,
    
    Honest people vs Polititians
    
    We as a people want to form groups, even within individual countries we form "tribes" and fight against each other, even if it is schools in the same town or football teams.. The human race will always fight amongst itself, it is the way we are programmed...

    replyreport
    1. 51

       paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       No compulsion; it is diversity

       replyreport
23. 66

    MikeNVposted 13 years ago

    No it would not.

    replyreport
24. 61

    outdoorsguyposted 13 years ago

    okay heres an example  Utopia on earth.. In the beginning Marx said... later Lenin said what the hell. I want power.. shortly after that Stalin said.. bite me its all mine.   
    
    Equality for all.  heres the bread line.. some one pass me the cavier and lop off that idiots head. 
    
    the problem is.. Power.. the dreamers all think people are basically good.   The power hungry think all people are idiots and cowards.. " the pen is mighter than the sword mr. stalin."   Stalin pauses then picks up a meat cleaver.. five bloody minutes later. he picks up a bloody pen.  " no mr dead protester.. brute force is mightier than the pen" 
    
    Lord Aktons law " power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutly." and some one always craves Power.
    
    protests, peace movements and talk only work against someone who is basically decent.  Hitler, stalin, Ghengis Ghan, Mao, Nero, Darius and a cast of a thousand other dictators and Power mad just march over you. and do what they want.  meanwhile the dreamers die.
    
    Reality can be such a downer.
    
    " pinky are you thinking what IM thinking"   " sure brain.. but where are we going to find five monkeys in Tutu's at this time of night"    " shut up Pinky.. TOnight we take over the world. "

    replyreport
25. 55

    andromidaposted 13 years ago

    a single country-sounds great.But,no one wanna go back to the past. Because the past divided us from a single country.

    replyreport