Philosophy Now Forum

this topic of "globalization and world governments"
has been on my mind for some time....I have in prior posts,
listed why I think that the future of human beings lies within
our having a "one world government" that is not only going to happen,
but it is justified in happening... as noted, we human beings
have gone from small tribal existence... for over a millions years,
during the Hunter-gatherer existence of human beings, we lived
within a small tribal existence...the rise of small towns and then
into bigger towns and then into cities of thousands...
which in turn becomes an empire and/or city/states...

at every step of human existence, we have lived in larger
and ever larger social, political, economic and legal societies....
with large scale political and economic entities like the EU
and NATO that now dominate in a way that was unthinkable
in the world after WW2...but there are questions that lie in the way
of everyone getting on board to the concept of large scale
political, social, economic, legal organizations....

the fear of such large-scale organizations are, for example,
the questions of identity, self-determination, inequality,
justice, diversity, and freedom.... and these are legitimate concerns
that people should have about the coming world order....

but that new world order needs to be understood a bit better..
what in fact are we talking about? for example, in this idea
of globalization, this is already a statement of fact...
the pandemic has clearly shown us that issues in one
country can bring about a great deal of chaos in
the legal, social, political and economic situation that
we live in.... a new plague in China can cause a world
wide chaotic situation...Russia attacking the Ukraine
has create global chaos, if the U.S were to walk
away from its global debts, the entire world would
collapse in several different way... globalization
is already here... a storm in Asia can cause chaos in both
America and Europe.. that is the very definition of
globalization....

the right tends to fear this globalization and the drive
for a unified world government more than the left....
but as usual, the right is fighting the last war and not
the current or future war..... the right fears the government,
but of course, if the government were favorable to right wing
politics, they have no problem at all with a global government....
but the question of globalization and world governments doesn't
lie within the government at all...that is the last war,
the current and future war is now about the incredible reach
of the corporations.... they now own the governments...
the right wing drive of state governments like Florida,
Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Tennessee is funded
by right wing extremists in business.. like the Koch Brothers
and Rupert Murdoch and Sheldon Anderson, for example....
they have bought the governments of those states and
as they have bought IQ45...he is a rich guy helping other
rich guys control the government....big business is the problem
today, not the government....it is big business that now runs
the governments of the world....

big multinational corporations are now beyond the reach of
local and state governments.... an example of this is
the war that Desantis is fighting with Disney...
a war that DeSantis has no chance of any kind, of winning...
the ''Mouse'' will demolish him because the "mouse'' has more
resources then the state of Florida... its a bigger entity than
then the state of Florida... and how does a local or state government
keep a multinational corporation with greater resources to follow
the rules? it can't.....at this point, the only entities capable of
keeping multinational corporations in check, is large scale
governments like the U.S or political organizations like NATO,
or the EU..... if we are to control big business, we must
have entities like the American government......

This is one argument for the existence of federal governments
like America, but as big business are now multinational corporations,
we must have ever larger governments to hold the multinational
corporations in check... and large organizations like the EU are needed
as the EU is also multinational....

or to state this another way, I fear multinational corporations
far more than I fear multinational political organizations like
the EU or NATO......

Which leads us to ponder such large scale political organizations
like the EU or NATO...The arguments against organizations like
the EU or NATO, revolves around several aspects.... the potential
loss of self-determination, of freedom, the rise of inequality,
of the loss of justice.....

each of these plays a factor in people's fear of large government,
or for that matter, the fear of all government....
as displayed by the right wing....

"The government is not the solution; it is part of the problem."

as St. Raygun used to say... but the fact of the matter is that
government is not only an excellent solution to many of our
current problems, it is the only possible solution for such problems
like income inequality, climate change, pollution, out of control
multinational corporations, immigration reform, large scale
corruption, illegal drugs coming into the country, poverty,
homelessness.. are just a few of the problems facing us that
require, no demand answers on a much larger scale than
local or state governments....only a national government
can find a solution to these and other large scale problems....
and given many of these problems are multinational
problems, that means a solution can only be found
within a multinational solution...or do you think that,
California for example, the 6th largest economy
in the world, can handle such problems as income inequality,
or illegal drugs or climate change by itself? No, not at all....

but we still run into the concern of those who fear the government,
a fear that such large-scale government will deny self determination
and freedom and justice/equality....

a fear that was held by the American founding fathers....that is why
the government was built the way it was.... to ensure that
the voices of many were heard by building into our political
system the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press
and the freedom of religion....

and the assault on those freedoms are coming from the right wing,
not the left.. once again, look to the state of Florida has the
blueprint for governmental overreach... they have instituted
the banning of books, the denial of freedom of gays and transgender
people, penalties for people who dare criticize the governor...
and the denial of women's rights such as abortion....
this assault of personal freedoms is based on flawed notions
of what is the point of, or the purpose of government....
and other state are following Fla, such as Tennesse which has
recently kicked out democratic state senators based on
political beliefs such as gun control....
and we can see how people can be afraid of large scale political
organizations if we see this type of dictatorship coming from
state level organizations....

but the solution to this fear is a commitment to what government
is supposed to do, which is protect rights such as freedom to speech
and freedom of the press and the right to practice religions as
one wishes, even to the protection of rights such as voting rights
and the right to personal health care like abortions...

(to interfere with abortions is to say that the government
has a right to interfere with our own personal health care,
to mandate masks however is not about our own personal health care,
masks are there to protect us collectively, not personally..
if we practice abortions as is currently given, then under
that aspect, the call to ban masturbation is coming because
masturbation is the destruction of live cells that can propagate
life.. how is sperm any different than embryos? the call
to end one, must be made to both because the end result
of both is the destruction of possibility of life)

so I have begun to lay out the arguments for and against
globalization and world governments....
what do you think?

Kropotkin

this question of globalization and world governments,
revolve around the question, what is the point or
mission statement of government? why does government
exist and what is it supposed to do?

part of the reason that we cannot ever trusts big business
or multinational corporations is the goal or point of
business.... which is to make profits... all other
considerations are secondary to this point of making
money...as I have pointed out, this making money to
the point that human lives, human values are
meaningless is nihilism.... the negation of human
beings and their values is nihilism...pure and simple....

this is why we cannot make business or corporations the
meaning of our existence, because that means we make
nihilism the meaning of existence....

but what is the point of the government?
is it to make a profit? well, according to conservatives,
that is exactly the point of the government....
why do you think that they make an ongoing point of
the debt and our failure to pay off the debt, a political
selling point?
the conservatives tell us over and over again, that the
government spends too much money and stifles the "almighty"
taxpayer by taking in too much taxes.....as if the point of
government was to make a profit.... it isn't....

as noted, big business is about nihilism because it
puts the acquisition of profits over the lives and values
of human beings...why would we demand the same thing
from government? The denial of human beings and their
values from the government, is not the point of government....

so once again, what is the point of govenment?

is the point of government to make a profit?

Kropotkin

as I have noted before, that government's budgets
are moral/ethical documents....and governments pass
laws that define what is moral and what isn't...
but the government also help maintain and promotes
order...many such laws are made to produce and maintain
order... traffic laws for example...and laws that bring the
punishment of people to the legal system and not by any sort
of vigilantism.......to allow vigilantism is to promote disorder
and chaos... this argument is one such argument against such
laws as Florida's "stand your ground" laws.. to allow private
citizens discretion in making and enforcing punishments,
is asking for disorder and chaos....to allow idiots like
Kyle Rittenhouse or George Zimmerman to determine
what is appropriate in regards to "stand your ground''
is to encourage violence and more gun deaths... as if
America really needs any more gun deaths...
so, beyond just maintaining order by the public administration
of justice, we have the resolution of morality and ethics,
so what else is government good for?

one of the basic functions of government is to administer
equality/justice of the legal system and the political system...
the fundamental statement in what is America is in the
declaration of independence...

"we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men/beings
to be equal''

and it is the government that makes this statement a reality...
a class of citizens must be treated equal because anything less is
to hold "that all men/beings are not equal"

thus, we have laws that protect gays, the handicap, minorities,
workers.. and why? To protect them from predatory institutions
like businesses, banks, even government itself from being taken
advantage of...to have its citizens be treated fairly and equally
is one of the fundamental purposes of government....
and making government powerful enough to achieve this,
means we must have taxes and freedom to act for and by
the government...to make government small enough to
drown in the bathtub is deny the citizens of that country
basic rights such as order, freedom, the ability to meet
one's need such as food, water, the biological needs..
and the value of government is also to create
space enough for people to reach their
psychological needs of love, esteem, safety/security,
a sense of belonging...

a government that cannot create safety/security for
its citizens is a failed state.. and creates what Hobbes
called, a "state of nature" where everyone is at war with
everyone else... and that means life is "Nasty, brutish and short"
and conservatives who calls for a smaller government is calling
for this "state of nature" and this is one of the primary governmental
roles, to prevent this "state of nature" from happening....

and what other roles does the government do? it provides
its citizens with not only protection but with education,
with health care, with libraries, police and fire services,
roads and garbage collection....

and does providing these essential services really mean
that government must keep to a profit and losses statement
to maintain it existence? I would suggest that not only is the
is the government not to be run like a business, by making
profits, but I would suggest that making the goal of government
being engaged in profits/losses, turns the government into a business,
which is the practice of nihilism, of making profits more important
than people lives or their values......and that isn't what
government is about....the government is about bringing
value into people's life, and government does that by
the actual practice of making sure that:

"all men/beings are created equal"

socially, legally, politically, economically and philosophically.....
the value of government is to enhance our lives by making sure that
we are safer, treated equally, given justice, and have value, not
just within the pursuit of profits, by the very fact of existence....

to exist is to have value....to exist is to be judge equally
and be treated equally and to have economic equality
and to be treated politically equal.... and therein lies
the value/purpose of existence.... to ensure that
we human beings travel that road of going from
animal, to animal/human to finally becoming fully human...

Kropotkin

to allow one to avoid judgement because of wealth,
titles, power, fame or material possessions is to
deny the very act of justice in America...
to claim that IQ45 is above the law, is to
claim that the legal and political system allows
special treatment.. that one is not treated equal,
is admit that we are not, as the declaration of
independence says,

" it is self-evident that all men/beings are created equal"

is no longer true.. that means the application of justice/equality
no longer stands true... we no longer have a legal system in America
today if we allow individuals or groups or corporations to be treated
differently by the political or legal system by virtue of wealth,
titles, power, fame or material possessions....

we have denied the basic tenets of both the declaration of independence
and the constitution....by allowing some individuals, groups or
corporations to be treated differently within the political or
legal system because of wealth, power, titles......

the equal application of the law is a fundamental aspect of
America and without that, we no longer stand for anything
outside of raw power and wealth....

what do we stand for, individually and collectively,
as one, as some, as many and as all of us?

Kropotkin