The Instigator
mudgil
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Jifpop09
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

whole world (all 210 counties) should be brought under the umbrella of a single government

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Jifpop09
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 548 times Debate No: 46485
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

mudgil

Pro

yup it would take humanity to a new era of equatily
Jifpop09

Con

Alright, I accept your challenge. I will debate that the 196 sovereign nations are still solving their own individual problems, and are not yet ready for a world government.
Debate Round No. 1
mudgil

Pro

today in this contemporary world we call our civilization global civilization , the countries have come closer to each other and the distances between them has reduced . today they their needs are common and almost all of them the 196 counties that u have mentioned are struggling to solve the similar kind of problems like terrorism, political instibilty , and economic inflations so if a single government comes them it will take decisions for all there countries collectively

.terrorism would be solved since the whole world is one country the no one would like to terrorise his own country
.trade across the states of the whole world (that are countries now) would be liberalised and since the financial policies through out the world will remain same and so economic stability would be there
.since the world would be under a singe government political stability is obvious
Jifpop09

Con

Today they their needs are common and almost all of them the 196 counties that u have mentioned are struggling to solve the similar kind of problems like terrorism, political instibilty , and economic inflations so if a single government comes them it will take decisions for all there countries collectively

No, we are all not going through the same problems. In fact, every country has problems unique to their own nation. They each need to individually solve these "unique" problems before we can even think about a one world government.


.terrorism would be solved since the whole world is one country the no one would like to terrorise his own country

No it wouldn't. Terrorism derives from many different things. Other forms of terrorism will exist, involving religion, ethnicity, culture.

trade across the states of the whole world (that are countries now) would be liberalised...

In your one world government, which I am assuming is a democracy, everybody will probably have a say. And MANY people around the world would object to liberalization. This applys to other issues too. There is no possible way we can appease every group in the world on earth. Europe has no place telling the middle east what to do. Just as the middle east should have no say in Brazils affairs. Anarchy and destruction would be within hours.


and since the financial policies through out the world will remain same and so economic stability would be there

It is just not possible to apply one policy to the whole world. While a policy might be effective in Ghana, it might destroy the economy of Panama. This is the exact opposite of economic stability.

.since the world would be under a singe government political stability is obvious

Not really. It seems obvious that a million agressive seccession movements would rise up, and genocide and anarchy would run rampant. You ever hear of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia is what happens when you put many different ethnicitys, cultures, and religions in the same borders. I would like to write more, but I only have 4 minutes left.
Debate Round No. 2
mudgil

Pro

mudgil forfeited this round.
Jifpop09

Con

Give me that source point....

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
I'm only arguing that the world is not yet ready. The world has had more peace in the past 30 years then ever, and I see no reason to drastically destroy 196 governments. Considering the majority of them are actually working.
Posted by Abominminded 2 years ago
Abominminded
We don't have to put them under our control we can let them come to us just by setting an example. No one has any power we didn't give them. I don't think any one ever agreed to any of this , even the kids probably think their living in a country where the people call the shots . To much pride in the founding men of America You know I believe in God but I don't believe this government was established by him. sooner or later two opponents war, but the meek shall inherit the earth.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
....13 more hours
..... 13 more hours
Posted by mudgil 3 years ago
mudgil
waiting....
waiting.........
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
mudgilJifpop09Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con brought up better "arguments" and "refutation".Though I personally do no agree with Con about his view point on eliminating "Terrorism", "Terrorism" can easily be eliminated if all the countries of the world stands against it as one. Pro lost conduct for the forfeit.