In theoretical discussions about a possible better world order, the term "world government" often comes up very quickly. People of international renown, including Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi and many others, have advocated it without having expressed a more precise idea. In science fiction literature, the unified government of planet Earth is widespread. It all sounds mostly positive.
In
reality, however, negative opinions predominate. Very few people love
their governments, even if they are democratically legitimised. And
then a world government on top of that, no thanks. The 1906 novel
"Lord of the World" describes a superficially good world
government that leads to misery and ruin. Many warlords in history
had such ambitions and would have liked to rule the world. Adolf
Hitler and his entourage took it to the extreme. At present, there
are also some dark figures on the loose again who are keeping the
world on tenterhooks. They also have nuclear bombs. The greatest
enemies of any idea of a world government, however positive, are the
nationalists of all the countries of the world, who fortunately
cannot unite because that is against their nature.
I would
therefore strongly advise against using the prospect of a world
government to promote a better future for mankind. This is simply
about the term, because it is misleading and offers too much room for
wild fantasies. There are better options. I have published an article
about this on Substack:
World Government - is that necessary? Please stop this nonsense!