Aster Eragon
Oct 19, 2021
Writing Feedback / The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. [2]
Please check and give feedbacks on my essay!
The responsibility for ruling nations has long been assigned to governments, and such controlling systems are adopted by almost every country around the world. However, there is a belief that establishing a world government is better than having each nation represented by its own governing body. I, nevertheless, deprecate the notion owing to the two demerits of a global government as follows.
To begin with, finding ideal leaders of the world's governing body proves extremely challenging. Since conducting elections simultaneously on a global scale with varying opinions about innumerable candidates is impractical, selected leading individuals risk being prone to strong opposition among a large number of ordinary people worldwide. Leading a global government also demands in-depth and well-rounded knowledge , besides the ability to deal with an enormous workload as well as to propose a rightful way of developing the world, and few people are able to meet all of these criteria.
Additionally, ruling the world with only one government causes international problems to be addressed largely ineffectively. To be more specific, really long period of time is required so as for the universal government to be fully informed of global issues in numerous areas and decide conclusively which problems need prioritising before any practical actions are allowed to be taken. During such delayed time, risks of the exacerbation of maladies are totally inevitable. More seriously, when worldwide issues are approached erroneously by this utmost powerful governing body, there is no other administrative organisation legally eligible to question the leading individuals' decision, resulting in the whole world suffering the aftermaths. This consequence is exemplified by the predictable decimation of the Jewish and escalation of racism in the case Adolf Hitler had successfully adopted cosmocracy.
In conclusion, I regard a world government as extremely disadvantageous rather than beneficial due to great difficulties in choosing well-deserved leaders and unproductive solutions to global maladies. Therefore, it is advisable that today's system of national governing bodies be maintained and cooperate responsibly with international organisations like UN, UNESCO or WHO to facilitate the development of the world as well as of each nation in stead of forming a new global government with inevitable downsides.
Please check and give feedbacks on my essay!
Should the world have only one government or a national government for each country?
The responsibility for ruling nations has long been assigned to governments, and such controlling systems are adopted by almost every country around the world. However, there is a belief that establishing a world government is better than having each nation represented by its own governing body. I, nevertheless, deprecate the notion owing to the two demerits of a global government as follows.
To begin with, finding ideal leaders of the world's governing body proves extremely challenging. Since conducting elections simultaneously on a global scale with varying opinions about innumerable candidates is impractical, selected leading individuals risk being prone to strong opposition among a large number of ordinary people worldwide. Leading a global government also demands in-depth and well-rounded knowledge , besides the ability to deal with an enormous workload as well as to propose a rightful way of developing the world, and few people are able to meet all of these criteria.
Additionally, ruling the world with only one government causes international problems to be addressed largely ineffectively. To be more specific, really long period of time is required so as for the universal government to be fully informed of global issues in numerous areas and decide conclusively which problems need prioritising before any practical actions are allowed to be taken. During such delayed time, risks of the exacerbation of maladies are totally inevitable. More seriously, when worldwide issues are approached erroneously by this utmost powerful governing body, there is no other administrative organisation legally eligible to question the leading individuals' decision, resulting in the whole world suffering the aftermaths. This consequence is exemplified by the predictable decimation of the Jewish and escalation of racism in the case Adolf Hitler had successfully adopted cosmocracy.
In conclusion, I regard a world government as extremely disadvantageous rather than beneficial due to great difficulties in choosing well-deserved leaders and unproductive solutions to global maladies. Therefore, it is advisable that today's system of national governing bodies be maintained and cooperate responsibly with international organisations like UN, UNESCO or WHO to facilitate the development of the world as well as of each nation in stead of forming a new global government with inevitable downsides.