The Establishment Process of World Government

The theoretical desirability of a world union may be however well-established, but is of no use without actions to bring it about. Critics of world government have long found fault with the lack of a feasible transition plan from the national system to global governance. Many theorists hardly engage with the issue at all; and unfortunately those plans that have been suggested often involve great stretches of suspension of disbelief. I agree with the sceptics that previous plans are overwhelmingly impractical but disagree with their approach of dismissing the concept outright; rather, we must turn our minds to finding a better transition process.

The fastest way to get a world government is an alien invasion.

Internal consolidation is quickest when faced with a common, external, and urgent threat. Not just an alien invasion, but even a worldwide catastrophe such as a natural disaster or pandemic can mobilize a global government framework. However a crisis government may not last beyond the crisis, it being unlikely that it would have authority without the acquiescence of the nations. That said, some people have argued that world government can or will arise only in the aftermath of an epic crisis—should we wait for something like that to happen? It is only reasonable to be proactive towards world government rather than wait for a catastrophe to befall humanity.  

As outlined previously in Nature of World Government, there are four main pathways towards world unification. The first is ‘slow transformation’, comprising incremental shifts towards world government by nations gradually shifting authority to international institutions, these being either functional or regional. Second is accession, whereby countries ratify a treaty of unification that establishes global institutions. A third option is a worldwide revolution to overthrow all national governments and set up a new global regime from scratch, driven by vast numbers of worldists across the planet. The fourth possibility is of parallel governments – when instead of revolting, worldists set up an alternative world government outside the national structure and shift their allegiance to it.

Of these it is the first two options which seem both most preferable and most practical. A structured and orderly approach will ensure stability and avoid the possibility of plunging the world into disorder, which is the opposite of the goal of world government. The revolution and parallel governments options only come into the picture if nationalism remains entrenched against overwhelming popular pressure in favour of worldism.

The first step towards world government would be a social change: people start gradually realizing that unity is preferable to nationalism, and rise above national alienation to become more cosmopolitan. Prior solutions have envisioned a predominantly political process, yet nationalism is as much a social phenomenon as it is political, and must be transcended on both levels. The social change is to precede the political change, and if it does not then the transition will get stuck. That is why it is crucial to drive this stage with all possible effort. Let us suppose that this rise of worldism catches on in the 2040s; if it is done sooner then all the better. How this process is to be driven shall be detailed in a future paper.

The second stage comprises the political mobilization of the worldist movement, in the form of political parties and large civil society organisations, and the beginning of political changes towards world government. I do not expect these changes to come from within the nationalist establishment, as some other transition plans do. Rather, it seems more likely to me that these will be driven by the worldist movement through national politics. If Stage 1 succeeds in time, then Stage 2 could take place roughly around the decade of the 2050s.

Under the accession path, this step would involve worldist political parties competing in national politics, winning elections, and ratifying a treaty of accession to the world union. After ratification countries would then be merged into the new global institutions and territorially reorganized into new subdivisions as required. It is essential that this treaty be open to all states unconditionally, and is not a selective union (for example, of only democracies or one region). A potential problem here is if only some countries (say, 40 to 100) join the union while the rest hold out. This would fall short of a true world union, but merely become the most powerful state among other nations. Thus the accession initiative should only begin after the completion of Stage 1 in most of the world.

If the transformation approach is taken, this stage would involve pressurizing national governments (or worldists coming to power through national politics) to make reforms towards world government, for example by giving up more and more power to the UN and international institutions. In particular, authority with regard to some specialized functions would be handed over to functional institutions such as the WHO. Some of the initiatives to be taken at this stage could include limited disarmament and global security, and a push for opening up the world economy with state support.

Stages 1 and 2 will, in all likelihood, take place at different times across nations, but that is not too great a challenge for the transition process. The only requirement is that it needs to gain a foothold in every nation and prevail in a large majority of them for further progress. Once the bulk of the world joins in, the remaining outliers will feel pressure and find themselves compelled to join without subjugation or force. This is due to the economic incentives, progress and development, efficiency (Fed. 6, 10), and growth of rights (Fed. 9) that would be witnessed in the parts of the world participating in global governance. There is no clear boundary between Stages 2 and 3, however, for accession there is the requirement that the federation becomes greater than all the remaining nations combined. Otherwise it would be just like any other bloc of nations or superpower.

The final step, Stage 3, is the shift from limited to true world government. Herein nations start being subjugated politically and legally to the world government, and cease to exist as sovereign entities. The institutions of the government will directly represent and interact with the global population, rather than with nations as intermediaries. At this stage national armed forces shall also be dissolved and abolished, and the world government can start exercising global jurisdiction. The formation of the world government can be regarded as complete when the nations are reorganized to form new provinces and sub-units, bringing an end to the national order and cementing the authority of the world government. If this step is implemented in the 2060s, then by 2070 we may well have a fully-fledged world government. In general, from the beginning of Stage 1, the transition process should take about 30 years.

I shall now address some fears about the establishment process of a world government. A common one is that its pursuit would involve a global war or the use of coercive force. I am no consequentialist for world government; the means justify the end, and I do not support any such efforts or proposals to bring about world unity. It is inexcusable if any massive catastrophe occurs because of a political system, such as a famine or civil war after a revolution. This applies to both world government and to nationalism, and in this light nationalism must be replaced due to it having the perpetual risk of global conflict as well as the dangers from a lack of international cooperation.

Another fear that is often asserted is that the world government will take the form of a single hegemonic power which has come to dominate all other states. Yet as long observed in the balance of power dynamics in international politics, it is extremely unlikely that a single state will be able to completely dominate the entire world. Moreover, the existing international order has a core principle of recognition of state sovereignty, making it unfeasible for one state to conquer and absorb another. So this fear can be put aside, for world government is not coming that way.

As for the fear of a global revolution, I do not support it either as a means to world government given its destabilizing potential. As stated earlier, such a situation would only arise if nationalists remained entrenched in political power against overwhelming public support for world unity. After the completion of Stage 1, it will be evident that nationalism’s time is coming to an end. It is better for nationalism to go peacefully when its time is up, rather than to be driven out which would be worse for all.

And if a tiny minority of countries with really fierce nationalists resist unification entirely, then it may be better to leave them out rather than compel them to join. As stated earlier, eventually they will start losing out on the benefits of a union and join of their own accord. This may seem contrary to the core ideals of true universality and cosmopolitanism, even as a temporary measure. Yet as a policy choice it is far preferable than having a militant insurgency from nationalist secessionists, threatening the stability of the whole union.

In this whole discussion about the establishment of world government, the power of human agency is commonly forgotten as people seek only to analyse. Whether world unification will happen or not is an irrelevant question. We have to do it to make it happen. Some people have argued that the process will take a very long time such as 200 years, but that is only if it is left to itself. We can also make it much faster if we collectively as humanity drive it against the typical dynamics of international and identity politics.

Hence this should not be taken as a prediction of how a world government shall come about, since there is no point in speculating about the highly contingent and unforeseeable future. Rather it is more like an action plan, a blueprint of steps to achieve world unification. The immediate action to undertake is to spread the worldwide collective consciousness and the ideas of worldism in society, and to expand the discussion on world government to bring it into widespread consideration. Let humanity begin shaping its own political future.