DescentBB

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I swear you debate like a stubborn 10-year old. I wouldn't argue with a 10-year old for the same reason.

Yeah... because this comment you made was textbook debate material right here:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:There is no obstacle to world-government that vision's imagination cannot solve, with varying degrees of implausibility, but he cannot be the architect for where this world is already heading...

Dreams, imagination, these are things that add richness to life. Holding on to rigid views, mental inflexibility, these are a source of conflict and suffering. [/deep]


So... here in this thread we have a bunch of people who think a one-world government is inevitable, and another bunch who think it's impossible. Sounds like a good topic to explore if you ask me. If you notice in that other thread I made, I starting asking related questions. I personally have no idea if we will/can have a one-world government, and if we did, I can just as easily imagine it being either/both a blessing and a nightmare. It's a good topic to think about and discuss. However, if your mind is made up then you should exit the conversation because you'll be limited in your contribution. Thanks.

Krom wrote:Actually, not having a single world government may significantly improve humanity's chances of surviving the next great extinction. (Note: I say humanity's chances of survival, not any particular nation.) Diversity has historically proven to be a very effective survival strategy.

here here. Wanna signal-boost this.

Increased diversity reduces overall efficiency, but it increases overall survivability. And vice versa.

So if humanity does ever feel the need to pull together as one, for the duration we may be weaker, so we'd better be doing something worthwhile with it. i hope it's toward a specific goal of developing technology to expand our species range beyond the planet. ie: increase our survivability, and enable even greater diversity by expanding our environment and thus allowing for greater uh.... speciation events. I'd like it if humanity could spread itself out so much, that any local problems really are just local problems and shouldn't ever again concern the whole species. We could basically do away with notions of collective humanity, because we'll be bigger and wider than that. It'd be nice if we could say with a relatively clean conscience "Oh. Problems 100 lightyears away you say? Why should i give a ★■◆●" . Not that i nessesarily think we should drop our empathy, but ... well atm our neighbours are so close so we kindof have to care about one-another's affairs. I wonder what it'd be like without the inherent obligations that come from our current proximity.

However, i do worry that this new influx of unmined resources will just be seen as an exciting new lawless frontier to engage in resource wars. Which i guess is kinda what the MinerWars 6DOF game is all about yes?
It's a core problem of scarcity based economies - agents who want to preserve that scarcity by warring to monopolise any-&-all new resources that are discovered.