The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? hay nhất giúp bạn có thêm tài liệu tham khảo để viết bài luận bằng Tiếng Anh hay hơn.

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages

Đề bài: The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages - mẫu 1

Lately, some have voiced support for a single united government to rule over mankind, supplanting the traditional model of each country having a national government. As lofty as this idea sounds, whether its advantages outweigh its disadvantages would only be clear following careful examination.

Being unified under a one-world government produces several benefits, chief among them the unification of systems that people rely on in daily life. Because one government would mean uniform units of measurement, there would be no need to convert between miles and kilometers or pounds and kilograms; as a result, life would become much more convenient. The same is especially true for money when a single currency used by all would expedite every transaction under the sun. In addition, having a one-world government would make national borders redundant, and the freedom of transportation that arises will relieve humanity of the constraints of physical distance. Flying to an exotic or cosmopolitan destination every weekend for vacation, for instance, would be a lot more viable. To sum up, life’s comforts will improve thanks to the one world-state.

However, this scenario might also present more drawbacks than expected. A major point to keep in mind is that as the concept of nations ceases to exist, so will the need to defend from external threats. Hence, the military would be used to police the vast global population, endangering personal liberty in the name of enforcing peace. Furthermore, since a world government’s power has to be physically concentrated at a location, the further away people are, the more likely they would be disaffected by the bureaucrats’ decisions. Conflicts would undoubtedly arise, especially considering how culturally and historically diverse mankind is, yet to address them at the root would more often than not require repressive measures. In the end, the benefits associated with a world-state would come at the expense of more fundamental matters.

To conclude, having a single ruling government on Earth would do more harm than good. People deserve to be governed by themselves, or at least by those close to them physically and culturally; to support a global state would be a dishonest sacrifice of individual agency for comfort.

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages - mẫu 2

With globalization accelerating at a rapid pace, there have been growing calls to have only one global government on the basis that it would motivate countries to pool resources together to resolve shared issues. However, I disagree with this notion since such advantages will be dwarfed by the disadvantages, the biggest of which is the potential abuse of power that could be exercised by influential nations.

The biggest advantage of forming such a government would be that it could encourage member countries to contribute collectively to solve common problems. A global government would be able to act faster in solving issues efficiently since they would have more resources at their disposal. For example, members of the European Union were asked to cooperate in tackling the Syrian refugee crisis of the last decade. Using their collective political and material resources, the European Union was able to house and integrate millions of refugees into its constituent members’ societies, providing much needed safety for a vulnerable population from their war-torn homelands.

However, a global government presents the risk of member nations abusing their power to serve their own interests rather than those of the entire world. For instance, in the United Nations, the closest approximation of a global government, nations can exercise their right to block or enact measures that can empower or enrich them or their closest allies, much to the detriment of the world as a whole. For example, two of the UN Security Council’s chief members Russia and China have been accused of exercising their veto power to block new security policies that will challenge their regional power, despite them being genuinely beneficial to the wider world.

In conclusion, the disadvantages of a global government, chief of which is possible rampant abuse of power, are far more substantial than its advantages. Moving forward, countries should retain their national governments, but continue to reach out globally to encourage mutual cooperation.

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages - mẫu 3

There have been suggestions historically for a single government that could control all nations. In my opinion, there are utopian benefits that would result from this, however, the drawbacks related to autonomy make it a negative theoretical proposal.

Supporters argue a single government would be more effective and focused. This is best illustrated through major problems that all nations currently struggle to solve such as climate change and the recent health crisis facing the world. A single centralized government could better protect the environment by enacting strict legislation against the burning of fossil fuels and force all citizens to get vaccinated against Covid-19. In purely hypothetical terms, such unilateral power could achieve tremendous ends. However, in reality, there is a strong likelihood that a government would either pursue different, less desirable goals or be unable to enforce their mandates.

Beyond the infeasibility of such a world government, there are more basic reasons to oppose its existence. Variety in government is valuable in itself. Take for example the different governments currently in power around the world. Each country has, to varying degrees, chosen a government that represents their values and enacts laws based on the kind of nation they wish to have. The result is that some countries, such as those in Western Europe, lean more towards a socialist system that ensures a minimum standard of living for all citizens, others place greater emphasis on individual empowerment, others on transparency and still others on security over freedom. This diversity is a defining feature of human society.

In conclusion, a single government for the entire planet could help resolve global issues but would ultimately limit the distinctiveness of each individual nation. Therefore, there are other solutions that should be undertaken to remedy the current crisis of confidence in government.

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages - mẫu 4

People have different views about whether we should move towards a world federal government. In my opinion, I believe that this proposal would offer more benefits than drawbacks.

On the one hand, a world federation poses several challenges. Firstly, smaller or poorer nations may feel they are not fairly represented in a world government. The United Nations is a prime example. It is dominated by countries with greater economic strength, and those superpowers often exert their influence over the international decision making. Secondly, there is the lack of innovation and competition. Over the course of time, the types of governments have constantly changed to reflect the respective societal needs. However, having a single government would inherently ward off evolution, and therefore hinder the opportunity to work out different models of governance.

On the other hand, global centralisation of power and regulation helps to tackle poverty. Currently, international aid often fails to reach the poor because it is beguiled by corruption. However, a world government could adopt a transparent process for aid distribution and establish a strong governmental watchdog agency to supervise the procedure. As a result, we would be able to eliminate bureaucracy and bribery, and therefore ensure the underprivileged receive the support they need.

Finally, it would ensure a collaborative and efficient response to global crises. As can be observed during the Covid-19 pandemic, countries are competitive when it comes to protecting their own citizens. However, by having one central governing body that promotes egalitarianism, we can ensure that cooperation takes precedence over competition in times of crisis. Facing similar pandemics in the future, it would be in this government’s interest to ensure that people all over the world get vaccinated in a fair manner.

In conclusion, despite potential problems such as under-representation of smaller nations and resistance to changes, I believe that moving to global federalism would be a better choice as it facilitates poverty alleviation and promotes cross-border cooperation to take on problems at a world level.

Xem thêm các bài luận Tiếng Anh hay khác:

• In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people believe that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not allow salaries above a certain level. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

• It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is no reason why people should stop this from happening. Do you agree or disagree?

• Some people say in order to prevent illness and disease, governments should focus on reducing environmental pollution and housing problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• In many parts of the world, people do research on their family history. Some people believe that finding out about previous generations is a useful thing to do. However, others believe that it is better to focus on present and future generations. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

• In some countries, university students live at home, while in other countries university students go to other cities rather than live with their family. Do you think the benefits of living away from home outweigh the disadvantages?

• Hơn 20.000 câu trắc nghiệm Toán,Văn, Anh lớp 9 có đáp án

---