I have just read with interest a freshly published book “The United States of the World” by Antonio Ragusa. The basic thesis of the book is that a global federal government is desirable, and could potentially solve some of the worlds more persistent problems, such as incessant wars and climate change.
The U.S has for for centuries been seen as a model for how a global governance might work. That seems odd now considering the short sighted and aggressive posture of the current US administration. However in the past the U.S has been seen as a model that could be adapted on a global scale.
The essential thesis of this book is not new. A global governance is necessary to bring order to the planet. This argument was made by Imanual Kant more than two hundred years ago. The persuasiveness of this thesis has also grown considerably since his time, considering that technological changes have vastly increased the interconnectedness of the peoples of the world.
Most of Ragusa’s book is dedicated to expounding on the potential benefits of a global system of government. I skimmed over that material, largely because I am already familiar with the thesis. I agree that a revamped system of global governance is essential for the long term solution of a variety of global problems , including issues of War and Peace and Climate. Still for anyone unfamiliar with this argument the material will be well worth reading carefully.
The real question , as I see it , is how all of this could come about. Ragusa does have a chapter on that subject. He mentions as possible paths forward reform of the U.N , strengthening regional unions such as the E.U , involving youth somehow or another and holding a global referendum.
I find these suggestions as to the path to Unity rather weak. Substantial reform of the U.N is well nigh impossible with the balance of global power as it is at present. The countries holding veto power in the UN security council are not going to voluntarily relinquish that.
I work in industrial automation. In many cases it is easier to build a new system from scratch than to try and make substantial changes to an existing one.
In short what is needed, in my opinion, is a new global organisation, based on the rule of law and dealing effectively with global environmental issues and the promotion of peace.
It is worth pointing out that Kant also proposed a global federation of republics. His proposal expressly excluded countries ruled by dictators of one sort or another. For an organisation, as a building, must be built on solid foundations.
I think the question of the path to unity should be central to any discussion of this subject . For without a navigable path to unity, the promise of the benefits of unity will remain out of reach.
I will end on a positive note. The threats of Trump to a wide variety of democratic countries and institutions is having the no doubt unintended consequence of drawing countries, across the globe, who believe in the rule of law together. This could and should provide the impetus for the formation of a new global alliance based on the rule of law and human rights and environmental protection. The formation of such a global alliance and delivering a check mate to Trump will likely, over time, also lead to a change in the balance of power within the U.S and the return of the U.S to the fold of civilisation.
Jeffrey Glausiusz
