@buffalobill90 Said 
I see. In my opinion, an
(1)independent nation, with the final decision on its own laws, is more likely to become corrupt and immoral than a union of states with agreed laws. But you are right in a sense; any international government would need to be democratic and accountable to prevent it from being corrupt. Of course, since different countries have such different cultures and varying populations, would it be fair to make such an institution democratic, since the most popular culture is not necessarily the best one to be represented by the government in all nations?
Clearly there must be some agreement on common laws which are held to be right by all cultures; perhaps the Bill of Human Rights is an attempt at this. But how does one decide what is the best kind of law? What is the 'true' morality? Should local customs be respected even if they don't conform to this?
(2)A benevolent dictatorship, with unrestricted power to enforce 'true' morality in all countries would be the best system, but the trouble would be with working out what true morality is in the first place (if it exists) and then instating a trustworthy agent or group to administer it.
(1)0kay. But that's just scale- The independent Nation is small while the International would be so huge.
Each, going up in power, would seem to have an easier time going corrupt since there are more areas to blame. Easier to confuse the rest of the departments until it's too late.
(2)Seems hard to except. What Government is really there for the people? It's there to protect itself; The Nation. The people are only a resource to use and care.
Yes, it benefits the government to maintain happy and productive citizens but it will always take care of the over all power it has to the detriment of the citizens.
Cultural laws? No idea how that would be handled.
Wow, Ididn't know I was so cynical.[/] 
In my opinion.
Nov 11, 2009 @ 22:27:34
It's only a bad thing when you don't benefit from it and your life becomes worse.
