> Hopefully we'll arrive fairly soon at a point where we have 10 or so major blocs sitting around a table, almost like elected officials representing their electorate, and they can duke out this kind of stuff with real authority and the power to back up their words.
Good ghod, I hope not. Why would I want folks representing some foreign power to have any authority over me?
If they've got a good idea, I can implement it without doing as they insist. If they've got a bad idea, why would I want to implement it?
"Why would I want folks representing some foreign power to have any authority over me?"
That's the reality of living in a multilateral world. For an up to the minute example, check out where a lot of AIG's bailout money is going: repaying its promises to the europeans. That cannot but be the result of intragovernmental "pay that or else". Who knows what the "or else" was but obviously coughing up $100B (and counting, rapidly) was preferable.
The EU is the largest economy on the planet. The USA does what the EU says, for anything to do with trade anyway. Wouldn't you prefer the process to be formalised, public, debated, representative?
Anyway, we were talking about war, so here's an example of looking on the bright side of things. Imagine there was such a supranational body, with the balls to say no to, well, anyone. Imagine GWB went to them, cap in hand, asking to invade Iraq. They told him to go jump, as they obviously would. You'd be up, what, 4,000 soldiers and half a trillion dollars in treasure?
A 10-member "war council" is not a bad idea at all.
Decentralized systems are much more stable in the long run than top-heavy centrally-planned ones. Only the looter welfare state crowd is lying to themselves about that.
Oh yes, decentralised systems like Europe in the 20th century? We've just had 60 years of (relative) peace precisely because there was a top-heavy single-superpower (well, two superpowers for a lot of it, but still).
There are so many counterexamples to your argument it's not funny. Are societies with single governments less stable than those with several parties all pulling for control? Do trade agreements make regions more or less stable? These are all self-evident.
Not sure what you mean by "tinfoil", I assume it's meant to be insulting, but I really don't see the controversy.
Good ghod, I hope not. Why would I want folks representing some foreign power to have any authority over me?
If they've got a good idea, I can implement it without doing as they insist. If they've got a bad idea, why would I want to implement it?