Wasn’t quite sure where to ask the question in the title, or if this is even the right question to ask, but figured a Solarpunk community would be most likely to have the answers I’m looking for…
My reasoning is we are facing some global problems here, you know with all the climate change and whatnot; So we need global solutions for them; Therefore the obvious solution seems to be the United Nations 2.0, or League of Nations 3.0 if you will. Basically a global constitutional assembly, hopefully before it all devolves into total war again this time, or worse.
So I want to read up on what thought or maybe even activism there is out there specifically in this regard. Anything to read, recent or historic, you can recommend?
Any thoughts you want to share? Why can or can’t this work? Am I being to naive here? Explain it Like I am 5 please!
The keyword is probably world government. Also institutions like the EU are pretty intressting. That has been copied in Africa, Eurasia and South America.
Yeah in a way. That particular keyword has a big conspiracy factor when you search for it though. :D
Local international institutions are of course an obvious avenue whether you aim for a world government or not, but I doubt they have velocity required for the problems we are facing, old and new.
Bodies like the LvN and UN are inherently going to fail to achieve peace because they rely on willing compliance with almost zero enforcement mechanisms.
Because having enforcement mechanisms slams face first into the principle of state sovereignty.
The only way you’ll build a world government is through the slow, grinding establishment of transnational federations like the proposed European Federation and East African Federation. Technically India is that already. Pan-Arabism seeks to establish a state of this sort.
The UN won’t become an effective governing body until it’s made the governing body of a united federation of earth, probably built over a VERY long period of state mergers between democratic nations.
Picture how unlikely it would be just for all of NATO to agree to a single constitution for all of them to join as a single state, now scale that up exponentially for the amount of work it’d take to convince Russia or China to democratically merge with such a state.
This state of the world we live in is the most united it’s ever been in cooperative initiative and communication, and it’s an absolute shit show that makes the HRE look like the pinnacle of effective internal integration of a state.
Bodies like the LvN and UN are inherently going to fail to achieve peace because they rely on willing compliance with almost zero enforcement mechanisms.
Because having enforcement mechanisms slams face first into the principle of state sovereignty.
I agree on the state sovereignty part. But both the LvN and UN bettered the world within their limited means, while obviously more often failing than succeeding. So I don’t agree on the failure part entirely. They may be inherently aspirational, but they tried and managed to improve conditions somewhat, exactly by being an (if ever so slight) impediment on state sovereignty that didn’t exist before.
But yeah the general consensus seems to be that the UN is a failure, so I’m just looking for people who are thinking about what to do about that. Seems like the only people talking about it are the World Bank and Russia with its multipolar world order.
This is indeed interesting. That charter reads like a
git diffon the current one. Exactly the stuff I was looking for, thanks.World Bank ties though? Oof. People are going to call me a lizard person. /s
I have no suggestions of groups, books, papers, blogs and etc regardin global constitutionalism, but I have an opinion.
Creating bigger and stronger governments will only lead to the protection of an elite that is way too irresponsible with their powers.
Right now the vibe is against oil, gas and pollutants and in favor of sustainability mostly globally. It’s genuinely very hard to find someone that says: “I don’t care about microplastics, “I have no issue with air pollutants causing cancer” and “I don’t care we are trashing the ocean”.
And this is sort of where solarpunk fits extremely well in. I don’t know if governments and corporations will solve the climate crisis, but goddamn I’ll do my part and help businesses and others do their part too.
Creating bigger and stronger governments will only lead to the protection of an elite that is way too irresponsible with their powers.
Well I clearly see the danger. The many against the few is a problem as old as society. And where there is power, there will be abuse. And every system we have, like separation of powers and checks and balances, is flawed. But the cold hard truth is that we have run out of time and I don’t really see any other viable solutions. If somebody has one please let me know, that’s why I made this post.
It’s genuinely very hard to find someone that says: “I don’t care about microplastics, “I have no issue with air pollutants causing cancer” and “I don’t care we are trashing the ocean”.
I know what you mean, most people would agree on this. But sadly it is very easy to find the people who would say so. Cui bono? Who is benefiting? So we need to regulate them. And then of course there are people too consumed with simply subsistence to care about any of this.
I don’t know if governments and corporations will solve the climate crisis, but goddamn I’ll do my part and help businesses and others do their part too.
On this we agree.
I think you are being naive. The LofN failed, the UN is now failing too.
None of them really can do much other than issue recommendations, which are then used for political plays for optics on the international stage. They by definition cannot solve problems. That said some related incentives have succeeded, such as the WHO. The idea of a United earth authority is not unappealing, but it needs to have teeth, and that’s not easy to achieve, because geopolitical power today stems from cultivating economic dependence and nuclear stockpiles, without both, the any United earth is out of the question.
However, I think something like the European Federation is in theory, more feasible, these countries are not only dependant on each other, but they are culturally adjacent, an easier sell. However even that is extremely difficult, potentially impossible, in a world where national idea won over the solidarity idea. EU is failing too.
The EU is failing because some of the individual member states are too strong. The same is true on global level where some overly large states or similar constructs form competing power blocks.
Increasing regional integration is basically a local optimum that makes global integration impossible.
I think you are being naive.
Fair.
The LofN failed, the UN is now failing too.
That’s why I’m looking for ideas to reform or replace it.
They by definition cannot solve problems. That said some related incentives have succeeded, such as the WHO.
That’s kind of the crux here though, it can solve problems and it does. People are being fed by the UN every day. Yes, it’s not good enough at solving the problems it is charged with solving. But that makes improving upon it the obvious course of action, does it not? What else is there except apathy?
![[Request For Comments] Can you recommend any groups/books/papers/blogs/keywords/etc on the topic of UN reform and global constitutionalism?](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/6a758f23-5368-473e-ba26-002ff6df9683.jpeg){kind=link}