Global World Order

I was discussing the concept of a global government in the context of a world without sovereignty last night, unfortunately with a stupid person. There are some ideals to which we can aspire to achieve, but such a government isn't really one of these.

First, there must be an assumption that we can reach a world without states or sovereignty. This relies on two things, human unity and all actors being rational actors; however, I can't think of any situations in which all actors have been rational. Rather, actors are irrational and petty - or 'human'.

Second, under the establishment of such an institution, sovereignty still exists, just compressed within the groups that control the government. There is always a controlling group. Problems across the world can be addressed, but how can we make the assumption that the entire world wants to respond in the same way? This removes the beneficial aspects of a universal government because much of a government's role reflects the society upon which it is based, minimizing the values of individuals in minority status in this government structure.

That leads to the third point - civil war. It will happen, because a global government means that there must be a global society. People's values and beliefs differ from area to area, and there will be conflict at a very fundamental level because of how people choose to identify themselves. Withstanding an extra-terrestrial attack that unifies all people on Earth as 'humans' or members of Earth, people will continue to identify by differentiation, about which Huntington talks.

I do think that a global secular body with state sovereignty that all people can participate within should be something to which we aspire. This is akin to the concept of a U.N. that actually enforces things, not just send peacekeeping troops that sit and watch people die.
The world isn't some atomic model, upon which everything will fall perfectly once we understand the ideal shape. It has a dark, deep soul - full of malice, depravity, indifference, suffering, and hope. The world can change and we have to appeal to our utopian ideals, but that doesn't mean we can achieve such perfection.

If we can't achieve the perfect, why not work simply in a pragmatic mindset? It appears to be a good idea - move to plan B and do the best we can. Does anyone like the results we have seen so far? We need to do better, because no matter how one views the outcomes of previous endeavors, it is usually agreed that they did not work out perfectly.