!!

Guests can now post!

Welcome to Intelligent Answers.  As a guest, you are now able to post a question, subject to getting through our spam-bot filters.  However, if you want to answer any questions, you will need to register.  Thanks for visting!  (BTW - guests cannot post links, and if you post spam, we will block your IP and report you to every spam protection site we can find - we work hard to keep this site spam free for the benefit and enjoyment of our members!)

Author Topic: In Science Fiction, there is often a single leader for the whole planet...  (Read 3226 times)

Offline redslap

  • Founder member and IA's official taster - cheese a speciality.
  • Founder
  • Student - A Level
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 442
  • Helpfulness: 17
  • Still Breathing, that's good, right?
...do you think this could ever be possible in reality?

Offline Hiheels

  • Founder member, in the naughty corner for smoking in the café.
  • Founder
  • Chancellor
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 123
  • -Receive: 82
  • Posts: 5060
  • Helpfulness: 677
  • Yes, yes, very nice. Now put it away.
I reckon that would depend on the size of the planet and the personalities (if any) of the planetarians.

If there were, for example, half a dozen inhabitants, then it might work. However with a larger number and if there were diverse personalities amongst them then not a chance.
A huge planet full of clones would give a good chance of it working.

Offline Duffield1

  • Founder member and wannabe deity.
  • Administrator
  • Maria Montessori
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 61
  • -Receive: 36
  • Posts: 2505
  • Helpfulness: 67
  • I ain't nothing but a hound dawg...
I'd suspect that there is a fairly good chance - especially if there was a common foe, rather than friend.  I suspect that if there was an interstellar threat against the world that there would be a gathering of world powers, and one person would have to chair that - probably the president of Russia, China or the USA.

However, if it was a friendly relationship, with potential for extra-terrestrial exporting of goods or resources, then there would be a certain amount of protectionism, with global nations competing for the trade.

Offline siasl

  • Founder member who you can't insult as I'm too ignorant.
  • Administrator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 122
  • -Receive: 85
  • Posts: 5306
  • Helpfulness: 129
  • Intelligence is soluble in alcohol <hic>
Not possible here until everyone ratifies democracy as a method of government. There are still dictatorships and theocracies in various places around the globe, and that gets in the way of progress

Captain Kirk

  • Guest
I have asked something similar to this on IQ before, It was agreed that the president of the USA would appear to be the head leader of the world in first contact situations and lets face it if there would be an attack he would be the first to go so no big loss really so i am all in favour of it being him lmao

Offline robinsamuels

  • Founder member.
  • Founder
  • Student - A Level
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 408
  • Helpfulness: 11
  • Never argue with an armed queen!
    • Robins
Not possible here until everyone ratifies democracy as a method of government. There are still dictatorships and theocracies in various places around the globe, and that gets in the way of progress

Personally, I would have thought it would be the opposite. I can't see a democratically elected world leader, but a dictatorship or theocracy on a world wide basis could be feasible. After all, that way worldwide dissent could be put down, rather than worrying about appeasing the billions of voters needed for the next election.

Offline siasl

  • Founder member who you can't insult as I'm too ignorant.
  • Administrator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 122
  • -Receive: 85
  • Posts: 5306
  • Helpfulness: 129
  • Intelligence is soluble in alcohol <hic>
Well, there is that, too :D

But then how does he become that dictator - he'd need to start out at the head of a rather large army - and most of those are in ostensibly democratic countries

Offline robinsamuels

  • Founder member.
  • Founder
  • Student - A Level
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 408
  • Helpfulness: 11
  • Never argue with an armed queen!
    • Robins
You assume that a dictator would take control, rather than being given it. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept of a dictatorship, it's just what most people end up doing when they became dictator that's the issue.

Don't forget, the term comes from ancient Rome, where the senate could vote dictatorial powers to a leader in time of crisis, allowing him to act quickly rather than being mired in politics.

Also, one of my favourite quotes was something I heard a vicar say once in a sermon: "Heaven is not a democracy"!

Offline macavity

  • Founder member.
  • Founder
  • Student - AS Level
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 1
  • Posts: 388
  • Helpfulness: 13
    • props fashions
There have been many attempts to rule the world with the various empires that have appeared over the decades. They found out that it was an impossible task to manage so many different cults and sects in so many places at the same time and human nature as it is rebels eventually till things alter. So another ruling emerges to try and rule,

Offline siasl

  • Founder member who you can't insult as I'm too ignorant.
  • Administrator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 122
  • -Receive: 85
  • Posts: 5306
  • Helpfulness: 129
  • Intelligence is soluble in alcohol <hic>
I don't doubt that a benevolent dictator could do a good job (assuming you find someone who isn't too corrupted by the power), I just doubt they'd be "given" the job to unite the globe when there are in existence the current crop of wildly disparate government systems.

Currently, the only countries with enough clout to manage this are the USA and China, and I can't see the rest of the world accepting either.

Unification will only occur as the countries become intermingled enough to support the idea of mixing political ideologies within the same country - and even then there's the hurdle to leap of what to do in a multi-faith environment.

Look at Iraq - likely to be chaotic for the foreseeable future. All parties moderately unhappy at any foreign presence, some more violently than others. Yet if the foreign military presence ups-sticks and leaves tomorrow, the place would really get nasty quite quickly. Things are getting better, but it's a very slow process that some parties are doing their utmost to undermine.