World Government 1990

uk 75

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
27 September 2006
Messages
6,033
Reaction score
6,129
In the Gerry Anderson series Space 1999 nuclear weapons are stored on the moon along with other nuclear waste after a limited nuclear war/ terrorist act in Switzerland in the 80s.
The Anderson derived comic had already created a World Government in 2028 following a limited nuclear war in Europe.
In 1990 the dream of a united world with the US and its democratic allies almost seemed possible. A few short years later the horrors of war in Yugoslavia showed how false such hopes were.
But if a nuclear exchange had occurred some time before 1990 might we have been living in a world in which the UN was turned into a World Government. The US and China would have called the shots as they have done in real life
 
No disrespect to the posters but this is way outside scope of this forum and will likely be shut down by the administrators as soon as they become aware of its existence.
Unfortunately it’s highly political and gives the usual suspects a chance to air their highly dubious views.
 
kaiserd
I understand your concerns but the thread is alternate history. World Government would have been a major impact on all technical developments both civil and military.
 
I hear World Government - I see us all driving Trabants, one type of landline phone(Like the UK had upto the 80's) and it all looking a little North Korean, wide avenues, lots of parades thanking our illustrious leaders for their benign governance.

Meanwhile Regional Prince OberFurher Boris Johnson is setting up floozy number 64 with a grace and favour country house, and we wont know anything about it!!
 
A World Government also featured in the adventures of Dan Dare in the Eagle comic.

It features in a *lot* of science fiction... Star Trek has it, Starship Troopers (both movie and book) has it, Babylon 5 has it. When the "world government" is assumed to be a good thing, it's *usually* not depicted or described in any detail. For a simple reason: there's no such thing as a truly powerful World Government that would be seen as a "good thing" by the vast majority of people, because nobody could agree on just what it is. Tell Americans that the World Government will tax the bejeebers out of them in order to raise up a couple billion Africans and Asians? Naw, dude. Tell Europeans that the World Government will make universal the Second Amendment and that concealed carry and an AR-15 in every home will now become the law of the land? Ha. The World Government will eliminate borders and immigration restrictions? Yeah, ask the citizens of Lesbos or Malmo how that has worked out for them.
 
Last edited:
But on the positive side before the Monty Python foot descends on the thread wasnt the idea of a World Government a way to pay for all sorts of really big technology both military and civil which could only be done at a global level
 
But on the positive side before the Monty Python foot descends on the thread wasnt the idea of a World Government a way to pay for all sorts of really big technology both military and civil which could only be done at a global level

That would not seem to follow. For starters, if you have a World Government, you wouldn't *need* a military... in theory, anyway. In reality you'd need a police force that would be indistinguishable from a military in order to put down the inevitable and incessant rebellions from all the people realizing what a bad idea the WG turned out to be. But that wouldn't require much investment for advanced military tech apart from surveillance/interrogation/imprisonment tech, certainly not fighters or stealthy bombers or subs and the like.

Other advanced technology would *probably* begin to stagnate, since technological advancement generally comes from competition, and with a WG you don't have anywhere near the level of competition. And as history has shown, governments don't give up power, but either slowly or quickly grab up more and more. Coupled with a probable economic clampdown on the advanced regions for the dubious benefit of the less advanced, chances seem quite good that commercial technological development would end up being suppressed.
 
Hard to fault your points. All the Sci Fi Utopias had to have an extraterrestrial threat to unify them and invest in fighting. Guess thats that then.The foot may fall..Good sci fi novel that one
 
If we can keep this from real world politics, and avoid the diatribes about certain political philosophies then the Mods might permit this to last.

I would agree that a world government is a likely response to a major catastrophic event such as an alien invasion.
And it would have to be such that only terrifying sacrifice would drive people together.
Survival trumps all.

Footfall does seem to hit the spot.
 
Zen I think we have closed the discussion anyway in a civilised manner. Perhaps the foot no longer needs to fall!
 
But on the positive side before the Monty Python foot descends on the thread wasnt the idea of a World Government a way to pay for all sorts of really big technology both military and civil which could only be done at a global level

That would not seem to follow. For starters, if you have a World Government, you wouldn't *need* a military... in theory, anyway. In reality you'd need a police force that would be indistinguishable from a military in order to put down the inevitable and incessant rebellions from all the people realizing what a bad idea the WG turned out to be. But that wouldn't require much investment for advanced military tech apart from surveillance/interrogation/imprisonment tech, certainly not fighters or stealthy bombers or subs and the like.

Other advanced technology would *probably* begin to stagnate, since technological advancement generally comes from competition, and with a WG you don't have anywhere near the level of competition. And as history has shown, governments don't give up power, but either slowly or quickly grab up more and more. Coupled with a probable economic clampdown on the advanced regions for the dubious benefit of the less advanced, chances seem quite good that commercial technological development would end up being suppressed.
That was my point, our progress to date has been 99% driven by the desire to kill you - all of you.

Take than away, and projects are going to take 10 years to decide if they are working in blue or black ink.

Another 10 to decide the date format.
 
Such World Governments are usually the product of conflict. The aftermath of the Great War saw the creation of the League of Nations and the end of the Second World War saw the creation of the United Nations which was consciously intended to be more useful than its predecessor. As peace returned, focus went elsewhere onto national policies and traditional rivalries and both quickly became rather toothless talking shops. Good intentions in wartime tend to evaporate as memory of hostilities fade. Interwar dreams of international governments maintaining peace by fleets of strategic bombers (as shown by H. G. Wells and others) were rather darker attempts to preserve peace by force but these were non-starters.
There is no doubt that following a conventional or limited Third World War that some kind of successor to the UN with even more teeth would have been sought, but of course it probably wouldn't have been any more effective in the long-run. There is a body of historical discussion of these interwar efforts, David Edgerton's England and Aeroplane being one book which examines airpower as a proxy for world government.
Even in the Gerry Andersonverse of TV21 there were two non-aligned powers that were determined to upset the World Government's rule and Government City's location in Bermuda was somewhat Western-centric, so there was some realism there.
 
Star Trek's "World Government" was enabled by a devasting war and solving of resource issues. A world with unlimited energy, replicators and transporters solves most of the issues raised above. Immigration, borders, customs tariffs, inequality of wealth distribution, all become irrelevant.
 
Star Trek's "World Government" was enabled by a devasting war and solving of resource issues.

Half right. The world came together after WWIII, but resources remained a problem for some time...

A world with unlimited energy, replicators and transporters solves most of the issues raised above.

Transporters weren't invented until a century after WWIII ("Enterprise"), and replicators even further down the line (TNG).

Immigration, borders, customs tariffs, inequality of wealth distribution, all become irrelevant.

Yeah, but no. Star Trek is often proclaimed as a multutultural utopia, but the reality is it's a *MONO*cultural utopia. Roddenberry, at least by the time of TNG, decided that humanity had become entirely atheistic... a development that seems monumentally unlikely. Even today as conventional religiosity in the developed West is in decline, superstitious newage is on the rise. Old-school religiosity is on the rise in those parts of the developed west that are importing it in large numbers form the underdeveloped world. Humans, it seems, have a natural inclination towards the supernatural.

So for "Star Trek" to have come about, World War III would have to be *really* bad; worse than the some dozens of millions of dead usually described. Instead, billions would probably need to die... Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran all nuking the bejeebers out of each other, destroying their populations and cultures, leaving the United States and western Europe *mostly* intact while the environmental disaster wipes out much of South America and Africa. In the aftermath, the US and EU are the first on their feet, and they move into the destroyed regions of the world and essentially culturally colonize them. That way, by the time of TOS the world is more or less the one westernized monoculture on display.

Note: Not saying that's what I *want* to happen; saying that's pretty much what would have needed to happen for the world of TOS to come together the way its shown, what with *everybody* speaking English and with less cultural variation than you'd see across the span of a few block of Newark, New Jersey.
 
What the visions of the future we have been describing have in common is that they are based on The West imprinting itself on the world. Events in last 29 years since 1990 have shown how erroneous this was.
The world is a much more complicated place than these stories suggest. In particular the rise of China hardly features.
In my lifetime religion has returned as a factor in life which in the 60s seemed unlikely.
 
In particular the rise of China hardly features.

Indeed. When Star Trek or those British puppet shows were dreaming of a benevolent World Government, there were those who saw China in the future, but seemingly only as a minor lurking badguy, always in the shadows getting kicked. But it's increasingly looking like any actual World Government will resemble the Chinese system far more than a western system... omniscient surveillance, "social credit," and all the rest.

While the west was reading 1984 as a warning, others were reading it as an operation manual.
 
In 1964, Russel Braddon, an Australian author published a novel entitled "The Year of the Angry Rabbit." It featured "super-myxomatosis" - a disease designed to kill rabbits that had become immune to normal myxomatosis. Problem was, there quickly developed a species of super-rabbit - giant sized and immune to super-myxomatosis. Super-myxomatosis however was deadly to humans. Australia was presented with a super weapon. There was no known cure for this weapon. The Australian Government decides it's going to take over world by siting, in all cities secret, remotely controlled caches of the virus. Once that is done, Australia informs the world via a demonstration in Africa. When all communication ceases with the area of Africa that has been affected, Australia instructs the US and fUSSR to use nuclear weapons to destroy the virus or the world is doomed.

They do so. Canberra then starts issuing instructions as the world government. They tell everybody to destroy all their weapons...or else. They do so, but it is discovered the world is wedded economincally to the production of weapons so Canberra instructs them to resume production but to dump them immediate, once constructed. They do so. The world enters into a period of peaceful prosperity. The only problem is the super-rabbits. They still exist and they are breeding. Australia has to be evacuated, leaving the Aborigines the only humans left there. There is always a price to pay it seems for hubris.
 
In general a "World Government" and how well it does or does not work in fiction is highly dependent on the direction the originator WANTS it to go and why (as Scott notes :) ) details tend to be lacking when it's "good" and usually detailed down to that "horrible first step on the slippery slope to doom" when it's bad :)

Reality being a lot more messy than fiction it's quite obviously never going to be that black-or-white. The Andersonverse "World Government" like most back then were semi-extrapolated as following the post-WWII trend of "up-sizing" alliances towards larger and larger organizations. The problem with those remains the same, you need someone who is NOT part of the bigger group as an 'enemy' or focus which the World Government is organized to oppose in the same manner you had the whole "East-v-West" Cold War world "organization". (In theory, in reality it was never that solid of blocks on either side)

In most of these cases the "World Government" comes about from some trauma that "brings the world together" to solve but as always fiction points out that in and of itself might not be such a cozy outcome. In general, for example the Cold War situation above, something that brings the existing power structures into any kind of cooperative agreement if most likely going to be based on maintaning the status-quo as well as solving the original problem. For example the Niven/Pounelle "Co-Dominum" of the mainly US and Soviet governments binding themselves together by treaty and organization is a good example. (Well "bad" actually as it was a horrible idea that barely worked WHEN it worked at all but you know what I mean) I have my doubts you could plausibly every get there from any possible POD short of world ending destruction in the near future which is why I postulate an incoming asteroid as a possible cause. But in the end the whole point of the "organization" is to leave the US and USSR as 'top dogs' with everyone else arrayed below them in a structured hiearchy which by it's original and evolove nature, (as we see in the series) would become generally oppresive and eventually fall apart.

In reality of course organizations of the size needed for an actual "World Government"as Scott also note would not represent everyone so there is inevitible conflict built in along with method and motive to supress that conflict in both subtle and overt manners. Larry Niven's "UN" world government in his Known Space series of stories tends to waffle back and forth between neccissary evil and opressive evil with a pretty plausible rationale since it is organized around the high profile bugaboos of the 60s and 70s pollution, resource depletion and overpopulation. Technology wise that means it HAS to support some advances in technology, (fusion power, spaceflight and colonization) while rather ruthlessly supressing others to keep the lid on Earth's population.

Of course the Kziniti put paid to their planning to create a more passive and 'controllable' humanity just in time :)

In Star Trek, despite what Rodenberry had originally planned the questions of how 'unified' the United Federation of Planets and how, and what, the World Government "United Earth" was in that context and on its own. The rather heavy western bias' shows through pretty clearly for the UFP and frankly UE is never really brought up or examined which I think is a shame since one thing I'd always noted is Kirk was from Iowa. NOT the United States, and while he was aware of America his idenity seemed more tied to a specific place rather than a nation-state. I also think that the title "United Earth" points to a lack of "nation-states" as a basis for organization but that may be just me :)

I rationalize this by assuming that the Star Trek universe IS actually our universe and the "more advanced" humanoid species, ("Q" Trelaine, et-al) are actually "us" as a post-human society trying to recreate a favorite "fan-fiction" series... Now THERE's a scary thought :)

Randy
 
Of course the Kziniti put paid to their planning to create a more passive and 'controllable' humanity just in time :)

And they had big ships! Don't forget the big ships, to sail the world map.
 
The original Star Trek had FTL engines, and transporters and very small energy weapons. The threat was now off earth. Even if there was a World Government - and having spoken to Gene Roddenberry personally, he never mentioned it - the "final frontier" was filled with things that could kill you. Star Fleet and mankind "evolving" into a more peaceful society was never explained in detail. There were only glimpses of the new space arm, Star Fleet. And yes, there was that one episode where a member of a very advanced society appeared, suggesting a possible meeting in a few thousand years.

Meanwhile, it's quite obvious that war, on any level, and competition for land and resources are the drivers for new technology.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The original Star Trek had FTL engines, and transporters and very small energy weapons.

And to think the 'one' of those that was litterally caused by budget and time constraints was the one (IIRC) Roddenberry commented he'd wished he'd never 'invented' because he didn't realize all the problems it would cause :) Had the Shuttlecraft piece been done on time the 'transporter' likely wouldn't have been a part of the canon technology. But that, (along with "we'll technobabble it to fix it") is a Star Trek staple/requirment so there's that no matter how it effects everything else.

The threat was now off earth.

Well the universe IS a cold, uncaring void but there's all those pretty "alien's" of the arguably opposite "sex" out there ... I mean I've always blamed Captain Kirk for the Sheppard of the Mass Effect games after all :)

Even if there was a World Government - and having spoken to Gene Roddenberry personally, he never mentioned it - the "final frontier" was filled with things that could kill you.

Well "United Earth" was offical so it was obviously in the background and in context of the whole UFP structure each 'planet' was considered a "whole" unit so it was an assumed detail. As the premise was essentially a "Space Western" you had to assume some sort of external threat as a basis for most stories.

Star Fleet and mankind "evolving" into a more peaceful society was never explained in detail. There were only glimpses of the new space arm, Star Fleet. And yes, there was that one episode where a member of a very advanced society appeared, suggesting a possible meeting in a few thousand years.

Star Fleet was always a hybrid 'service' in that it was "military" but "not-military" in both mission as well as organiztion. It was also clear that it was intended to be UFP controlled rather than "Earth" based so that it would (in theory) be capable of enforcing UFP directives on Earth as well as external threats. Of course like any "Western alliance but really US lead and organized, oh wait we mean 'UN' of course" future world/interstellar government that would never happen because the US. I mean "Earth" is in charge :)

Meanwhile, it's quite obvious that war, on any level, and competition for land and resources are the drivers for new technology.

Hmmm, maybe easier to say "Conflict and Competition" are the main drivers?

Randy
 
Star Fleet and Kirk are clearly inspired by the high period of the RN and a certain fictional Captain Hornblower.
A period when the Admiralty dispatched ships to map and explore the world.....to....boldly go....
 
Star Fleet and Kirk are clearly inspired by the high period of the RN and a certain fictional Captain Hornblower.
A period when the Admiralty dispatched ships to map and explore the world.....to....boldly go....

Total aside but there was an interesting thread over on AHdotcom that 'reimagined' what-if Roddenberry had pitched "trek" as sailing era US Navy series :)
Some interesting character and episode concepts for that one...

Also we had a thread where "Trek" was done in England by Gerry Anderson and some of the Doctor Who folks...

Randy
 
Star Trek was definitely the Space Navy, It used nautical terms with a bit of updating, Military protocol and structure were evident. Choosing the Enterprise to host various alien diplomats for a meeting meant that Earth was in charge, or at least agreeable to others. For the viewer at the time - 1968 - Star Trek was a look at the future of the United States. I listened intently as Mr. Roddenberry told me about his future TV plans, and was disappointed when the first one appeared.
 
Star Trek's Original Series does not really define the Starfleet clearly until the last of the three series. Early on there is very little political background, so much so that in the trial scene for Spock various real flags are draped in the background. In a later episode a shield in red with UFP appears. The influence of Kennedy's hopes for America and the changes from 1963 to 1968 are mirrored in various episodes. It is very much UScentric.

The Gerry Anderson series have little in the way of political background onscreen. There is a Stingray episode about a caricature Eastern dictatorship joining the WASP which has the UK and US flags flying at Marineville. The World Government does not arrive until "Captain Scarlet", in fact its was created by Alan Fennell in a spectacular comic called TV21. The seminal World Government story has Steve Zodiac hunting down the assassins (Kennedy again) of an alien leader who has come to Earth to avoid a "space war". The World President is given the name Nikita (Kruschev) Bandranaik (Sri Lankan leader). Dan Dare in the EAGLE was Fennell's model and its World Government was simply the UN writ large with and improbable British led Spacefleet.

The writers of these fictions simply took events of the day and spun them.

2001 a Space Odyssey, the other big future depiction of the 60s makes no attempt at all and simply keeps the Cold War Powers of 1968 in charge.

Anderson and Roddenberry did try to break free from the pale white male world but in the 60s that was a lot harder than we appreciate today.
 
"pale white male world" How totally wrong. Today's politics are manufactured out of whole cloth by a small group of self-proclaimed makers of progress. And so far, usually not.

The events of the day were not simply spun. The design of the Enterprise was a radical departure from most of the spacecraft that came before it. Matter-antimatter engines? Of course, that was just common thinking from the time - not. And even the shuttlecraft. Anyone care to name how many other SF ships carried one? Assignment: Earth was creative in the extreme.
 
It was also clear that it was intended to be UFP controlled rather than "Earth" based so that it would (in theory) be capable of enforcing UFP directives on Earth as well as external threats.

*Eventually.* Early on the Enterprise was not somuch part of the United Federation of Planets, but the United Earth Space Probe Agency. One of the early episodes had Kirk pronounce the organization "Oospa" while references calling back to it for orders. So it wasn't so much that Starfleet just happened to have a whole lot of humans in it... initially, Starfleet was an Earth organization that Spock signed on to for unclear reasons.
 
Imagine NATO or theEuropean Union. The various military forces in NATO are directly under NATOs command, but the various national services remain separate. Each nation pretty much builds or buys its own stuff, to its own specifications. A given unit is not likely to deal on a regular basis with foreign military, unless there are some exchange personnel. Toss in budget considerations for makeup, models, sets, etc it's easier to avoid the issue.
 
UFP=NATO is one interpretation, and early in Star Trek that would've made sense, what with the UESPA running the Enterprise and the Vulcans having their own Constitution class ship. But as the episodes rolled on and the world building proceeded in miniscule dribs and drabs, it eventually became clear that it was more like UFP=USA, where what were once separate state military forces became one unified military force. By the time of the movies and especially the TNG era, it was pretty clear that Starfleet is *not* composed of separate "national"space forces all operating under one umbrella, but it was indeed a single unified organization.
 
Mostly because people were wondering where the aliens were. So, we get a bunch of aliens with strange heads but they can buy their clothes off the rack at Target. They finally started to make real use of CGI with "Enterprise". They changed the Gorns from some guy in a lizard Halloween costume to a full CGI raptor.
 

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom