- zastanow sie, czy zgadzasz sie z postawiona teza
- przeprowadz burze mozgow. Oto pare gradzinek z mojej strony:
The world is so divided, and even torn by wars in many places, that it is impossible to unite and form one consistent entity to have a common government.
There is still a large number of countries which don't guide themselves by democratic principles, and look unlikely to adopt them any soon. How would they fit in?
How would the democratic process work if, on one hand, we have a multitude of poor countries with huge populations, and on the other -- much outnumbered highly developed countries with small citizen counts? If we allowed direct election, it is obvious that only the interests of the so-far unprivileged would be represented. Would that not threat with a prospect of the poor just wishing "to make even" all at once? What implications would that have for "costly luxuries" such as advanced scientific research, space exploration, or environmental care? And in case we introduced an electoral census, how stable would the system be? And would it still be a democracy at all?
Would people identify with an administration of foreigners who would often be individuals from completely different cultural backgrounds and living by other values from theirs? Would they have trust in it, and would they be able to have a true faith in their own ideals? Would not the world become even more cynical and materialist?
How gigantic a bureaucracy might develop! It is quite enough to look at the European Union of today -- and this is, after all, a community of countries that are fairly similar in legal and political terms, and not that far apart in economic development.
How would conflicts be solved? The United Nations, as we know it, is quite inefficient. Brutal as it may sound, we now still have the extreme measure of an armed conflict, which currently mostly takes the form of a local war -- the balance of military power means only limited involvement of other countries. What if we had one global state? Would not the tensions and the escalated difference of opinion lead to political standstills that would break all fluency of political dealings and cause the huge machine of government to seize?
On a limited scale -- such as is necessary, useful and, more or less, all-compatible -- we _do_ have a world government in the shape of plentiful important global organizations, both political and economic, few of which are: the aforementioned UN, the World Bank, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent, and the International Monetary Fund.
---
No, to tak jednostronnie :) (tak tez wolno). Argumenty mozna wymyslac dalej. Ja np. z checia zobaczylbym jakies przeciwne :) Samemu mi sie nie chcialo sobie zaprzeczac, ale wtedy esej bylby jeszcze ciekawszy.
Co do porad nt. pisania, to _moje_ akurat niedawno uzewnetrznialem ;) (Inni tez :)) :
https://www.ang.pl/Nauka_writingu_11438.html
Powodzenia!!!