Apparently this is a worry that concerns the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart.
|Willis Hart: On the Notion that World Government Would Eliminate the Need for War... Total horse-shit. a) There would still be the possibility of a civil war (and, boy, would it ever be a dandy) and b) even if there wasn't a war, we all know for a fact that governments worldwide have slaughtered far more of their own people (democide - Google it) than they've ever killed through warfare, and that if we ever decided to give these fiends ultimate power they would more than happy to up the ante. Please, wake up, folks. (3/19/2016 AT 2:54pm).|
Frankly, I find it "horse-shit" that anyone would author such a post. One world government? Does Willis REALLY think that is something he needs to worry about? What's next? A series of commentaries about how the Illuminati and Freemasons are planning the New World Order at the Bilderberg conference?
BTW, as far as "democide" goes, as per the person who "revived and redefined" the term "democratic institutions—even partial ones - reduce the likelihood of armed conflict and all but eliminate the risk that it will lead to geno/politicide" ("demo" being ancient Greek for "people").
As Wikipedia points out, examples include "the Great Purges carried out by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, the deaths from the colonial policy in the Congo Free State, and Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward, which resulted in a famine killing millions of people". So what we should be fearing are totalitarian dictatorships (if a "one world government" were ever to come about it isn't guaranteed that it would not be a democracy).
However, I think that "democide" is really Libertarian code for "government bad". ANY kind of government. Even democracy. Which Libertarians also hate, btw. Because (Libertarians believe in kingdom rather than democracy.
Not kingdom in the traditional sense of the word, where the progeny of the King inherits rulership, but a system under which corporations are kingdoms and the CEO rules. This is the kind of organization Libertarians prefer. A "meritocracy" of the wealthy (wealth being proof of a person's right to rule). Although most of us refer to this as plutocracy.
And you think the plutocrats don't kill people? I'm more worried about what would happen if these fiends gained more power (via further deregulation and by "allowing them to keep more of their own money"). I'm positive they would more than happy to up the ante. And here I think is something that is well within the realm of possibility, unlike with the Hartster's one world government delusions.