We humans are prone to becoming enamored of emotionally satisfying but intellectually vacuous slogans such as “global government,” “fair share,” and “universal healthcare,” to name just a few. But to protect our pocketbooks, as well as our freedom, we should apply some Engineering Thinking before we jump on board to support any of these causes.
To avoid the creation of inferior products, engineers do not base design decisions on a single highly-appealing feature. Instead, we consider a full array of goals, many of which compete with each other; i.e. the engineer is faced with making tradeoffs, favoring some features while downgrading others. In medical products, for example, engineers will emphasize reliability even if it means higher costs.
Let’s look at the example of Global Government, using a simple tradeoff analysis.
Global Government implies peace and prosperity and fairness for all. But think about it: when have you ever wanted to have only one choice? Would you prefer to be able to buy groceries only at Publix, or get cosmetics only at Neiman Marcus, or purchase tools only at Lowe’s, or have only one possible selection for a mate? Of course not, because having only one choice limits your opportunities. At a basic level everyone knows that competition — having multiple options — is a very good thing.
In the case of global government, the tradeoff is the assumption of peace, prosperity, and fairness, versus the fact that you will have no choice in your selection of government. It follows that if the global government does not perform as well as hoped, there will be no way to escape its reach. Today, for example, if you find the federal government oppressive, your can leave the U.S. But if we have a one-world government that you can’t stand, then where are you going to move? The Moon?