QA：如果世界上所有的國(guó)家聯(lián)合成一個(gè)大國(guó)會(huì)發(fā)生什么？

Balaji Viswanathan CEO at Invento (2016-present)
There is a folktale of an Indian Maharajah who saw a football match for the first time. He was quite aghast at the end and told his secretary - "buy each of those players one of those balls. I don't like the idea of all of them fighting for something as simple as that"
This "one world" idea is not far from that.
Humans by nature compete. And we compete at multiple levels. This competition produces most of the innovations we see around us. For instance, in the 1950s Americans were slacking in their space research. In came the Russians with their Sputnik. The national rivalries were sparked and in the following two decades world saw an amazing range of innovations in space science. Had the Russians never tried to compete with the Americans, we would not have had satellites or moon landing.

【回答】首席執(zhí)行官(2016年至今)
有一個(gè)民間故事，講的是一個(gè)印度國(guó)王第一次看足球比賽。最后他非常吃驚，告訴他的秘書“給每個(gè)球員都買一個(gè)這樣的球。我不喜歡他們所有人都為這么簡(jiǎn)單的事情而相互爭(zhēng)斗?！?br /> 這種“單一世界”的理念與這故事相去不遠(yuǎn)。
人類與生俱來(lái)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。我們?cè)诙鄠€(gè)層面上競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這種競(jìng)爭(zhēng)產(chǎn)生了我們周圍大多數(shù)的創(chuàng)新。例如，在20世紀(jì)50年代，美國(guó)人在太空研究方面有所懈怠。俄國(guó)人發(fā)射了他們的人造衛(wèi)星。國(guó)家之間的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)由此開(kāi)始，在接下來(lái)的二十年里，世界看到了一系列令人驚嘆的空間科學(xué)創(chuàng)新。如果俄國(guó)人從未試圖與美國(guó)人競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，我們就不會(huì)有衛(wèi)星或登月。

Computers were mainly invented to break enemy codes in WWII and Internet was built during the cold war as a way to keep communication running in case the Russians managed to attack a few key points.
If I'm able to type something that you could read somewhere else in the world, it is because of the national rivalries between US and other countries.
It is all about incentives.
Yesterday, I was listening to a lecture from a popular historian on why India, China and Arabs didn't discover the new trade routes at their heights in the middle ages. One of the key reasoning was the profit motive. These cultures didn't desire for much from the west. In fact, when Vasco da Gama visited Calicut for the first time, the locals laughed at what he had to offer. Thus, the Portuguese had to just give up their silver having no other useful stuff. This trade imbalance continued for centuries.

計(jì)算機(jī)主要是為了在二戰(zhàn)中破譯敵人的密碼而發(fā)明的，而互聯(lián)網(wǎng)則是在冷戰(zhàn)期間建立的，用于在俄國(guó)人攻擊幾個(gè)關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)時(shí)保持通信暢通。
如果我能打出你們?cè)谑澜缙渌胤娇梢宰x到的文字，那是因?yàn)槊绹?guó)和其他國(guó)家之間的國(guó)家競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。
這一切都與激勵(lì)有關(guān)。
昨天，我聽(tīng)了一位著名歷史學(xué)家的演講，內(nèi)容是關(guān)于為什么印度、中國(guó)和阿拉伯人在中世紀(jì)的鼎盛時(shí)期沒(méi)有發(fā)現(xiàn)新的貿(mào)易路線。其中一個(gè)關(guān)鍵的推理是利潤(rùn)動(dòng)機(jī)。這些文化并不渴望從西方得到什么。事實(shí)上，當(dāng)瓦斯科·達(dá)伽馬首次訪問(wèn)卡里庫(kù)特時(shí)，當(dāng)?shù)厝顺靶λ峁┑囊磺小Ｋ?，葡萄牙人不得不放棄他們的白銀，因?yàn)樗麄儧](méi)有其他有用的東西。這種貿(mào)易不平衡持續(xù)了幾個(gè)世紀(jì)。

On the other hand, Portuguese, Dutch and later other Europeans had plenty to gain - silk, spices and later coffee, tea, cotton etc. Thus, they had the motive. This resulted in their exploration around the world. If the Europeans were not in so much pain to compete, they would not have discovered the new world and other parts of the world.
Money and pride are two of the biggest motivators for humans. This keeps our engine running.
Monopolies and Innovation
Twelve years ago, Microsoft had very little competition in the browser space. Internet Explorer was at some point clueless of what should be done. Innovation sagged in the absence of competition. Then Firefox came with a variety of new innovation such as a practical implementation of the tabbed interface. Later Chrome joined the party. Innovation in browsers rapidly expanded.

另一方面，葡萄牙人、荷蘭人和后來(lái)的其他歐洲人獲得了很多東西——絲綢、香料，以及后來(lái)的咖啡、茶、棉花等。這樣，他們就有了動(dòng)機(jī)。這導(dǎo)致了他們?cè)谑澜绺鞯氐奶剿?。如果歐洲人沒(méi)有那么痛苦地相互競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，他們就不會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)新大陸和世界其它地區(qū)。
金錢和驕傲是人類最大的兩個(gè)動(dòng)力，這讓我們的引擎一直運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)。
壟斷與創(chuàng)新
十二年前，微軟在瀏覽器領(lǐng)域幾乎沒(méi)有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手。在某種程度上，IE不知道該怎么做了。在缺乏競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的情況下，創(chuàng)新力下降了。然后火狐瀏覽器帶來(lái)了一系列新的創(chuàng)新，比如標(biāo)簽式界面的實(shí)際應(yīng)用。后來(lái)Chrome也加入了這個(gè)行列。瀏覽器的創(chuàng)新迅速擴(kuò)大。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Ultimately it was the competition. Same in the case of politics. When there is rivalry, nations innovate. Money and pride motivate the commoners to pay attention to their scientists and then fund them with resources to push the frontiers. Without that push from government, science will sag and so will every other part of the society.
In short, competition in governance and politics is very crucial just as a riveting football game enriches our fun time. Of course, hooliganism is bad and so are wars. Thus, we have to constantly work towards ways to keep the rowdy crowd under control and root out violence. But, hooliganism doesn't mean you need to avoid playing. In the same way wars don't mean we have to stop national rivalries and pride.
Who benefits from this one world?

歸根結(jié)底還是競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。政治方面也是如此。當(dāng)存在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)時(shí)，國(guó)家就會(huì)創(chuàng)新。金錢和驕傲激勵(lì)老百姓關(guān)注他們的科學(xué)家，然后為他們提供資源推動(dòng)前沿。如果沒(méi)有政府的推動(dòng)，科學(xué)將陷入癱瘓，社會(huì)的其他部分也是如此。
簡(jiǎn)而言之，治理和政治方面的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)是非常關(guān)鍵的，就像一場(chǎng)引人入勝的足球比賽豐富了我們的娛樂(lè)時(shí)間一樣。當(dāng)然，流氓行為是不好的，戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)也是如此。因此，我們必須不斷努力，想方設(shè)法控制騷亂人群，根除暴力。但是，流氓行為并不意味著你需要避免比賽。同樣，戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)并不意味著我們必須停止國(guó)家間的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和驕傲。
誰(shuí)能從這個(gè)單一的世界中獲益？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

You can see this "one world" government idea from Indians and possibly from some Chinese and Americans. It is not a surprise. Because, groups with huge demographic advantage would dominate this "one world" while smaller cultures will be waylaid. Imagine Israel. Is there any possibility of them merging with this one world and give up all the things they fought for? One world will be the trampling of small cultural groups.
What if Idi Amin is the world leader?
Finally, when people think of "one world" they have some utopian visions. Doves flying, smiling child faces. What if the one world leader is Idi Amin? When he was ruling Uganda his people at least had the option of moving to other countries. What if there is no other country to go to? How will you escape tyranny?

你可以從印度人，也可能從一些中國(guó)人和美國(guó)人那里看到這種“單一世界”的政府理念。這并不令人驚訝。因?yàn)椋瑩碛芯薮笕丝趦?yōu)勢(shì)的群體將主宰這個(gè)“單一世界”，而較小的文化將被淘汰。想象一下以色列。他們有沒(méi)有可能融入這個(gè)世界，放棄他們?yōu)橹畩^斗的一切？單一世界將是對(duì)小型文化群體的踐踏。
如果伊迪 · 阿明是世界領(lǐng)袖會(huì)如何呢？（非洲三大暴君之一）
最后，當(dāng)人們想到“單一世界”時(shí)，他們有一些烏托邦的愿景。鴿子在天空飛翔，孩子們笑臉盈盈。如果世界上唯一的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人是伊迪 · 阿明呢？當(dāng)他統(tǒng)治烏干達(dá)時(shí)，他的人民至少可以選擇移居到其他國(guó)家。如果沒(méi)有其他國(guó)家可去怎么辦？你將如何擺脫暴政？

Do you think it is impossible to elect a tyrant as the world leader? Think again. There are far more crazy people in the world than scholars and peace activists. In "one world" these people would have enormous power from the scale. You can already see some semblance of this in the elections in big countries. The moderates get weeded out in large countries as they cannot match the organizational power of the strong. When you expand their reach to the whole world, the good politicians don't stand a chance.
Leave alone tyranny. How about fundamental differences in culture? Islam will be the largest religion of this "one world". It is possible for a democratically elected world government to propose Sharia law. Will it be acceptable to others? If it is not accepted, how will you fight this "one world" government.
A single world government monopolizing will be terrible for innovation in social, cultural and technological terms.

你認(rèn)為選一個(gè)暴君當(dāng)世界領(lǐng)袖是不可能的嗎？再想想吧。世界上瘋狂的人比學(xué)者和和平活動(dòng)家要多得多。在“單一世界”中，這些人將擁有巨大的權(quán)力。你已經(jīng)可以在大國(guó)的選舉中看到這方面的跡象。溫和派在大國(guó)被淘汰，因?yàn)樗麄儫o(wú)法匹敵強(qiáng)者的組織力量。當(dāng)你把他們的影響力擴(kuò)展到整個(gè)世界時(shí)，優(yōu)秀的政治家就沒(méi)有機(jī)會(huì)了。
不要管暴政。那么文化的根本差異是什么？伊斯蘭教將成為這個(gè)“單一世界”中最大的宗教。民主選舉的世界政府有可能提出伊斯蘭教法。別人會(huì)接受嗎？如果它不被接受，你將如何對(duì)抗這個(gè)“單一世界”的政府。
一個(gè)單一的世界政府壟斷，將嚴(yán)重阻礙社會(huì)、文化和技術(shù)方面的創(chuàng)新。

Binati Sheth Engineer
The world was a single country once upon a time before the continents broke apart. Though human societies didn’t really exist back then.
If the entire world became fellow citizens (a rosy picture):
* We would not be antagonized by other’s religious beliefs, but accept the fundamental right to have a belief
* We would probably have one completely new universal language
* Trade would be fair and all matters of business would be conducted for the greater good and environmental sustainability of this one country because they won’t be trying to defeat some company in some country
* There is about 85 trillion dollars in the world right now and if we divide that by the 7.5 billion population, it’s 11000+ dollars which is not bad for any country + of course assets (171 trillion dollars) - they’ll all be under one umbrella

【回答】工程師
在大陸分裂之前，世界曾經(jīng)是一個(gè)單一的國(guó)家。盡管當(dāng)時(shí)人類社會(huì)還沒(méi)有真正存在。
如果整個(gè)世界都成為同胞(這是一幅美好的圖景) :
* 我們不會(huì)被他人的宗教信仰所敵視，而是接受擁有信仰的基本權(quán)利
* 我們可能會(huì)有一種全新的通用語(yǔ)言
* 貿(mào)易將會(huì)是公平的，所有的商業(yè)事務(wù)都是為了這個(gè)國(guó)家更大的利益和環(huán)境的可持續(xù)性而進(jìn)行，因?yàn)樗麄儾粫?huì)試圖打敗某個(gè)國(guó)家的某些公司
* 現(xiàn)在世界上大約有85萬(wàn)億美元的財(cái)富，如果我們把這個(gè)數(shù)字除以75億人口，就是11000多美元，這對(duì)任何國(guó)家來(lái)說(shuō)都不是壞事，當(dāng)然，還有資產(chǎn)(171萬(wàn)億美元)——它們都在一把保護(hù)傘下。

* We would have to learn to survive as a whole which will rake up significant money and time investments
* The world right now consumes about 10 billion tons of freshwater and that would change a bit because developed countries tend to waste more than they use… Under one common umbrella, water division would be uniform and fair and sustainable
* The 98% of the current globally malnourished live in developing countries but under a common umbrella, food wastage would definitely be reduced and utilized towards truly universal nourishment drives

* 我們必須學(xué)會(huì)作為一個(gè)整體生存下去，這樣才能獲得大量的金錢和時(shí)間投資
* 目前世界消耗約100億噸淡水，這一情況可能會(huì)有所改變，因?yàn)榘l(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家傾向于浪費(fèi)多于使用... 在一個(gè)共同的保護(hù)傘下，水資源分配將是統(tǒng)一、公平和可持續(xù)的
* 目前全球營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良的人口98%生活在發(fā)展中國(guó)家，但在一個(gè)共同的保護(hù)傘下，糧食浪費(fèi)肯定會(huì)減少，并用于真正的全民營(yíng)養(yǎng)運(yùn)動(dòng)

* Sports would be a little uninteresting because World Cups will have one country… Maybe if World Cups turn to State Cups, we’ll be good to go
* Multiculturalism would spread like wildfire - the world will be beige; not black-white-brown-pink-yellow - beige which would be fantastic (screw skin whitening or tanning products)
* The Arts will flourish because one country, multiple interpretations
…that’s all I can think of.
I wrote this entire answer as an optimist. There will be many problems if the world becomes one single country but I am choosing to be bright and shiny today.

* 體育運(yùn)動(dòng)會(huì)有點(diǎn)乏味，因?yàn)槭澜绫挥幸粋€(gè)國(guó)家... 也許如果世界杯變成國(guó)家杯，我們就沒(méi)問(wèn)題了
* 多元文化主義會(huì)像野火一樣蔓延——世界將是米色的，而不是黑色、白色、棕色、粉色、黃色、米色，這將會(huì)非常美妙（去他X的美白或美黑產(chǎn)品）
* 藝術(shù)將會(huì)蓬勃發(fā)展，因?yàn)橐粋€(gè)國(guó)家、多種詮釋
...我只能想到這些了。
我作為一個(gè)樂(lè)觀主義者寫下了這個(gè)完整答案。如果世界成為一個(gè)單一的國(guó)家，將會(huì)有許多問(wèn)題，但我今天選擇做一個(gè)光明向上的人。

Pranav Kumar worked at McKinsey & Company
This is already happening!
We already live under a strong global order, which will only get stronger with time. This global order is not complete but the world today already behaves a lot like a single social entity. This has been driven by globalization which in turn has been fueled by the technological revolutions in communication, trade and travel.
A state is a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.
But the whole world already is governed under unified international laws and treaties. Most of the world are signatories to entities such as the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO and so on. Most of these treaties clearly state that they will get precedence over national laws! Sovereignty of nation-states is increasingly sub-ordinate to the "global order".

【回答】在麥肯錫公司工作
這已經(jīng)發(fā)生了！
我們已經(jīng)生活在一個(gè)強(qiáng)大的全球秩序之下，這種秩序只會(huì)隨著時(shí)間的推移而變得更加強(qiáng)大。這種全球秩序并不完整，但當(dāng)今世界已經(jīng)表現(xiàn)得很像一個(gè)單一的社會(huì)實(shí)體。全球化推動(dòng)了這一趨勢(shì)，而通信、貿(mào)易和旅游領(lǐng)域的技術(shù)革命又為全球化推波助瀾。
國(guó)家是一個(gè)人類共同體，它成功地宣稱壟斷某一領(lǐng)土內(nèi)合法使用武力的權(quán)利。
但是整個(gè)世界已經(jīng)被統(tǒng)一的國(guó)際法律和條約所統(tǒng)治。世界上大多數(shù)國(guó)家都是聯(lián)合國(guó)、國(guó)際貨幣基金組織、世界銀行、世貿(mào)組織等機(jī)構(gòu)的簽約國(guó)。這些條約中的大多數(shù)都明確聲明，它們將優(yōu)先于國(guó)家法律！民族國(guó)家的主權(quán)與“全球秩序”的關(guān)系日益緊密。

Europe is a particularly stark example. The monetary unx takes away the power to print own currency and have own central bank from member countries. For EU to survive, many experts have called for greater fiscal unx. While EU is going through tough times, from a historical point of view, it is a remarkable next step in the history of nation-states. Most regions from ASEAN (East Asia) to ECOWAS (west Africa) are trying ever harder to get into some sort of "unx".
KnowledgePresumably the "global order" in knowledge - especially science and technology - is already nearly complete. The same TCP/IP protocol (the backbone of internet) is used by the Chinese truck driver and the American hedge fund manager. Chinese may have censorship, but there is no "internet with Chinese characteristics" as far as the technology is concerned. From Somalia to Bolivia, not only our light-bulbs and fans are based on same laws of Physics, but are also probably supplied by the same global supply chain.

歐洲就是一個(gè)特別鮮明的例子。貨幣聯(lián)盟剝奪了成員國(guó)印制本國(guó)貨幣的權(quán)力，并擁有自己的央行。為了讓歐盟生存下去，許多專家呼吁建立更大的財(cái)政聯(lián)盟。盡管歐盟正在經(jīng)歷艱難時(shí)期，但從歷史的角度來(lái)看，這是民族國(guó)家歷史上值得注意的下一步。從東盟(東亞)到西非國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)共同體(西非)，大多數(shù)地區(qū)都在努力加入某種“聯(lián)盟”。
知識(shí)，特別是科學(xué)技術(shù)知識(shí)的“全球秩序”已經(jīng)接近完成。中國(guó)的卡車司機(jī)和美國(guó)對(duì)沖基金經(jīng)理也使用同樣的 TCP/IP 協(xié)議(互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的主干)。從索馬里到玻利維亞，我們的燈泡和風(fēng)扇不僅基于相同的物理定律，而且很可能由相同的全球供應(yīng)鏈提供。

Nate White
We know the answer to that. Look around you.
It happened like this.
European ex-colonists got very rich from shipping in slaves to work the vast fertile plains of North America for free, and tapping the other rich resources, like oil, from the virgin territory.
They then got vastly richer by profiteering during two world wars, and by lending money to both sides, and by leveraging the fact that Europe was embroiled twice in two hugely costly wars while America was free to focus on making money. They still had huge manpower, too, by taking quite extreme measures to maintain the historic social division that slavery had created and cultivating poverty traps to keep a vast underclass of mainly non-white citizens as cheap labour. This continues to this day - domestic manufacturing industries all utilise a prison population slave labour force that is literally shipped round the country to work for third world wages. They introduced various laws to ensure this which were first introduced in the immediate wake of emancipation so it was presumably at least partially deliberate.

【回答】
我們知道答案的，看看你的周圍。
事情是這樣發(fā)生的。
歐洲的前殖民者通過(guò)免費(fèi)運(yùn)輸奴隸到廣闊肥沃的北美平原上工作，以及從未開(kāi)發(fā)過(guò)的領(lǐng)土上開(kāi)采其他豐富的資源，比如石油，獲得了巨大的財(cái)富。
然后，他們通過(guò)在兩次世界大戰(zhàn)期間牟取暴利，向雙方提供貸款，以及利用歐洲兩次卷入兩場(chǎng)代價(jià)巨大的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，而美國(guó)卻可以自由地專注于賺錢，從而變得更加富有。他們?nèi)該碛写罅康娜肆?，采取相?dāng)極端的措施來(lái)維持奴隸制造成的歷史性社會(huì)分工，并培育了貧困陷阱，以保持非白人為主的龐大下層公民作為廉價(jià)勞動(dòng)力。這種情況一直延續(xù)到今天——國(guó)內(nèi)的制造業(yè)都是利用監(jiān)獄里的奴隸勞動(dòng)力，這些勞動(dòng)力實(shí)際上被運(yùn)往全國(guó)各地，為第三世界的工資而工作。他們制定了各種法律來(lái)確保這情況，這些法律是在解放之后立即制定，所以，可以推測(cè)出至少部分是故意的。

After the wars they were hugely rich and Europe was bankrupt so they lent more money and became richer. My country, England, only paid off the loan borrowed to fight World War Two in 2006.
They also expanded into overseas territories under the guise of a war on Com...ism. Their empire is now of an almost unimaginable scale and reach - even my own country, England, is effectively under military occupation since we are covered in American military bases that use our country as a strategic location.
The military measures they took to create this empire were extreme - to give one random example, they carpet bombed a neutral developing country, Cambodia, and razed whole villages of desperately poor and unarmed non-combatants to strengthen their position in the neighbouring country Vietnam. The man ultimately responsible for this atrocity was awarded the nobel peace prize - and around this time America became widely seen as an evil empire. It also became a military power several times greater than all others there have ever been combined.

戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)結(jié)束后，他們變得非常富有，歐洲也破產(chǎn)了，因此他們借出更多的錢，變得更加富有。我的祖國(guó)英國(guó)在2006年才還清了為參加第二次世界大戰(zhàn)所借的貸款。
他們還打著向共產(chǎn)主義宣戰(zhàn)的幌子向海外擴(kuò)張。他們的帝國(guó)現(xiàn)在的規(guī)模和影響力幾乎是難以想象的，甚至我自己的國(guó)家，英國(guó)，實(shí)際上也處于軍事占領(lǐng)之下，因?yàn)槲覀儽幻绹?guó)的軍事基地所覆蓋，這些軍事基地把我們的國(guó)家作為一個(gè)戰(zhàn)略要地。
他們?yōu)榱私⑦@個(gè)帝國(guó)所采取的軍事措施是極端的，舉一個(gè)例子，他們對(duì)中立的發(fā)展中國(guó)家柬埔寨進(jìn)行地毯式轟炸，并夷平整個(gè)村莊的極度貧窮和手無(wú)寸鐵的非戰(zhàn)斗人員，以加強(qiáng)他們?cè)卩弴?guó)越南的地位。對(duì)這一暴行負(fù)有最終責(zé)任的人被授予諾貝爾和平獎(jiǎng)，大約這個(gè)時(shí)候，美國(guó)被廣泛視為一個(gè)邪惡的帝國(guó)。它還成為了一個(gè)比其他所有國(guó)家的軍事力量加起來(lái)還要強(qiáng)大好幾倍的軍事強(qiáng)國(guó)。

The dollar is now the reserve currency to the world which means all money is pegged to theirs and the complex can never go bust however much debt they accumulate.
They can simply charge it to the rest of us by fixing rates.They quite literally owe trillions upon trillions and yet they are by far the richest country in the world, and their economic and military empire is larger than the British Empire was at its peak.
They own the world. All of it except China.

美元現(xiàn)在是世界的儲(chǔ)備貨幣，這意味著所有的貨幣都與他們的貨幣掛鉤，無(wú)論他們積累多少債務(wù)，這個(gè)復(fù)雜的經(jīng)濟(jì)體永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)破產(chǎn)。
他們可以簡(jiǎn)單地通過(guò)固定利率向我們其他人收費(fèi)。
他們確實(shí)欠下了數(shù)萬(wàn)億美元的債務(wù)，但他們是世界上最富有的國(guó)家，他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)和軍事帝國(guó)的規(guī)模比鼎盛時(shí)期的大英帝國(guó)還要大。
他們擁有了整個(gè)世界，除了中國(guó)。

Josh Avinante former Research Specialist II, International Relations at Department of Energy - Republic of the Philippines …
Europeans had once lived under one country -The Roman Empire. The Middle East once lived as one nation as the Ottoman Empire. The Mongols once united the largest land empire in history that included China. The Austrian Empire was among the most multicultural society in history.
They all had the same fate. They collapsed and tje different nationalities they ruled carved kingdoms or nations out of the once peaceful, prosperous and united empire.
Humans are thinking beings. Sometimes overthinking. When the concept of nations and nationalism rose after the French Revolution, it was first welcomed as a positive development to freedom until nationalist revolutionaries caused The Great War or World War II. It further led to bloodshed in the Asian colonies. In this age of globalisation and green movements, humans are beginning to question the divisive results of nationalism. We have seen the destruction that nationalism does. Yet a good number of humans still believe in it’s divisiveness, preserving the integrity of a superior race. In 2016, Donald Trump was elected and supported a wall to protect the supremacy of the white anglo-saxon protestant race. President Rodrigo Duterte is building walls against the west in the name of sovereignty. Many friends of mine believe globalisation has failed and it’s time to rebuild walls. Trump and Duterte will not win and remain popular for no reason.

【回答】曾任菲律賓共和國(guó)能源部國(guó)際關(guān)系二級(jí)研究專家
歐洲人曾經(jīng)生活在單一國(guó)家的統(tǒng)治之下——羅馬帝國(guó)。中東曾經(jīng)像奧斯曼帝國(guó)一樣統(tǒng)一。蒙古人曾經(jīng)統(tǒng)一了包括中國(guó)在內(nèi)的歷史上最大的陸地帝國(guó)。奧地利帝國(guó)是歷史上最多元文化的社會(huì)之一。
他們的命運(yùn)都是一樣的。他們崩潰了，他們統(tǒng)治著不同的民族，從曾經(jīng)和平、繁榮和統(tǒng)一的帝國(guó)中分裂出來(lái)不同的王國(guó)或國(guó)家。
人類是有思想的生物。有時(shí)候想得太多了。當(dāng)民族和民族主義的概念在法國(guó)大革命后興起時(shí)，它首先被視為對(duì)自由的積極發(fā)展而受到歡迎，直到民族主義革命導(dǎo)致了第一次世界大戰(zhàn)或第二次世界大戰(zhàn)。這進(jìn)一步導(dǎo)致了亞洲殖民地的流血事件。在這個(gè)全球化和綠色運(yùn)動(dòng)的時(shí)代，人們開(kāi)始質(zhì)疑民族主義造成的分裂結(jié)果。我們已經(jīng)看到了民族主義所造成的破壞。然而，很多人仍然相信這種分裂是為了維護(hù)一個(gè)優(yōu)越種族的完整性。2016年，唐納德特朗普當(dāng)選并支持修建一堵墻，來(lái)保護(hù)白人盎格魯-撒克遜種族的至高無(wú)上地位。菲律賓總統(tǒng)羅德里戈 · 杜特爾特正在以主權(quán)的名義修建隔離墻。我的許多朋友認(rèn)為，全球化已經(jīng)失敗，現(xiàn)在是時(shí)候重建墻壁了。特朗普和杜特爾特不會(huì)獲勝，也不會(huì)無(wú)緣無(wú)故地繼續(xù)受歡迎。

Once upon a time, my sister told me to leave the house to prevent any further conflict with my mom. Proximity breeds contempt. Once upon a time, conservatists looked at divorce in contempt as the beginning of the fall of the sacredness of the Family. Today, generations later, we realise that divorse has saved children from PTSD or post traumatic stress disorder. It had saved battered wives. Sometimes division is more peaceful than living together.
So to answer the question, this may sound like a good idea especially if you listen to John Lenon’s Imagine. But you see, history has told us many times that unity implodes. The best path to world peace is not unification but rather respect for each other’s uniqueness.

很久很久以前，我的姐姐告訴我離開(kāi)這個(gè)家，以防止我和媽媽之間發(fā)生進(jìn)一步?jīng)_突。親近招致輕蔑。從前，保守主義者輕蔑離婚，認(rèn)為離婚是家庭神圣性衰落的開(kāi)始。今天，幾代人之后，我們意識(shí)到離婚已經(jīng)把孩子們從創(chuàng)傷后應(yīng)激障礙或后急性壓力障礙時(shí)代中拯救出來(lái)。它拯救了被虐待的妻子們。有時(shí)分開(kāi)比生活在一起更和平。
所以回答這個(gè)問(wèn)題，這聽(tīng)起來(lái)是個(gè)好主意，特別是如果你聽(tīng)約翰·列儂的歌曲《想象》。但是你看，歷史已經(jīng)告訴我們很多次了，團(tuán)結(jié)會(huì)崩潰。世界和平的最佳途徑不是統(tǒng)一，而是尊重彼此的獨(dú)特性。

A house is designed to have rooms for privacy then a common area for the family to bond. Rooms represent your nations and borders while the common area represents the UN, Miss Universe, Olympics, World Cup, etc.
You can’t keep humans under one roof for long while you can’t keep them apart for too long either. I think individuality is a good thing.
Have one country will not prevent wars. On the contrary, it will breed more wars. The US once survived the Civil War. That is because tjey defined the line between state rights and federalism. They balanced unity and division.

一所房子被設(shè)計(jì)成既有私密的房間，又有公共的區(qū)域供家庭聯(lián)系。房間代表你的國(guó)家和邊界，而公共區(qū)域代表聯(lián)合國(guó)，環(huán)球小姐，奧運(yùn)會(huì)，世界杯等。
你不能把人類關(guān)在一個(gè)屋檐下太久，同時(shí)你也不能把他們分開(kāi)太久。我認(rèn)為個(gè)性是一件好事。
單一國(guó)家并不能阻止戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。相反，它會(huì)滋生更多的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。美國(guó)曾經(jīng)在內(nèi)戰(zhàn)中幸存下來(lái)。這是因?yàn)樗麄兌x了州權(quán)利和聯(lián)邦制之間的界限。他們平衡了團(tuán)結(jié)和分裂。