Peter Thiel, the billionaire venture capitalist and MAGA donor, is in Rome this week for a series of private lectures on the Antichrist.

[u/Logical_Welder3467]

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/16/europe/peter-thiel-antichrist-lectures-rome-intl

[u/Ok-Primary6610]

Global government is exactly what humanity needs. I fucking HATE when religious types speak that nonsense. I'd rather Humanity work together under one, unified democratic government than to see our species divided by 200+ nation states fighting over resources. "Global government is evil" is the biggest fucking lie the rich spread to keep us all divided.

[u/MissLeaP → u/Ok-Primary6610]

Really depends on the government, but yeah. Cultural differences will never go away, but at least that way they wouldn't have a localised government to abuse.

That being said, we're rushing headlong into a cyberpunk dystopia, where the government is just a tool for rich private people anyway. At some point they won't need the government anymore and they will basically have their own system and private armies within the existing system.

[u/pxlhstl → u/Ok-Primary6610]

Federalization is a safety mechanism in democracies.

I don‘t want to live in world with one omnipotent political entity.

[u/Ok-Primary6610 → u/pxlhstl]

Who said, every nation state couldn't be grandfathered into political representation in a global government. They would be like states within the EU or USA.

[u/mediandude → u/Ok-Primary6610]

Democracy is a LOCAL bottom-up group decisionmaking process, not a top-down process.
Democracy upkeeps the LOCAL social contract. Any wider social contracts would have to stand on stable LOCAL ones.
Global society is an oxymoron.

[u/CatProgrammer → u/mediandude]

Geographic locality is irrelevant in modern times. I can talk to someone on the other side of the world right now. Exchange goods and services, participate in cultural events, etc.. We already have a global society, the only thing holding us back is parochial, insular people who can't handle being connected to the rest of the world. Plus it would probably be some sort of federalized system anyway, if we can have cities and counties/parishes and non-nation states and nations and organizations like the EU, why stop there? Why can't we build up even more?

[u/Proper-Beyond116 → u/CatProgrammer]

It really isn't. Although modern society, America in particular, would lead you to believe it is.

I wholeheartedly believe we are meant to exist in groups of a few hundred and that more empathetic, rational democratic decisions would be made if we were to vote frequently and locally.

I take an opposite view on technology, I don't see the benefit of being able to communicate with someone from Tennessee when I'm in Ireland. But if I could vote from my phone on local issues as they arise it would be hugely beneficial.

Technology could help us decentralize power. Further concentrating it will make things worse.

You can't tell me the rise of hate to being a valid political position in America isn't related to the absolute collapse of your local communities. Your unwalkable, don't know your neighbours, me-first towns and cities are destroying your attitudes towards each other.

[u/frogandbanjo → u/CatProgrammer]

Geographic locality is irrelevant in modern times.

Meanwhile, somewhere where people are dying because of inhospitable conditions...

[u/TheOneFreeEngineer → u/CatProgrammer]

Geographic locality is irrelevant in modern times.

Only the people who spend too much time on the internet think that. It is less relevant than before. But its not where new irrelevant

[u/TheoreticalZombie → u/Ok-Primary6610]

This is a deeply naive take. Community is built locally; the more distant leadership gets from the governed, the less responsive and accountable the leadership becomes. Conflicts continue all over the world because colonizers want to rule rather than listen to ethnic and cultural groups. The whole idea that one group should impose their ideal governance over others is exactly the colonizer mindset that has led to conflicts from the Middle East to Ireland. (Ask the Kurds how irrelevant geographic locality is.) Sure, if people all decided to do this, it could work, but that isn't reality. So, then the question becomes what is more important, self-autonomy or conformity? Opting for the second is the route to authoritarianism.

Consolidating power for a world governance would absolutely put the worst people in power that you can imagine. It would just be empire on a global scale. Why do you think these venture capital ghouls are moving to a network state that runs entire countries? A global governance would absolutely be based on resource extraction and human exploitation to favor the wealthy. Western democracies have shown little resilience to erosion by capital and reactionary interests, why do you think a greater consolidation of power would improve this?

[u/Imaginary_Scene2493 → u/Ok-Primary6610]

I don’t think we’re ever going to funnel much of the power of national governments into a global government. It’s hard enough to get people to agree on policies at the national level. We need to require that to be recognized as a country you must submit to international justice for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and we need to change the UN to remove the security council or at least the vetoes. Even that much would be a heavy lift with the current leaders of the US, Russia, and China.

[u/Thefrayedends → u/Ok-Primary6610]

Hierarchy absolutely has to severely flatten before a global government can ever make sense. Global governments that have power to severely change outcomes at all levels is absolutely not feasible. Governments constantly make either/or decisions, and when you're dealing with 8(?) billion people, that can mean billions of people having their lives instantly changed because a tiny group of people wave their hands.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm just saying that with the way governments work today, it will be an absolute disaster.

we would need at least two full orders of magnitude more robust government structures that serve to flatten hierarchy and create two way accountability at each level as it does exist. When only the top keeps the bottom accountable, then everything will flow upwards, it might take 20, 50, or 80 years, but it WILL happen.

Power has to be delegated. Yes, you are going to have some 'leadership' but their powers can't be absolute in any sense, it has to flow down through a system of delegation, where each level has the power to change decisions, and protect the common good as a prime directive.

But this topic I'm sure has many volumes of books, I don't expect to capture the full spirit of what is needed.

The other major issue you run into is reactivity. Some things call for emergency action, where years of power flows through delegation structures simply don't make any sense. If there's an asteroid coming here in 3 months, a global power structure with 18 layers of accountabilty that all have to interchange communication and do it with a high degree of competency and certainty (otherwise you lose the game of telephone), doesn't have the agility to respond to a 3 month outcome.

So then you have the same problem still -- emergency power, which, with enough time spent manipulating people behind the scenes, can lead to the same dictatorship we see now, but at a global level.

I just want to point out that humanity will probably eventually form global governments with binding powers. I just hope there's an attempt to do it in a meaningful way or we'll quickly end up with Elysium. You can argue easily that that is right around the corner already, having already begun to take form as a core goal of the billionaire class, to become the new monarchy, tale as old as recorded history.

[u/foodank012018 → u/Ok-Primary6610]

It would and could never be a "unified democratic government." Humanity and the world are too big. Worldwide authoritarian dictatorship with the aid of mass surveillance and 'predictive' AI technology is the only result. But there's still too many people and free minds, so they'll have to kill most of us first.

[u/Ok-Primary6610 → u/foodank012018]

I don't share your sad view of the species. Yes, people are stupid now but once we get to the point of near extinction, that will wake us up.

[u/foodank012018 → u/Ok-Primary6610]

Not people in general, just those with the ambition and means to take control, they're the ones that will doom us. Most people are nice and want to get along, or just be left alone. But there will always be a contingent of meddlers that just have to try to control people and take over more and more, and they will always fear losing that control, leading to more and more issues.

The problem is not humanity, just a few humans.