Wasn't quite sure where to ask the question in the title, or if this is even the right question to ask, but figured a Solarpunk community would be most likely to have the answers I'm looking for...
My reasoning is we are facing some global problems here, you know with all the climate change and whatnot; So we need global solutions for them; Therefore the obvious solution seems to be the United Nations 2.0, or League of Nations 3.0 if you will. Basically a global constitutional assembly, hopefully before it all devolves into total war again this time, or worse.
So I want to read up on what thought or maybe even activism there is out there specifically in this regard. Anything to read, recent or historic, you can recommend?
Any thoughts you want to share? Why can or can't this work? Am I being to naive here? Explain it Like I am 5 please!
Bodies like the LvN and UN are inherently going to fail to achieve peace because they rely on willing compliance with almost zero enforcement mechanisms.
Because having enforcement mechanisms slams face first into the principle of state sovereignty.
The only way you'll build a world government is through the slow, grinding establishment of transnational federations like the proposed European Federation and East African Federation. Technically India is that already. Pan-Arabism seeks to establish a state of this sort.
The UN won't become an effective governing body until it's made the governing body of a united federation of earth, probably built over a VERY long period of state mergers between democratic nations.
Picture how unlikely it would be just for all of NATO to agree to a single constitution for all of them to join as a single state, now scale that up exponentially for the amount of work it'd take to convince Russia or China to democratically merge with such a state.
This state of the world we live in is the most united it's ever been in cooperative initiative and communication, and it's an absolute shit show that makes the HRE look like the pinnacle of effective internal integration of a state.
I agree on the state sovereignty part. But both the LvN and UN bettered the world within their limited means, while obviously more often failing than succeeding. So I don't agree on the failure part entirely. They may be inherently aspirational, but they tried and managed to improve conditions somewhat, exactly by being an (if ever so slight) impediment on state sovereignty that didn't exist before.
But yeah the general consensus seems to be that the UN is a failure, so I'm just looking for people who are thinking about what to do about that. Seems like the only people talking about it are the World Bank and Russia with its multipolar world order.