Yes to global democracy but no to the global government? The case of Yuval Harari
I have made several references to one of my favourite intellectuals Yuval Noah Harari in my intellectual work and opinion-making. For example, I have written about Harari’s recent book “21 lessons for 21st century” via the Swedish cultural magazine Opulens.
Harari is one of my absolute favourite intellectuals. At the moment, when I am focusing on promoting ideas of liquid democracy, I have been trying to understand Harari’s position regarding global development and politics concerning democracy. From reading his latest book, I understood that Harari is:
a) against global government
b) in favour of global politics, democracy and institutional order
My own position is that I am :
a) against the idea of one global government consisting of 20-30 ministers making direct decisions without involving citizens and organisations
b) in favour of democratically elected World Parliament, the global rule of law with court and police force, citizenship granting aspects as free migration
Basically, I am not in favour of a global government that would be similar to national levels or even with the European Commission, but I am in favour of global institutions common for the whole world and all humans.
Also, I am not in favour of international democracy, politics, and laws. Because “international” means intergovernmental, between sovereign states and nations. In contrast, “global” means worldwide, between and for humans, integrated. Intergovernmental cooperation and decision-making can exist within the framework of global democracy and federalism. Still, global democracy, citizenship and federalism cannot exist in an international system today with the United Nations.
Now regarding Harari’s stances, I have been thinking to write about it until I saw the article written by my UK-based colleague John Vlasto from Democracy Without Borders (I am a member of the Swedish chapter). Vlasto explains Harari’s position and why it is problematic but still valid for understanding the case for global democracy:
Indeed, nation-states should not be replaced with a global government and there are few, if any, who suggest this. Instead, an additional layer of global government needs to be created to facilitate cooperation between nation-states in the common interest, based on the principle of subsidiarity. Just as the United States functions better under a federal government than it did as independent states (in the short-lived confederation from 1783 to 1789), so a world federation could more effectively tackle global challenges than 193 independent nation-states.
For more information, you can read the whole text via DWB. Thanks, John!
Thanks for reading. You can support and reward my writing via:
Pay Pal – lauvlad89@gmail.com
Seeds – vladlausevic
Steemit – @lauvlad89
Skycoin – ZxjhWMJRbTNCRQzy5MekZzH4fhdWFCqBP8
Bitcoin 3HbxyDXE9MhNQ8RqsirqgYvFupQzh5Xby2
Swish – 0762345677
Tezos — tz1QrRzkTAKuPKF8dmGW6c1ScEHBUGvoiJBM