The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

In the present day, the power of nations has been conducted by different governments and authorities which leads to an immense variety of types of leadership.

Although

some governments give more voice to the population, others are completely different and both there are positive and negative sides.

This

essay will discuss both sides and explain which of them outweigh. On the one hand, if the world were conducted only by one government, certainly there would not be a plethora of discussions about essential topics, since the leader would not need to listen to the other leaders to address the problem,

in other words

, saved time in

this

topic could be used to tackle other situations.

For example

, in any situation

that is

incredibly complex to give a voice for everyone, as people are different and have different ideas;

therefore

, the voice of the majority would be kept, resulting in disapproval of some individuals.

On the other hand

, when authoritarianism reaches power citizens lose their freedom and in some cases their rights.

Furthermore

, the only government conducting the world could promote ancient beliefs and old fashion traditions completely opposite the modern age in which we live.

For instance

, the planet with the leadership of Afghans not only would take off the rights of women but

also

solve the problems through the usage of weapons, resulting in a nation completely without freedom and unsafety. For these reasons, the advantages do not outweigh the disadvantages;

therefore

, the way more democratic and fair is that each country has its own leader. In conclusion, becoming a democratic leader is a complex process but is completely necessary in order to keep order and vital functions.

This

essay discoursed about two sides and explained in detail which of both can be more positive.