Why isn't it possible to make a united states of earth with no nation-states that seperate, divide and control people? Isn't it possible to increase people's freedom and let everyone be where he wants and what he wants?

Nation-states prevent people from solving their common problems. States are maintained by the myth that those living on one side are fundamentally different from those living on the other side. Although the world is divided into nation-states, the production of goods and services is international. Computers are manufactured by Chinese workers, assembled by Mexican workers, sold by American workers, and serviced by Indian workers. Most people don’t want to leave their homes and families. They migrate to survive. Abolishing states would enable us to raise global living standards, as goods and services developed in one location would become freely available everywhere. Furthermore, the vast resources that are currently devoted to policing states and waging wars could be used to meet human needs.

Not possible at all, not even desirable.

__________________
"Good intentions are a noble thing, but you have to look at the end result to see if those intentions are well placed."
-- LessGovMrPrez

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."
-- Thomas Jefferson

But why is it not possible and desirable?

Because nations won't ever relinquish their powers.
Its not desirable because the centralization of power always leads to abuses.
A wise saying goes "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

__________________
"Good intentions are a noble thing, but you have to look at the end result to see if those intentions are well placed."
-- LessGovMrPrez

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Trying to govern completely different cultures with the same government is a terrible idea. Beyond that richer nations would end up subsidizing poor ones, and most everyone in Europe, Asia and North America would be far worse off.

Additionally the wants of one group of people is far different than others.

__________________

Plus you'd lose cultures and life would become boring fast.

__________________
"Good intentions are a noble thing, but you have to look at the end result to see if those intentions are well placed."
-- LessGovMrPrez

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."
-- Thomas Jefferson

This would never work, I would hate it even if it did. All people are different, they all have different points of view within the society. If the USE did something many people (even a minority) didn't like, they might split off and form a rebellion. Countries are created in order for people of similar ideals and beliefs to come together.

The centrifugal powers would be too large.
Its already a hell of a task for very large countries to keep their territorial integrity intact.

Regional integration is already very ambitious. Global integration is utopic.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

I think it's an interesting question...but very difficult to awnser!
If you look to every Science Fiction story there is a World Governement...
and I think one day we'll have one in very far away future...

At one side you could say it is a scientific/technoligcal matter: writing made it possible to rule empires, and I think the more space and time are going to be compressed (at all levels) it will make a World Governement possible.


On the other side you could say it's not possible because humans have inherted the instinct of competition. Sow it is an economic question...sow capitalism is involved... First of all you could say capitalism has a center, a semi-periphery and a pheriphery, sow capitalism is the ruling world economic system. The high wealth in the Center (the West) is only possible because of the total explotian in the 3rd World...
The roots of this are colonialism...European countries injected capitalism in the 3rd World, but the surplus that was created there was exported to the West/North...you could say their economies were (and are) out-orientated (there weren't national markets, because all the surplus went out). Some say (Frank, Wallerstein) they will never develop because the the Center of this system will always be the West, others say this is'nt true because capitalism is a dynamic system, and what with the NIC countries?
With this information you could say a World Governement, with a capitalistic system, will never be possible or wanted because it would mean a minority (the wealthy) will rule a majority (the poor)...

However others (Laclau) say that capitalism isn't and will never be the only economic system. Laclau says different systems can function side by side together (traditional economic systems <-> modern traditional economic systems)...this makes it possible for 3rd World countries to develop...
Then again you can say this makes it possible that everyone can (or will) reach a certain level of development...
Because of this you can say people around the world can create a compromise that will enable the possibilty of a World Governement...

I don't know what to believe, it's fun to think about the possibilties...but we'll not be here anymore by then...

__________________
"Nos pays sont devenus trop petits pour le monde actuel, à l'échelle des moyens techniques modernes, à la mesure de l'Amérique et de la Russie aujourd'hui, de la Chine et de l'Inde demain. L'unité des peuples européens réunis dans les Etats-Unis d'Europe est le moyen de relever leur niveau de vie et de maintenir la paix. Elle est le grand espoir et la chance de notre époque. Nous aussi, nous allons vers notre but, les Etats-Unis d'Europe, dans une course sans retour."

Jean Monnet - Rome 1957

^^^ Of course, technology is the key to a possible world government. But also because of this its still utopic.

Its furthermore questionably if our current ecnomical system could cope with something like that. I'd guess it can't.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"