网帖翻译

Josh Avinante former Research Specialist II, International Relations at Department of Energy - Republic of the Philippines …
Europeans had once lived under one country -The Roman Empire. The Middle East once lived as one nation as the Ottoman Empire. The Mongols once united the largest land empire in history that included China. The Austrian Empire was among the most multicultural society in history.
They all had the same fate. They collapsed and tje different nationalities they ruled carved kingdoms or nations out of the once peaceful, prosperous and united empire.
Humans are thinking beings. Sometimes overthinking. When the concept of nations and nationalism rose after the French Revolution, it was first welcomed as a positive development to freedom until nationalist revolutionaries caused The Great War or World War II. It further led to bloodshed in the Asian colonies. In this age of globalisation and green movements, humans are beginning to question the divisive results of nationalism. We have seen the destruction that nationalism does. Yet a good number of humans still believe in it’s divisiveness, preserving the integrity of a superior race. In 2016, Donald Trump was elected and supported a wall to protect the supremacy of the white anglo-saxon protestant race. President Rodrigo Duterte is building walls against the west in the name of sovereignty. Many friends of mine believe globalisation has failed and it’s time to rebuild walls. Trump and Duterte will not win and remain popular for no reason.

【回答】曾任菲律宾共和国能源部国际关系二级研究专家
欧洲人曾经生活在单一国家的统治之下——罗马帝国。中东曾经像奥斯曼帝国一样统一。蒙古人曾经统一了包括中国在内的历史上最大的陆地帝国。奥地利帝国是历史上最多元文化的社会之一。
他们的命运都是一样的。他们崩溃了，他们统治着不同的民族，从曾经和平、繁荣和统一的帝国中分裂出来不同的王国或国家。
人类是有思想的生物。有时候想得太多了。当民族和民族主义的概念在法国大革命后兴起时，它首先被视为对自由的积极发展而受到欢迎，直到民族主义革命导致了第一次世界大战或第二次世界大战。这进一步导致了亚洲殖民地的流血事件。在这个全球化和绿色运动的时代，人们开始质疑民族主义造成的分裂结果。我们已经看到了民族主义所造成的破坏。然而，很多人仍然相信这种分裂是为了维护一个优越种族的完整性。2016年，唐纳德特朗普当选并支持修建一堵墙，来保护白人盎格鲁-撒克逊种族的至高无上地位。菲律宾总统罗德里戈 · 杜特尔特正在以主权的名义修建隔离墙。我的许多朋友认为，全球化已经失败，现在是时候重建墙壁了。特朗普和杜特尔特不会获胜，也不会无缘无故地继续受欢迎。

Once upon a time, my sister told me to leave the house to prevent any further conflict with my mom. Proximity breeds contempt. Once upon a time, conservatists looked at divorce in contempt as the beginning of the fall of the sacredness of the Family. Today, generations later, we realise that divorse has saved children from PTSD or post traumatic stress disorder. It had saved battered wives. Sometimes division is more peaceful than living together.
So to answer the question, this may sound like a good idea especially if you listen to John Lenon’s Imagine. But you see, history has told us many times that unity implodes. The best path to world peace is not unification but rather respect for each other’s uniqueness.

很久很久以前，我的姐姐告诉我离开这个家，以防止我和妈妈之间发生进一步冲突。亲近招致轻蔑。从前，保守主义者轻蔑离婚，认为离婚是家庭神圣性衰落的开始。今天，几代人之后，我们意识到离婚已经把孩子们从创伤后应激障碍或后急性压力障碍时代中拯救出来。它拯救了被虐待的妻子们。有时分开比生活在一起更和平。
所以回答这个问题，这听起来是个好主意，特别是如果你听约翰·列侬的歌曲《想象》。但是你看，历史已经告诉我们很多次了，团结会崩溃。世界和平的最佳途径不是统一，而是尊重彼此的独特性。

A house is designed to have rooms for privacy then a common area for the family to bond. Rooms represent your nations and borders while the common area represents the UN, Miss Universe, Olympics, World Cup, etc.
You can’t keep humans under one roof for long while you can’t keep them apart for too long either. I think individuality is a good thing.
Have one country will not prevent wars. On the contrary, it will breed more wars. The US once survived the Civil War. That is because tjey defined the line between state rights and federalism. They balanced unity and division.

一所房子被设计成既有私密的房间，又有公共的区域供家庭联系。房间代表你的国家和边界，而公共区域代表联合国，环球小姐，奥运会，世界杯等。
你不能把人类关在一个屋檐下太久，同时你也不能把他们分开太久。我认为个性是一件好事。
单一国家并不能阻止战争。相反，它会滋生更多的战争。美国曾经在内战中幸存下来。这是因为他们定义了州权利和联邦制之间的界限。他们平衡了团结和分裂。

Balaji Viswanathan CEO at Invento (2016-present)
There is a folktale of an Indian Maharajah who saw a football match for the first time. He was quite aghast at the end and told his secretary - "buy each of those players one of those balls. I don't like the idea of all of them fighting for something as simple as that"
This "one world" idea is not far from that.
Humans by nature compete. And we compete at multiple levels. This competition produces most of the innovations we see around us. For instance, in the 1950s Americans were slacking in their space research. In came the Russians with their Sputnik. The national rivalries were sparked and in the following two decades world saw an amazing range of innovations in space science. Had the Russians never tried to compete with the Americans, we would not have had satellites or moon landing.

【回答】首席执行官(2016年至今)
有一个民间故事，讲的是一个印度国王第一次看足球比赛。最后他非常吃惊，告诉他的秘书“给每个球员都买一个这样的球。我不喜欢他们所有人都为这么简单的事情而相互争斗。”
这种“单一世界”的理念与这故事相去不远。
人类与生俱来的竞争。我们在多个层面上竞争。这种竞争产生了我们周围大多数的创新。例如，在20世纪50年代，美国人在太空研究方面有所懈怠。俄国人发射了他们的人造卫星。国家之间的竞争由此开始，在接下来的二十年里，世界看到了一系列令人惊叹的空间科学创新。如果俄国人从未试图与美国人竞争，我们就不会有卫星或登月。

Computers were mainly invented to break enemy codes in WWII and Internet was built during the cold war as a way to keep communication running in case the Russians managed to attack a few key points.
If I'm able to type something that you could read somewhere else in the world, it is because of the national rivalries between US and other countries.
It is all about incentives.
Yesterday, I was listening to a lecture from a popular historian on why India, China and Arabs didn't discover the new trade routes at their heights in the middle ages. One of the key reasoning was the profit motive. These cultures didn't desire for much from the west. In fact, when Vasco da Gama visited Calicut for the first time, the locals laughed at what he had to offer. Thus, the Portuguese had to just give up their silver having no other useful stuff. This trade imbalance continued for centuries.

计算机主要是为了在二战中破译敌人的密码而发明的，而互联网则是在冷战期间建立的，用于在俄国人攻击几个关键点时保持通信畅通。
如果我能打出你们在世界其他地方可以读到的文字，那是因为美国和其他国家之间的国家竞争。
这一切都与激励有关。
昨天，我听了一位著名历史学家的演讲，内容是关于为什么印度、中国和阿拉伯人在中世纪的鼎盛时期没有发现新的贸易路线。其中一个关键的推理是利润动机。这些文化并不渴望从西方得到什么。事实上，当瓦斯科·达伽马首次访问卡里库特时，当地人嘲笑他所提供的一切。所以，葡萄牙人不得不放弃他们的白银，因为他们没有其他有用的东西。这种贸易不平衡持续了几个世纪。

On the other hand, Portuguese, Dutch and later other Europeans had plenty to gain - silk, spices and later coffee, tea, cotton etc. Thus, they had the motive. This resulted in their exploration around the world. If the Europeans were not in so much pain to compete, they would not have discovered the new world and other parts of the world.
Money and pride are two of the biggest motivators for humans. This keeps our engine running.
Monopolies and Innovation
Twelve years ago, Microsoft had very little competition in the browser space. Internet Explorer was at some point clueless of what should be done. Innovation sagged in the absence of competition. Then Firefox came with a variety of new innovation such as a practical implementation of the tabbed interface. Later Chrome joined the party. Innovation in browsers rapidly expanded.

另一方面，葡萄牙人、荷兰人和后来的其他欧洲人获得了很多东西——丝绸、香料，以及后来的咖啡、茶、棉花等。这样，他们就有了动机。这导致了他们在世界各地的探索。如果欧洲人没有那么痛苦地相互竞争，他们就不会发现新大陆和世界其它地区。
金钱和骄傲是人类最大的两个动力，这让我们的引擎一直运转。
垄断与创新
十二年前，微软在浏览器领域几乎没有竞争对手。在某种程度上，IE不知道该怎么做了。在缺乏竞争的情况下，创新力下降了。然后火狐浏览器带来了一系列新的创新，比如标签式界面的实际应用。后来Chrome也加入了这个行列。浏览器的创新迅速扩大。

Ultimately it was the competition. Same in the case of politics. When there is rivalry, nations innovate. Money and pride motivate the commoners to pay attention to their scientists and then fund them with resources to push the frontiers. Without that push from government, science will sag and so will every other part of the society.
In short, competition in governance and politics is very crucial just as a riveting football game enriches our fun time. Of course, hooliganism is bad and so are wars. Thus, we have to constantly work towards ways to keep the rowdy crowd under control and root out violence. But, hooliganism doesn't mean you need to avoid playing. In the same way wars don't mean we have to stop national rivalries and pride.
Who benefits from this one world?

归根结底还是竞争。政治方面也是如此。当存在竞争时，国家就会创新。金钱和骄傲激励老百姓关注他们的科学家，然后为他们提供资源推动前沿。如果没有政府的推动，科学将陷入瘫痪，社会的其他部分也是如此。
简而言之，治理和政治方面的竞争是非常关键的，就像一场引人入胜的足球比赛丰富了我们的娱乐时间一样。当然，流氓行为是不好的，战争也是如此。因此，我们必须不断努力，想方设法控制骚乱人群，根除暴力。但是，流氓行为并不意味着你需要避免比赛。同样，战争并不意味着我们必须停止国家间的竞争和骄傲。
谁能从这个单一的世界中获益？

You can see this "one world" government idea from Indians and possibly from some Chinese and Americans. It is not a surprise. Because, groups with huge demographic advantage would dominate this "one world" while smaller cultures will be waylaid. Imagine Israel. Is there any possibility of them merging with this one world and give up all the things they fought for? One world will be the trampling of small cultural groups.
What if Idi Amin is the world leader?
Finally, when people think of "one world" they have some utopian visions. Doves flying, smiling child faces. What if the one world leader is Idi Amin? When he was ruling Uganda his people at least had the option of moving to other countries. What if there is no other country to go to? How will you escape tyranny?

你可以从印度人，也可能从一些中国人和美国人那里看到这种“单一世界”的政府理念。这并不令人惊讶。因为，拥有巨大人口优势的群体将主宰这个“单一世界”，而较小的文化将被淘汰。想象一下以色列。他们有没有可能融入这个世界，放弃他们为之奋斗的一切？单一世界将是对小型文化群体的践踏。
如果伊迪 · 阿明是世界领袖会如何呢？（非洲三大暴君之一）
最后，当人们想到“单一世界”时，他们有一些乌托邦的愿景。鸽子在天空飞翔，孩子们笑脸盈盈。如果世界上唯一的领导人是伊迪 · 阿明呢？当他统治乌干达时，他的人民至少可以选择移居到其他国家。如果没有其他国家可去怎么办？你将如何摆脱暴政？

Do you think it is impossible to elect a tyrant as the world leader? Think again. There are far more crazy people in the world than scholars and peace activists. In "one world" these people would have enormous power from the scale. You can already see some semblance of this in the elections in big countries. The moderates get weeded out in large countries as they cannot match the organizational power of the strong. When you expand their reach to the whole world, the good politicians don't stand a chance.
Leave alone tyranny. How about fundamental differences in culture? Islam will be the largest religion of this "one world". It is possible for a democratically elected world government to propose Sharia law. Will it be acceptable to others? If it is not accepted, how will you fight this "one world" government.
A single world government monopolizing will be terrible for innovation in social, cultural and technological terms.

你认为选一个暴君当世界领袖是不可能的吗？再想想吧。世界上疯狂的人比学者和和平活动家要多得多。在“单一世界”中，这些人将拥有巨大的权力。你已经可以在大国的选举中看到这方面的迹象。温和派在大国被淘汰，因为他们无法匹敌强者的组织力量。当你把他们的影响力扩展到整个世界时，优秀的政治家就没有机会了。
不要管暴政。那么文化的根本差异是什么？伊斯兰教将成为这个“单一世界”中最大的宗教。民主选举的世界政府有可能提出伊斯兰教法。别人会接受吗？如果它不被接受，你将如何对抗这个“单一世界”的政府。
一个单一的世界政府垄断，将严重阻碍社会、文化和技术方面的创新。

Binati Sheth Engineer
The world was a single country once upon a time before the continents broke apart. Though human societies didn’t really exist back then.
If the entire world became fellow citizens (a rosy picture):
* We would not be antagonized by other’s religious beliefs, but accept the fundamental right to have a belief
* We would probably have one completely new universal language
* Trade would be fair and all matters of business would be conducted for the greater good and environmental sustainability of this one country because they won’t be trying to defeat some company in some country
* There is about 85 trillion dollars in the world right now and if we divide that by the 7.5 billion population, it’s 11000+ dollars which is not bad for any country + of course assets (171 trillion dollars) - they’ll all be under one umbrella

【回答】工程师
在大陆分裂之前，世界曾经是一个单一的国家。尽管当时人类社会还没有真正存在。
如果整个世界都成为同胞(这是一幅美好的图景) :
* 我们不会被他人的宗教信仰所敌视，而是接受拥有信仰的基本权利
* 我们可能会有一种全新的通用语言
* 贸易将会是公平的，所有的商业事务都是为了这个国家更大的利益和环境的可持续性而进行，因为他们不会试图打败某个国家的某些公司
* 现在世界上大约有85万亿美元的财富，如果我们把这个数字除以75亿人口，就是11000多美元，这对任何国家来说都不是坏事，当然，还有资产(171万亿美元)——它们都在一把保护伞下。

* We would have to learn to survive as a whole which will rake up significant money and time investments
* The world right now consumes about 10 billion tons of freshwater and that would change a bit because developed countries tend to waste more than they use… Under one common umbrella, water division would be uniform and fair and sustainable
* The 98% of the current globally malnourished live in developing countries but under a common umbrella, food wastage would definitely be reduced and utilized towards truly universal nourishment drives

* 我们必须学会作为一个整体生存下去，这样才能获得大量的金钱和时间投资
* 目前世界消耗约100亿吨淡水，这一情况可能会有所改变，因为发达国家倾向于浪费多于使用... 在一个共同的保护伞下，水资源分配将是统一、公平和可持续的
* 目前全球营养不良的人口98%生活在发展中国家，但在一个共同的保护伞下，粮食浪费肯定会减少，并用于真正的全民营养运动

* Sports would be a little uninteresting because World Cups will have one country… Maybe if World Cups turn to State Cups, we’ll be good to go
* Multiculturalism would spread like wildfire - the world will be beige; not black-white-brown-pink-yellow - beige which would be fantastic (screw skin whitening or tanning products)
* The Arts will flourish because one country, multiple interpretations
…that’s all I can think of.
I wrote this entire answer as an optimist. There will be many problems if the world becomes one single country but I am choosing to be bright and shiny today.

* 体育运动会有点乏味，因为世界杯只有一个国家... 也许如果世界杯变成国家杯，我们就没问题了
* 多元文化主义会像野火一样蔓延——世界将是米色的，而不是黑色、白色、棕色、粉色、黄色、米色，这将会非常美妙（去他X的美白或美黑产品）
* 艺术将会蓬勃发展，因为一个国家、多种诠释
...我只能想到这些了。
我作为一个乐观主义者写下了这个完整答案。如果世界成为一个单一的国家，将会有许多问题，但我今天选择做一个光明向上的人。

Pranav Kumar worked at McKinsey & Company
This is already happening!
We already live under a strong global order, which will only get stronger with time. This global order is not complete but the world today already behaves a lot like a single social entity. This has been driven by globalization which in turn has been fueled by the technological revolutions in communication, trade and travel.
A state is a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.
But the whole world already is governed under unified international laws and treaties. Most of the world are signatories to entities such as the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO and so on. Most of these treaties clearly state that they will get precedence over national laws! Sovereignty of nation-states is increasingly sub-ordinate to the "global order".

【回答】在麦肯锡公司工作
这已经发生了！
我们已经生活在一个强大的全球秩序之下，这种秩序只会随着时间的推移而变得更加强大。这种全球秩序并不完整，但当今世界已经表现得很像一个单一的社会实体。全球化推动了这一趋势，而通信、贸易和旅游领域的技术革命又为全球化推波助澜。
国家是一个人类共同体，它成功地宣称垄断某一领土内合法使用武力的权利。
但是整个世界已经被统一的国际法律和条约所统治。世界上大多数国家都是联合国、国际货币基金组织、世界银行、世贸组织等机构的签约国。这些条约中的大多数都明确声明，它们将优先于国家法律！民族国家的主权与“全球秩序”的关系日益紧密。

Europe is a particularly stark example. The monetary unx takes away the power to print own currency and have own central bank from member countries. For EU to survive, many experts have called for greater fiscal unx. While EU is going through tough times, from a historical point of view, it is a remarkable next step in the history of nation-states. Most regions from ASEAN (East Asia) to ECOWAS (west Africa) are trying ever harder to get into some sort of "unx".
KnowledgePresumably the "global order" in knowledge - especially science and technology - is already nearly complete. The same TCP/IP protocol (the backbone of internet) is used by the Chinese truck driver and the American hedge fund manager. Chinese may have censorship, but there is no "internet with Chinese characteristics" as far as the technology is concerned. From Somalia to Bolivia, not only our light-bulbs and fans are based on same laws of Physics, but are also probably supplied by the same global supply chain.

欧洲就是一个特别鲜明的例子。货币联盟剥夺了成员国印制本国货币的权力，并拥有自己的央行。为了让欧盟生存下去，许多专家呼吁建立更大的财政联盟。尽管欧盟正在经历艰难时期，但从历史的角度来看，这是民族国家历史上值得注意的下一步。从东盟(东亚)到西非国家经济共同体(西非)，大多数地区都在努力加入某种“联盟”。
知识，特别是科学技术知识的“全球秩序”已经接近完成。中国的卡车司机和美国对冲基金经理也使用同样的 TCP/IP 协议(互联网的主干)。中国可能有审查制度，但就技术而言，没有“具有中国特色的互联网”。从索马里到玻利维亚，我们的灯泡和风扇不仅基于相同的物理定律，而且很可能由相同的全球供应链提供。

Nate White
We know the answer to that. Look around you.
It happened like this.
European ex-colonists got very rich from shipping in slaves to work the vast fertile plains of North America for free, and tapping the other rich resources, like oil, from the virgin territory.
They then got vastly richer by profiteering during two world wars, and by lending money to both sides, and by leveraging the fact that Europe was embroiled twice in two hugely costly wars while America was free to focus on making money. They still had huge manpower, too, by taking quite extreme measures to maintain the historic social division that slavery had created and cultivating poverty traps to keep a vast underclass of mainly non-white citizens as cheap labour. This continues to this day - domestic manufacturing industries all utilise a prison population slave labour force that is literally shipped round the country to work for third world wages. They introduced various laws to ensure this which were first introduced in the immediate wake of emancipation so it was presumably at least partially deliberate.

【回答】
我们知道答案的，看看你的周围。
事情是这样发生的。
欧洲的前殖民者通过免费运输奴隶到广阔肥沃的北美平原上工作，以及从未开发过的领土上开采其他丰富的资源，比如石油，获得了巨大的财富。
然后，他们通过在两次世界大战期间牟取暴利，向双方提供贷款，以及利用欧洲两次卷入两场代价巨大的战争，而美国却可以自由地专注于赚钱，从而变得更加富有。他们仍拥有大量的人力，采取相当极端的措施来维持奴隶制造成的历史性社会分工，并培育了贫困陷阱，以保持非白人为主的庞大下层公民作为廉价劳动力。这种情况一直延续到今天——国内的制造业都是利用监狱里的奴隶劳动力，这些劳动力实际上被运往全国各地，为第三世界的工资而工作。他们制定了各种法律来确保这情况，这些法律是在解放之后立即制定，所以，可以推测出至少部分是故意的。

After the wars they were hugely rich and Europe was bankrupt so they lent more money and became richer. My country, England, only paid off the loan borrowed to fight World War Two in 2006.
They also expanded into overseas territories under the guise of a war on communism. Their empire is now of an almost unimaginable scale and reach - even my own country, England, is effectively under military occupation since we are covered in American military bases that use our country as a strategic location.
The military measures they took to create this empire were extreme - to give one random example, they carpet bombed a neutral developing country, Cambodia, and razed whole villages of desperately poor and unarmed non-combatants to strengthen their position in the neighbouring country Vietnam. The man ultimately responsible for this atrocity was awarded the nobel peace prize - and around this time America became widely seen as an evil empire. It also became a military power several times greater than all others there have ever been combined.

战争结束后，他们变得非常富有，欧洲也破产了，因此他们借出更多的钱，变得更加富有。我的祖国英国在2006年才还清了为参加第二次世界大战所借的贷款。
他们还打着向共产主义宣战的幌子向海外扩张。他们的帝国现在的规模和影响力几乎是难以想象的，甚至我自己的国家，英国，实际上也处于军事占领之下，因为我们被美国的军事基地所覆盖，这些军事基地把我们的国家作为一个战略要地。
他们为了建立这个帝国所采取的军事措施是极端的，举一个例子，他们对中立的发展中国家柬埔寨进行地毯式轰炸，并夷平整个村庄的极度贫穷和手无寸铁的非战斗人员，以加强他们在邻国越南的地位。对这一暴行负有最终责任的人被授予诺贝尔和平奖，大约这个时候，美国被广泛视为一个邪恶的帝国。它还成为了一个比其他所有国家的军事力量加起来还要强大好几倍的军事强国。

The dollar is now the reserve currency to the world which means all money is pegged to theirs and the complex can never go bust however much debt they accumulate.
They can simply charge it to the rest of us by fixing rates.They quite literally owe trillions upon trillions and yet they are by far the richest country in the world, and their economic and military empire is larger than the British Empire was at its peak.

美元现在是世界的储备货币，这意味着所有的货币都与他们的货币挂钩，无论他们积累多少债务，这个复杂的经济体永远不会破产。
他们可以简单地通过固定利率向我们其他人收费。
他们确实欠下了数万亿美元的债务，但他们是世界上最富有的国家，他们的经济和军事帝国的规模比鼎盛时期的大英帝国还要大。