HN Explorer

Global Voting: Good Idea or Bad?

1 points by badcarbine ↗ HN
The effects of pollution of all types are uncontrollable, and global at scale. Since global superpowers are in control of the health and well being of every human and life form on the planet - Voting should not be restricted to just the population that resides within that sovereign nation. Each nation able to participate in the global market, should be allowed to vote on a weighted scale for the leaders and laws governing nations outside each others borders.

Whoever wins the 2024 election in the US, wins the futures of untold numbers of people AROUND THE WORLD. Why shouldn't France get a vote?

5 comments

[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 20.5 ms ] thread
Rzor
So instead of capitalism be overthrowing democracy in each country in its own particular ways, now it would be able to do it on a global scale.
dave4420
Bad idea. e.g. the Russian and Chinese governments would submit block votes in favour of whichever candidate would most trash the U.S. military and U.S. economic independence. Pollution wouldn’t come into it.
badcarbine
Block votes? The way I was imagining it, certain countries would have a weight. Russia and China wouldn't weigh as heavily.
dave4420
You don’t believe they’d actually ask their citizens, do you?
wsgeorge
This brings back memories from Obama's first campaign. My parents joked that with the kind of influence the US has over us, every country should have a say in who leads them!

"Global Voting" is a poor solution to that problem, but more importantly, it is redundant. The Internet ensures that people in other countries can exert some influence over US voters. Even more importantly, migrant communities can exercise some amount of influence depending on their overall relationship with their home countries.

It's still a fun idea to think about.