The notion of world government is anathema to most political theorists. This is the case due to the arguments that a world government is infeasible, undesirable and unnecessary. This three-fold argument is partly predicated on the assumption that in world politics the larger a geographical and political entity is, the greater the chance of it becoming  unstable, ungovernable and, ultimately, illegitimate. On the one hand, if this assumption is correct, then a world government is likely to be illegitimate. On the other hand, if the assumption is wrong, then it is not far-fetched to consider a world government to be legitimate.
Considering a world government that emerges from a global social contract, this paper contends that:
the legitimacy or illegitimacy of a world government and the extent to which it is legitimate or illegitimate depends on the kind of social contract that produces it and the extent to which it fulfils or fails to fulfil the conditions of the social contract.
World Government, Social Contract and Legitimacy by Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere
#UnityInDiversity
#universalJustice
#universalequality
#universaleducation
#worldfederalism