what needs to be done to bring about world unity and peace? Or is it just a theoritical notion?
89293
we have to kill all those opposed to peace
666636
What does "World Peace" mean to you?\n\nReally... I mean, they all seem to want it. It would be nice to know what they actually think it is, wouldn't you say?\n\nGoodluck!
115013
world peace will never be accomplished; terrorism will not be erradicated either.. unfotunately.. but well we can all do a little bit to make this world a little better at home, and thats by starting to accept and love one another no matter what age, race, size, shape, religion, nationality, how rich or poor you are...
550568
It would be nice to have a world government, I think, along the lines of the UN but with a bit more teeth and backbone, but a world religion?  Not a chance.  I for one would never give up my personal religious views to be subjugated by any of the mainstream religions again.  Of course, if there's another Holy War started up and Christians and Muslims wipe themselves out the way it seems like might happen, then we'll see.  Buddhism is at least close to what I practice.\n\nAs for peace, I dont' think that total world peace will ever be possible.  Humans are too greedy, stubborn and materialistic.
1103326
Yes we need each other.\nThere are too many global issues where we need to work together as a world to over come.  Hunger, polution so on.  If we hid in our own little corners of the world and only try to take care of our own then we lose the chance to learn from each other.  If nothing else think of the food.  Ever visit a really cuturally diverse area at the time of a festival where all cultures came together and shared their traditional foods.  Oh my goodness that alone is reason for globalization.\n\nAre we closer together?  That depends on what your comparing it to.  In general I think yes but there are strong sticking points that cause us to move backwards.  I think two of the biggest stumbling blocks are also two things often seen as strengths.  Language and Religion.  If we could just add tollorance I think anything could be possible.  The problem is that in certain areas people refuse to understand that others may think radically differently than ourselves and then we are back to square 1.
538978
great question.\n\nwe should stop talking about all the theoretical and theological aspects of our faith, and start DOing something about it!\n\ni wish i had a real answer for you other than that.\nas for as i can see it we can each only do our part: that means loving our neighbors, spreading the notion of peace, preaching a spirituality of love and acceptance, etc.\n\nif you agree at all then you should read the book: "buried alive - a discussion on overcoming the seven lifeless sins".\nit's the best book i've ever read.  and it's relevant to nearly every aspect of life!
729214
I LIKE YOUR THINKING ...\n\n\nI think we should wish for world peace and nuttela
999659
it could work!\n\nbut only until you got human beings involved.\n\nthere are no utopias...
1023276
Certainly, the world should unite! Now, I don't mean a monolithic, authoritarian, "1984" nightmare dictatorship, but an assembly of nation-states under a minimalist, one-man one-vote global government. In fact, I've got an idea of how this government should be set up, with some rather specific points. Like our great system, it'll have three separate branches, with checks and balances on each. The legislative, or the Global Assembly, as I like to call it, will be unicameral, with four different types of officers. The Congressmen will be based on population, and divided amongst the nations of the world. There will also be a Parliamentary Member, with one officer serving every nation. Think of it as a Senator. There will also be an Ambassador, named by the Government of each member nation. Finally, there will be a Councilor, elected by the intelligentsia of each nation. All of this will be headed by a Prime Minister, popularly elected by all the people of Earth. What the global assembly will do is mediate the disputes between the nations, and it will also attempt projects that the nations alone couldn't achieve. The executive branch, the Premier, will be elected on a local level. Every 10,000 people will come together, vote for the Premier, and the winner of the greatest number of these will take office. The point of the executive will be to focus on the "higher things" in life: Science, the Arts, Medicine, Human Rights, all that. The Judicial will mediate the whole thing, keeping power balanced between Executive and Legislative, between Global and National.\n\n...Sorry to go on like that, but it's an idea I've held for a while.
1002736
One world government is one of those utopian dreams that has been proposed for at least a century, but at present, there are far too many obstacles. Just for one, look at the divisiveness between each of the major countries in the world. And that's not even counting the minor players, who can be extremely contentious. \nAt one point, people believed the United Nations was going to be a step in that direction, but for all it's theoretical potential, it has turned out to be toothless and ineffective. The US has NEVER paid it's UN dues! So much for even giving lip service to that institution.\nHow would you elect a one world goverment? You could not possibly send candidates around the world on a speaking tour. Nor could you have effective sattelite forums -- many of the smaller countries in the world are simply not technologically equipped to handle such a task. \nAnd in which language would the government operate? Again, that was not supposed to be a problem at the UN, but it is. Just finding enough skilled translators to handle the sessions is a major problem. \nI think the best solution would be to do whatever is possible to help nations work effectively within themselves. Not by stomping in with an army of enforcers, nor by sending in foreign aid to meet a crisis situation, but by helping them to solve their problems from within, because that is the only way to formulate stable solutions, and solutions that will recognize the uniqueness of each country. \nI really fear that if a one-world government was proposed, it would be just another case of the US going in and trying to make everyone do things their way. Their way may be fine for them, but it isn't necessarily the best way for everyone. \nAnyway, that's what I think. \nSorry, I've just tried to run this through the spellcheck but Yahoo is having problems with the Spellcheck, so you'll just have to excuse any pied type or spelling errors.
595901
Just a couple of ideas..\n\n(1) reform the UN\nhttp://heal-the-earth.org\n\n(2) institute unions representing each major region\nhttp://americas-union.org\nhttp://arabian-union.org\nhttp://asia-union.org\nhttp://africans-union.org\nhttp://oceanic-union.org\nhttp://euro-union.org\n\n(3) developing a 25 yr plan for the planet\nhttp://u-s-m.org
598711
This planet will only ever be at peace when it no longer exists.\n\nMankind is a violent creature.\n\nMaybe the time for peace will be when the nuclear winter/artificial virus has finished off a vast majority of the populace. \n\nTherefore the responsibility of the individual is to prepare for such events.\n\nTrain your body and mind. Converse with intellectuals. Become someone who is valued in the community and recognised as a leader.\n\nArmageddon draws ever nearer with each hour that passes....
976633
No no no no no! Every country should be it's own, and be seperate. Countries shouldn't be mixed together. If they are, people lose their convictions that set them apart in the first place. (i.e. "nutrality". btw, nutrality is the first step towards humanism and a Godless nation)\nIf cultures are swirled together, it  leaves a mellow, confused country that is fighting itself because of citizen unrest.
1105462
education to the world which promotes critical thinking and analytical reasoning without influence of political, religious, or any organization's influence. promote thinking of the world as one and people are not different by color, region, religion, country, or whatever type of label that we're taught to be important.  \n\nwhat political party, religion, or any organization would want to promote and contribute to the cause?
585558
Yes, if indeed there would be world peace with no "but"s, or exceptions.. I would come up with a different method to get around.
1101826
The world as a whole has nothing to work for. There is rampant apathy, and that creates a void that is filled only by a lust for power, either over one person or one million. People don't really care about anything anymore. When the world has something that everyone is truly willing to work for, then we will have "peace." Unfortunately, only world-wide disasters and wars are what can "bring us together."
510913
The world will never be world peace. As long as there is lust, greed, and fear, war will exist. These are all an unfortunate part of human nature. There are those among us who feel that the only good war is one fought with words, but we are a small minority.