World domination

World domination (also called global domination or world conquest or cosmocracy) is a hypothetical power structure, either achieved or aspired to, in which a single political authority holds the power over all or virtually all the inhabitants of the planet Earth. Various individuals or regimes have tried to achieve this goal throughout history, without ever attaining it. The theme has been often used in works of fiction, particularly in political fiction, as well as in conspiracy theories (which may posit that some person or group has already secretly achieved this goal), particularly those fearing the development of a "New World Order" involving a world government of a totalitarian nature.[1][2][3][4][5]

For other uses, see World domination (disambiguation).
"Conquer the World" redirects here. For the video game compilation, see List of MicroProse games.

Social and political ideologies
Main article: World government
By 500 BC, Darius the Great had created the largest empire up until that time, but it was still only a fraction of the land and people of the Earth.

Historically, world domination has been thought of in terms of a nation expanding its power to the point that all other nations are subservient to it. This may be achieved by establishing a hegemony, an indirect form of government and of imperial dominance in which the hegemon (leader state) rules geopolitically subordinate states by means of its implied power—by the threat of force, rather than by direct military force. However, domination can also be achieved by direct military force. In the 4th century BCE, Alexander the Great notably expressed a desire to conquer the world,[6] and a legend persists that after he completed his military conquest of the known ancient world, he "wept because he had no more worlds to conquer",[7] as he was unaware of China farther to the east and had no way to know about civilizations in the Americas.[8] However, with the full size and scope of the world known, it has been said that "world domination is an impossible goal", and specifically that "no single nation however big and powerful can dominate a world" of well over a hundred interdependent nations and billions of people.[9]

An opposite view was expressed by Hans Morgenthau. He stressed that the mechanical development of weapons, transportation, and communication makes "the conquest of the world technically possible, and they make it technically possible to keep the world in that conquered state." He argues that a lack of such infrastructure explains why great ancient empires, though vast, failed to complete universal conquest of their world and perpetuate the conquest. "Today no technological obstacle stands in the way of a world-wide empire," as "modern technology makes it possible to extend the control of mind and action to every corner of the globe regardless of geography and season."[10] Morgenthau continued on the technological progress:

It has also given total war that terrifying, world-embracing impetus which seems to be satisfied with nothing less than world dominion... The machine age begets its own triumphs, each forward step calling forth two or more on the road of technological progress. It also begets its own victories, military and political; for with the ability to conquer the world and keep it conquered, it creates the will to conquer it.[11]

Earlier, impressed with the swift opening of World War II, Derwent Whittlesey wrote in 1942:

The swift march of conquest stunned or dazzled the onlookers... The grandiose concept of the world domination became possible as a practical objective only with the rise of science and its application to mechanical invention. By these means the earth’s scattered land units and territories became accessible and complementary to each other, and for the first time the world state, so long a futile medieval ideal, became a goal that might conceivably be reached.[12]

Yet before the entrance of the United States into this War and with Isolationism still intact, US strategist Hanson W. Baldwin projected:

Tomorrow air bases may be the highroad to power and domination... Obviously it is only by air bases ... that power exercised in the sovereign skies above a nation can be stretched far beyond its shores... Perhaps... future acquisitions of air bases ... can carry the voice of America through the skies to the ends of the earth.[13]

In the early 17th century, Sir Walter Raleigh proposed that world domination could be achieved through control of the oceans, writing that "whosoever commands the sea commands the trade; whosoever commands the trade of the world commands the riches of the world, and consequently the world itself".[14] In 1919, Halford John Mackinder offered another influential theory for a route to world domination, writing:

"Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland:
Who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island:
Who rules the World-Island commands the World".[15]

Some proponents of ideologies (anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, and capitalism) actively pursue the goal of establishing a form of government consistent with their political beliefs, or assert that the world is moving "naturally" towards the adoption of a particular form of government (or self), authoritarian or anti-authoritarian. These proposals are not concerned with a particular nation achieving world domination, but with all nations conforming to a particular social or economic model. A goal of world domination can be to establish a world government, a single common political authority for all of humanity. The period of the Cold War, in particular, is considered to be a period of intense ideological polarization, given the existence of two rival blocs—the capitalist West and the communist East—that each expressed the hope of seeing the triumph of their ideology over that of the enemy. The ultimate end of such a triumph would be that one ideology or the other would become the sole governing ideology in the world.

In certain religions, some adherents may also seek the conversion (peaceful or forced) of as many people as possible to their own religion, without restrictions of national or ethnic origin. This type of spiritual domination is usually seen as distinct from the temporal dominion, although there have been instances of efforts begun as holy wars devolving into the pursuit of wealth, resources, and territory. Some Christian groups teach that a false religion, led by false prophets who achieve world domination by inducing nearly universal worship of a false deity, is a prerequisite to end times described in the Book of Revelation. As one author put it, "[i]f world domination is to be obtained, the masses of little people must be brought on board with religion".[16]

In some instances, speakers have accused nations or ideological groups of seeking world domination, even where those entities have denied that this was their goal. For example, J. G. Ballard quoted Aldous Huxley as having said of the United States entering the First World War, "I dread the inevitable acceleration of American world domination which will be the result of it all...Europe will no longer be Europe".[17] More recently, Geert Wilders argued in 2012 that "Islam is an ideology aiming for world domination rather than a religion",[18] and in 2008 characterized the 2008 Israel–Gaza conflict as a proxy action by Islam against the West, contending that "[t]he end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only... the start of the final battle for world domination".[19]

See also
  • World revolution
  • Americanization
  • Global governance, the political interaction of transnational actors.
  • Hyperpower, a state that dominates all other states in every sphere of activity, and is traditionally considered to be a step higher than a superpower.
  • List of largest empires by maximum extent of land area occupied.
  • Mad scientist, a fictional archetype of a scientist, engineer, or professor who is considered "mad" and often depicted as having a desire to "take over the world".
  • Singleton (global governance), a hypothetical world order in which there is a single decision-making agency (potentially an advanced artificial intelligence) at the highest level, capable of exerting effective control over its domain.
  • Superpower, a state with a leading position in the international system and the ability to influence events in its own interest by global projection of power.
  • Technocracy, a form of organizational structure or system of governance where decision makers are selected on the basis of technological knowledge.
  • Whig history, a school of historiography which claims that the world is moving towards increased liberty and enlightenment.
  • King of the Universe

References
  1. Camp, Gregory S. (1997). Selling Fear: Conspiracy Theories and End-Times Paranoia. Commish Walsh. ASIN B000J0N8NC.
  2. Berlet Chip; Lyons, Matthew N. (2000). Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort. Guilford Press. ISBN 1-57230-562-2.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  3. Goldberg, Robert Alan (2001). Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-09000-5.
  4. Barkun, Michael (2003). A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America. University of California Press; 1 edition. ISBN 0-520-23805-2.
  5. Fenster, Mark (2008). Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture. University of Minnesota Press; 2nd edition. ISBN 0-8166-5494-8.
  6. Green, Peter (2007). Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. London: Phoenix. p. 23. ISBN 978-0-7538-2413-9.
  7. Eric Donald Hirsch, William G. Rowland, Michael Stanford, The New First Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (2004), p. 144.
  8. Geoffrey Bruun, Millicent Haines, The World Story (1963), p. 474.
  9. The Atlantic Community Quarterly (1979), Volume 17, p. 287. At the time, the source specified that there were about 140 nations and about four billion people.
  10. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 4th edition, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967, pp. 358–365.
  11. Politics Among Nations, pp. 369–370.
  12. Derwent Whittlesey, German Strategy of World Conquest, (Essex: F. E. Robinson & Co, 1942), p 13.
  13. Hanson W. Baldwin, United We Stand! Defense of the Western Hemisphere, (New York & London: Whittlesey House, 1941), p 189, 222.
  14. Sir Walter Raleigh, "A Discourse of the Invention of Ships, Anchors, Compass, &c.", The Works of Sir Walter Ralegh, Kt. (1829, reprinted 1965), vol. 8, p. 325.
  15. Sir Halford John Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction (1919), p. 186.
  16. Buddy Selman, Because God Made a Promise to Abraham (2011), p. 262.
  17. J. G. Ballard, Prophet of Our Present. Review of Aldous Huxley: An English Intellectual by Nicholas Murray. The Guardian, 13 April 2002.
  18. Wilders, Geert (14 September 2012). "DECKER: 5 Questions with Geert Wilders". The Washington Times (Interview). Interviewed by Brett M. Decker.
  19. Geert Wilders Speech at the Four Seasons, New York (25 September 2008).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.