Wed, 03 Mar 1999 12:04:11 -0800
At 00:17 3/3/99 -0500, you wrote:
>I've always wonder what this really means. EF sounds like a stronger
>(i.e. more centralized) union than UN. Would EU be comparable? I would
>guess not. Since (sadly) a real nation is often defined by its military
>forces, the EF should be considered one nation, since there's one and only
>one well-defined army structure (as opposed to the ill-defined UN
>Peace-Keeper troops). So the comparison could be similar to the bigger
>countries of today: USA, Canada or China, with a centralized government
>(that also happens to recuit and run the armed forces) overseeing
>provinces/states that are self-governing in local politics.
>Of course I am really posing a question: is the above somewhat sensible?
>But really I don't see how it can be otherwise. You need an army
>structure with a clear chain of command to fight an organized enemy
>(Zeon). Someone has to control this army structure, and whoever this
>(person or committee or whatever) is, s/he/it must be damn close to the
>true power of the whole EF.
In his "Future History" novels, which may have influenced Tomino, Robert A.
Heinlein proposed a world government called the Federated Nations. The FN
was basically the US writ large, a Federal government in the Jeffersonian
mold, in which the former sovereign nations were subsumed as "sovereign
states" of the world-nation. As with the US, each nation had its own local
laws and "national guard" style military, but were subject to overarching
Federal laws and their own interests were subordinated to the Federal
interests. The FN military was drawn from the member states' forces in
proportion to the the population of each, much like Congressional districts.
The FN enforced its will with a fleet of spaceships in polar orbit that
could nuke anyone on the ground who got too far out of line. The
assignments were made in such a way that no FN military member would ever
be called upon to target their own homeland, but in any case the FN
military was sworn to protect and defend the FN in much the same way that
US military are sworn to protect the US.
Heinlein's rationale was that the UN was little more than a committee, with
no teeth to enforce its edicts and only such powers as the member nations
were willing to give it at any point in time. An effective world
government had to be a real government, with the power to tax and apply
military force without consultation or oversight beyond constitutional law.
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 04 1999 - 05:45:16 JST