When I was a kid, I was enamored of the idea of a World Government that performed the same functions as was originally intended for the Federal government of the United States under the Constitution. My examples were often those world governments in science fiction books that united the entire Earth under one set of decent laws and rules.

Unfortunately, whenever the idea of a world government popped up in real life, it was never a government whose sole purpose was the defense of individual rights and freedom.

Instead, every entity that proposed world-wide authority seemed to use Marxism--or worse--as its model, with the eventual goal being a world-wide socialist state, along with all the foul trimmings. Unfortunately, by the time I grew up this also included the United Nations.

I cannot respect an entity that supposedly represents law and order across the world, yet caters to dictators, thugs, and all manner of totalitarian thinkers. Communist nations are given equal say with free countries, and no one blinks an eye.

If the United Nations is considered to be simply a forum where nations can get together and discuss issues and conflicts, the inclusion of less desirable nations is acceptable. However, if the idea is to create a world-wide legal authority, then it cannot include nations and leaders who are butchers and criminals.

You can't set up a city police department that includes members of the mob.

This is one reason why U.N. entities like a World Court and others are unacceptable under these conditions. Mugabe and the Chinese communists, among many others, are in no moral position to dictate right and wrong or anything else to the rest of the world.