Why Mayors Should Rule The World

1102 Words5 Pages
Imagine a world ruled by mayors. Nation-states and federal governments become obsolete because cities are fully capable of running themselves. Benjamin Barber proposed that very idea in a Ted Talk he gave titled: “Why Mayors Should Rule the World”. However, his point of contention does not account for three potential dilemmas: It would be harder to solve global issues, ruralism would be eradicated, and laws would no longer be consistent. I disagree with the points made by Benjamin Barber in his TED Talk; mayors should not rule the world because it would lead to a plethora of conflicts and controversy. A common argument made to support mayors ruling the world is that it would become easier to solve global issues. However, global issues are more likely to eventually be harder to solve. For instance, there are currently 193 countries in the United Nations, an organization designed to promote international cooperation, and to create and maintain international order. The UN has done that by sending sixty-nine peacekeeping and observer missions to the world’s trouble spots over the past six decades. There are now sixteen peacekeeping operations around the world, carried out by approximately 125,000 men and women from 120 countries who go where others cannot or will not go. If humanity were to dispose of nation-states, the UN would no longer exist. Instead, it would likely have to be replaced by a new organization called the United Cities (for example). If that were the case, what
Get Access