The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Some  propose a unified global government instead of each nation having one of its own. This essay shall delve deeper to determine the pros and cons into this matter, and evaluate whether the notion of merits of such world order surpass its demerits. 

Undeniably, a single world-government could promote global cooperation and nearly eliminate conflicts between nations as having one central authority, issues like climate change, global health crisis, cross-border terrorism, and border disputes could be effectively addressed by discovering remedies sans impediments. Also, this arrangement can engender a conducive environment for travel and communication across borders, by affording uniform laws and policies, which would simplify trade and unify commerce across stratas of society.

However, the idea of one worldwide authority undermines cultural diversity and representation of people hailing from diverse backgrounds and regions with unique traditions, values, and political systems dating way before the conceptualisation of governments;  hence, it would be extremely difficult for universal governance to fairly address distinct local issues. Such centralisation would lead to loss of local autonomy, and could result in unequal and inefficient distribution of resources as managing the needs of a global population is highly complex.

Furthermore, vesting power in a global governing body poses the risk of misuse of authority: without sufficient checks and balances, such representation might become too powerful, potentially leading to authoritarian control, and eventually a collapse in the not too distant future. To corroborate this, the fall of the Soviet Union was largely credited to rampant corruption and neglect of accountability with blatant exploitation of the people and resources of Baltic nations.

Overall, although a universal regime might offer benefits such as improved coordination and reduced conflicts, those rejecting this stress on the pitfalls - particularly the risks to cultural diversity, representation, and political freedom - and state that these are far more significant than any rewards this proposed world order might afford.