Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So because DC is the capital of the US it can't be the 'unofficial capital of the world'? Where are the official rules to the unofficial capital selection process? I'm choosing the city with the most political power in the world to be it's unofficial capital and you're saying I need to pick a city with less political power....to be a capital...which is intrinsically a political designation? Are you serious?
And UNICEF is entirely seperable from the UN. I've yet to hear an actual reason why the UN is good thing. I'll say this again: COLLECTIVE SECURITY IS A FAILED IDEA. I don't know how much clearer I can be, and I don't know how that's even close to being debatable. The UN is just a place where people meet at this point- something that's pretty much an anachronistic since the age of global communications. The UN is a failure; international law (in general, but especially as dictated from the UN) is tautological and without the authority to be enforced on any powerful nation. What's its use then?
Why? Its in America. No other country is quite as central in the world as America. At the very least its a mental thing. Even Europeans put it down for NYC. And no other city can compete with NYC's diversity. Population, for sure. Diversity, not even close.
You are wrong. London matches the diversity of NYC. For better or for worse London is not the city it was 50 years ago. A study in 2005 showed that 300 languages are spoken in London. About a third of it's population is foreign-born, roughly equivalent to NYC. So NYC is not head and shoulder's above everyone else in terms of diversity.
Now if by diversity you mean lower percentage of white people than New York wins (or loses) by that count. But race aside, both cities are similar destinations for global immigration. While the largest group of NYC's immigrants come from Latin America London attracts huge numbers from India, Pakistan, the Middle East, the European Union, and the West Indies.
So because DC is the capital of the US it can't be the 'unofficial capital of the world'? Where are the official rules to the unofficial capital selection process? I'm choosing the city with the most political power in the world to be it's unofficial capital and you're saying I need to pick a city with less political power....to be a capital...which is intrinsically a political designation? Are you serious?
And UNICEF is entirely seperable from the UN. I've yet to hear an actual reason why the UN is good thing. I'll say this again: COLLECTIVE SECURITY IS A FAILED IDEA. I don't know how much clearer I can be, and I don't know how that's even close to being debatable. The UN is just a place where people meet at this point- something that's pretty much an anachronistic since the age of global communications. The UN is a failure; international law (in general, but especially as dictated from the UN) is tautological and without the authority to be enforced on any powerful nation. What's its use then?
Heh, off all the UN spinoff you pick UNICEF. Do you know what the "UN" in UNICEF stands for? You guess it, and many people may have guessed it - it's has the same meaning with the UN itself. Unicef is the same thing is FAO, WHO, UNESCO, etc. It's a subdivision of the United Nations and will ever be its division.
And I said it again, it won't be appropriate if the US capital to become the unofficial capital of the world. China won't let Washington DC to be the international hub and if there's alternative, many would pick other cities. It could be Seattle or Houston someday, but Washington DC means US national interest. As the American system has afforded many alternatives, it would be better if that city is free from US internal politics.
You seem to misunderstand that political importance have that much to say in multinational relations. It's not & as attested many times, many nations detest US politics hegemony. The more neutral place is any city beyond Washington DC and for now it's NYC.
You are wrong. London matches the diversity of NYC. For better or for worse London is not the city it was 50 years ago. A study in 2005 showed that 300 languages are spoken in London. About a third of it's population is foreign-born, roughly equivalent to NYC. So NYC is not head and shoulder's above everyone else in terms of diversity.
Now if by diversity you mean lower percentage of white people than New York wins (or loses) by that count. But race aside, both cities are similar destinations for global immigration. While the largest group of NYC's immigrants come from Latin America London attracts huge numbers from India, Pakistan, the Middle East, the European Union, and the West Indies.
And as more national security rules keep enacted in the US & UK surely has a more relaxed visa regulations, I think London will become more diverse than NYC.
Heh, off all the UN spinoff you pick UNICEF. Do you know what the "UN" in UNICEF stands for? You guess it, and many people may have guessed it - it's has the same meaning with the UN itself. Unicef is the same thing is FAO, WHO, UNESCO, etc. It's a subdivision of the United Nations and will ever be its division.
It's within the UN- it doesn't need the UN. It can work just fine on it's own, like the Red Cross. I'm not sure why that's so hard to grasp.
Quote:
And I said it again, it won't be appropriate if the US capital to become the unofficial capital of the world. China won't let Washington DC to be the international hub and if there's alternative, many would pick other cities. It could be Seattle or Houston someday, but Washington DC means US national interest. As the American system has afforded many alternatives, it would be better if that city is free from US internal politics.
Okay, but this isn't something coming down the pipeline anytime soon. It's not a discussion crouched in reality. If it was, and it was like what you're talking about, than none of the options listed would be viable. The topic is clearly about which city wields the most power in the world. Otherwise than Honolulu or Johannesburg or Prague would be just as good an answer as any. Topeka or Orleans.
Quote:
You seem to misunderstand that political importance have that much to say in multinational relations. It's not & as attested many times, many nations detest US politics hegemony. The more neutral place is any city beyond Washington DC and for now it's NYC.
Why? If many nations detest the US' hegemony why would it be in the US at all, then? The point is if the OP is asking which city in the world is the unofficial capital- which city has the most political power- it's obviously DC. If he's asking what city in the world would become the world capital in the event of a one world government, than NYC is just as unlikely as DC.
Okay, but this isn't something coming down the pipeline anytime soon. It's not a discussion crouched in reality. If it was, and it was like what you're talking about, than none of the options listed would be viable. The topic is clearly about which city wields the most power in the world. Otherwise than Honolulu or Johannesburg or Prague would be just as good an answer as any. Topeka or Orleans.
No it's not about power. It's about how people around the world perceive as the premiere city on Earth. Of course it's not DC. DC is where the Prez of America resides. It's not a neutral place. But where people of the world have a diplomatic or commercial congress.
Quote:
Why? If many nations detest the US' hegemony why would it be in the US at all, then? The point is if the OP is asking which city in the world is the unofficial capital- which city has the most political power- it's obviously DC. If he's asking what city in the world would become the world capital in the event of a one world government, than NYC is just as unlikely as DC.
You're adding your own definition to the OP opinion. Where does he say the city has the most political power? No you're just adding it because you feel it. The OP has given hints on his candidates - we would do well to heed on what he thinks as a world capital. Obviously that the city has to have some culture, a large commercial base, and famous as a multinational center.
If you say world capital means a city that wields the most US political power - then make your own thread. I'd vote Washington DC per your definition.
We all know this. Thank you for pointing out the obvious. The point is it can easily function outside the UN. The UN is not critical to it's functions, especially considering most UNICEF's funds come from donations.
Quote:
No it's not about power. It's about how people around the world perceive as the premiere city on Earth. Of course it's not DC. DC is where the Prez of America resides. It's not a neutral place. But where people of the world have a diplomatic or commercial congress.
Why would the unofficial capital of the world not be about political power? Quick game: Name a capital of anything (nation/province/state/county/etc) that doesn't have the most political power of that unit. You won't find one, because that's the definition of a capital.
Quote:
You're adding your own definition to the OP opinion. Where does he say the city has the most political power?
That's what a capital is.
Quote:
No you're just adding it because you feel it.
I'm adding it because I know what the definition of the word capital is.
Quote:
The OP has given hints on his candidates - we would do well to heed on what he thinks as a world capital. Obviously that the city has to have some culture, a large commercial base, and famous as a multinational center.
If you say world capital means a city that wields the most US political power - then make your own thread. I'd vote Washington DC per your definition.
What you're talking about IS NOT A CAPITAL. You're talking about the 'best city' or something like that. Not the same thing.
We all know this. Thank you for pointing out the obvious. The point is it can easily function outside the UN. The UN is not critical to it's functions, especially considering most UNICEF's funds come from donations.
But why bring up the Red Cross? Red Cross is not an UN body. UNICEF is a UN body. Contrary to what you think, UN is critical to UNICEF function. I think you're trying to escape from saying UNICEF is a UN body. No matter how independent it is, UNICEF is still a part of the UN.
Quote:
Why would the unofficial capital of the world not be about political power? Quick game: Name a capital of anything (nation/province/state/county/etc) that doesn't have the most political power of that unit. You won't find one, because that's the definition of a capital.
Because you don't see national politics go beyond a national border and there's no such thing as an Earth country where the US citizens don't sing Star Spangled Banner anymore and Londoners don't give a damn with God save the monarch. The nearest city to be considered is the most internationally renowned city of the world. Everybody has its own opinion but London, NYC, Paris, Tokyo, and a very few GAWC large cities are its candidate.
Quote:
What you're talking about IS NOT A CAPITAL. You're talking about the 'best city' or something like that. Not the same thing.
Look at the list on the first page. Then come back again. There's no such thing as capital of the world. There's a so-called Unofficial capital of the world and as the OP suggested, the city candidates are there.
Most of the people who are high on NYC are actually from NYC. But I've been to most of the cities on this list and can tell you that NYC, like Paris, is yesterday's news.
NYC isn't the financial capital of the world anymore, and hasn't been for about a decade. London is. And London is more diverse, if that's what you're into. Personally, I like a very British London, but that's also yesterday's news. Today, some parts of London are like a cleaner version of Islamabad, with lots of eastern eurpopean immigrants.
NYC isn't even the Capitol of the U.S., let alone the world. In a Political sense, the capitol of the U.S is of course in DC. In a cultural sense, the capital is in LA. In fact, America's identity, both within and without the U.S., is largely a myth built by the power of Hollywood. LA makes the only products the U.S. exports more of than it imports - movies and music. And NYC reputation is helped simply because Hollwood actors decided to make world wide series like Friends and Seinfeld, which are of course completely unrealistic.
NYC is soooo last decade. It needs to get over itself, and learn to accept that it's just not that as relevant as it used to be.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,047,835 times
Reputation: 11862
To others NYC is just another city, but, maybe because I've been brainwashed, it's in a whole other league from the likes of Chicago, Houston.etc. If I could only visit one world city it would be NYC no question.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
