Allocating authority upwardly and/or downwardly

Billions are aware of Cartesian graphs about the variation with time of some phenomena. Many varieties of stories of evolution involve prolonged periods of relatively trivial rate of change, sometimes called “plateaus” with occasional “jumps” featuring relatively brief periods of drastic transformation. During recent centuries, some world federalists have evaluated the launching of a Supra-National Federation as a reform that could be expected to blossom from trends traceable from the past. Home Rule Globally promotes the message that world government will be the most drastic transformation ever attempted by humanity. Some federalists advocate tremendous power and large budgets at the global level, thus being centralist-federalists.
 
The fangs of a cobra snake are sometimes removed to provide a friendly, pet snake. Thus the term  “de-fanging” has been an alternative expression for “decreasing the dangerousness” of an entity. Home Rule Globally emphasizes that the great need
for de-fanging each member of the federation. If some of the power now at the national level is transferred to governance entities having smaller constituencies, with focus upon empowering neighborhoods, than the grass roots might support the federation. Such grass roots support is of critical importance during the early decades of the federation when the dissidents are likely to have even greater clout than during the campaigns for ratification. The hurdle of ratifiability is extremely vague, but is an appropriate standard for the reluctant acceptance of a world government that is likely to be less than perfect when launched.
      
During the 20th century, some federalists treated anti-federalists as enemies to be destroyed. Home Rule Globally emphasizes the great diversities both within some nations, and among the nations. Whatever proposal can prompt contingent amendments to hundreds of national constitutions of nations aggregating the overwhelming clout of the world is not likely to be excessively tyrannical. 
      
Home Rule Globally treats all previous and contemporary proposals as merely “illustrative examples” and thus irritates various factions advocating explicit proposals and/or planks for platforms meriting immediate adoption. Because the marketability of a proposal will depend partly upon the grass roots enthusiasm for it, the direction of allocation of power might be significant. Voluntary ratifiability should be easier concerning allocation of power upwardly from socially responsible mature adults. In seeking plausible manageability of global problems, some allocation of power downwardly from remote bureaucracies might be necessary. Any such downwardly directed allocation of power might be deemed invasive tyranny by dissidents.
 
Many nations might interpret a plausible proposal as essentially enhancing its internal sovereignty because the modifications would concern global justice about the external clout of nations. Home Rule Globally encourages hope that civilization can be prolonged for at least a few centuries because humanity is so innovative that a yet-to-be invented Proposal might emerge.