Peace or Unity

Unity seems impossible to determine or define.
Peace is a feeling, a peaceful feeling.
So I'd be going for the peace.

all countries transform in to one large nation making it so strong , or , peace between all countries flourishing trade and finance ?

The transformation will bring much war, so if we can have "peace between all countries flourishing trade and finance" for free that sounds good.

#10
In medieval times each city was a state, with its own coin, with tariffs collected at the city gates, with own laws and with wars between cities.
Now cities have united to countries.
Countries can likewise unite to ultimately reach one worldwide state, with one currency, free trade, one law, and no wars.

this is a childish question. both variants are not possible, because main contradictions are inside everyone. i am not sure if there is a reason to choose between two impossible cases.

@steel-apron said in #14:

this is a childish question. both variants are not possible, because main contradictions are inside everyone. i am not sure if there is a reason to choose between two impossible cases.

I did not mention that it will happen in real , hypothetically which is better ?

#14
"not possible"
It is quite possible. There have been empires that stretched across the known world at that time.
The Roman Empire led to the Pax Romana, Roman Peace, and free trade inside the vast empire brought wealth and prosperity to all.

"Imagine there's no countries" (pretend there's music note emojis around that. The tune popped into my head when I read the thread title.)

Either idea would be great, if they worked. That is the problem. If our world history says anything, it is that wealth runs the world. Wealth in gold, wealth in land, wealth in soldiers, wealth in great minds, wealth in general, runs the world. And as long as that is the main theme of our history neither one of your premises can sustain. The best that we can hope for would be a supervisory group that could maybe get countries to discuss issues that would affect our futures. Right now, that could be The United Nations.

@tpr said in #16:

The Roman Empire led to the Pax Romana, Roman Peace, and free trade inside the vast empire brought wealth and prosperity to all.

Lol. Rome was never at peace at all. It was a relative peace, meaning no major conflicts against foreign nations, but there were plenty of internal conflicts in many places, wars agains the jews, the dacians, the brittons, you name it. Which is kind of the point, the ones who were absorbed didnt wanted to be part of rome and did everything they could do to be separated.

#19
"conflicts in many places"

• Nationalism and separatism cause conflicts.
  One empire with free trade brings peace and prosperity to all.