Achieving complete global consensus on anything, especially a system of governance and law, is incredibly difficult due to a number of fundamental obstacles:

1. Vastly Different Values and Ideologies

The world is not a monolith. Different cultures, religions, and political systems have deeply held, and often opposing, values.

• Individualism vs. Collectivism: Some societies prioritize individual rights and freedoms (e.g., the United States, Western Europe), while others emphasize the needs of the community or the state (e.g., China, Singapore).
• Secularism vs. Theocracy: The role of religion in law and government is a major point of divergence. A legal system based on secular principles would be unacceptable to those who believe law must be derived from religious texts, and vice versa.
• Political Systems: Democracies, monarchies, single-party states, and military juntas have fundamentally different views on where power should come from and how it should be used.

2. National Sovereignty

The current world order is built on the principle of national sovereignty—the idea that a nation-state has full control and authority over its own territory and domestic affairs. Any “new world order” would require nations to cede a significant amount of this sovereignty to a global governing body. Most countries, especially powerful ones, are extremely reluctant to do this.

3. Economic Inequality and Historical Grievances

There is a massive wealth gap between developed and developing nations. A new global legal system would have to address issues of economic justice, resource distribution, and historical colonialism. Reaching a fair agreement on these issues is arguably the biggest challenge, as the interests of rich and poor nations are often in direct conflict.

4. The Problem of Enforcement

Even if a law could be written and agreed upon by world leaders, enforcing it uniformly across the globe would be nearly impossible.

• Who would have the authority to enforce these laws? A global police force?
• Who would judge violations? A global court with real power?
• What would prevent powerful nations from simply ignoring or vetoing laws they don’t like? The United Nations Security Council, for example, often faces deadlock due to veto powers.

Pathways and Realistic Alternatives

While a single, universally accepted world law is improbable, humanity has moved towards greater global cooperation in specific areas. This is a more realistic model than a single world government:

1. International Law and Treaties: This is the closest we have to a “world order.” Nations voluntarily agree to be bound by specific treaties on issues like:
   • Human Rights: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and subsequent covenants.
   • Trade: The World Trade Organization (WTO) sets rules for trade that most countries follow.
   • Environment: The Paris Agreement on climate change.
   • War and Crimes: The Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
2. Supranational Organizations: Bodies like the European Union show that countries can voluntarily pool sovereignty in specific areas (like trade, currency, and border control) for mutual benefit. However, even the EU faces significant internal disagreement and the UK’s exit (Brexit) shows the fragility of such unions.
3. Global Norms: Often, change happens not through law but through the gradual development of global norms—shared expectations of behavior. For example, the norms against slavery or the use of chemical weapons are now so strong that they act almost like laws, even without perfect universal enforcement.

Conclusion

Can all people of the world accept a new world order? Almost certainly not. The diversity of human values, the primacy of national interests, and the problem of enforcement make universal consensus impossible.

However, can the world continue to build a patchwork of international laws, treaties, and cooperative institutions that address specific global problems like climate change, pandemics, and financial crises? Yes, and this is the most realistic and practical path forward. The goal is not a single world government, but ever-increasing cooperation between sovereign states to manage the challenges that no single nation can solve alone.