Quote:
why would a larger supernational government care more about minorities? I'd expect the opposite?
Well my view of a supernational government is that it would allow smaller semi-autonomous states to manage their own internal affairs, but also provide a framework for redress, and for social services, and for common defense and security--no one group can oppress any other group without being held accountable by higher authority.
In the same way that the UN tries to consider the needs of minority groups who are being oppressed, this new supernational framework would allow for smaller units such as minority regions, like Palestine, Israel, Kurdistan, etc, to exist but still have the benefits of being part of a larger nation, without being oppressed by a larger and antagonistic majority.
For example, Iraq currently has a number of smaller regions or cultural areas which simply can not coexist in one unified government. However, if Iraq were to be subsumed into a larger supernation, each little region might be able to exist in an autonomous capacity, without the dangers of "balkanization".
No one wants an area like Iraq or Somalia broken into several small independent states. However, in my framework, they can exist semi-autonomously, and yet still form parts of a larger nation.
Obviously this concept comes with its own host of problems, but in fact, dealing with large structural problems is in some ways easier then resolving small regional conflicts.
| 
