Well - first things first, you will have to unravel people's unnatural and conditioned love for their countries. Then teach them that international sport is all about fairness. Then convince them to form national teams based on their now unravelled love for their countries. Good luck with that!
In order for these people to get behind their new entities, you will have to teach them a new Ghana/Togo/Benin national identity (for example) which is currently not there. Then you are basically re-creating the "conditioning" thing you so heavily criticise, but in terms that you think are fairer. What might be fairer is if sport just didn't exist at all - that would take out any need to even consider its fairness. It's sport, it's not life or death - it doesn't have to be all evened out. As mentioned previously, solving world poverty or evening out financial resources on a global level (not only in sports) would be a better thing to achieve first. Without this, it would be hard to implement such a system as you offer. If you can achieve some of what you think needs to be done, then all is well.
Tell you what - wouldn't it be fairer if antelopes were the same strength and ferocity as lions? Of course - it would give both adversaries an equal chance. Should it be so? No.
Chill out, man - have a beer. It's Monday and the week is long.
I think you are taking my idea of "fairness" out of context. I know we have been over this before. I mean fair as in "competing on a level playing field" not fair as in "everything needs to be equal and the same so that all teams have the same skill level" that is not a very good description, but i don't know how else to put it.
With this second paragraph you are also erroneous. You don't need to teach people a Ghana/Togo/Benin identity. If there is a group of americans, a group of spanish, a group of indians, and then 1 guy from togo, 1 guy from ghana and 1 guy from benin... 9 times out of 10 they are going to naturally start to form their own social group because they are more culturally/ethnically similar. There is nothing to teach except the raw math. Furthermore, the majority of the people do not need to be convinced of this, I don't see why you think so. Your other points are also incomplete. Sport is not life and death... of course not. Neither is toilet paper, i can wipe my ass with a leaf and water if need be. The current international sports situation: wiping your ass with a leaf. my scenario: wiping your ass with toilet paper. We have also been over the eliminating extreme poverty argument. it is absolutely ludicrous to suggest solving extreme poverty is easier than changing international sport to be something closer than i suggest. solving extreme poverty is a simple concept and can be done, but would involve mass revolution and complete economic reorganization. My scenario involves creating a few dozen teams out of mostly rich countries (china would be a pain in the ass to divide up, but most countries not so much). secondly, as stated before, even if you remove extreme poverty you still have different country sizes (USA and New Zealand for example). New Zealand is superior in athletic efficiency to USA, but USA destroys NZ at most sports. There are countless examples like this, just view the European standings in my spreadsheets.
Your final statement I cannot apply to this situation realistically. a lion is naturally a lion, an antelope is naturally an antelope. germany is not naturally wealthy, cambodia is not naturally in extreme poverty... it's artificial circumstance.
I am pretty chill, i just don't beat around the bush when it comes to the few topics i actually know something about. I don't want to come across as an ass, but I know I am (: