Author Topic: Are nation-states necessary anymore?  (Read 757 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2018, 03:57:28 pm »
After years of increases, the number of states with democracies and rule of law is declining. This trend may be temporary, level off or reverse. The bottom line is the number of people living in states where they have control over their government is falling. I see that as the greatest "darkness".

Our politicians are merely a reflection of society and you cannot separate the two. If elected politicians act destructively that is because voters reward those that do. Unless you have a solution for mass brainwashing then no technical change is going to fix this issue.

Actually the number of democracies in the world continues to increase and is now at a post war high.

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/12/06100302/FT_17.11.10_demo_auto_map.png

And then if you look at all the international groups that have come into being especially since we endured two world wars, you can see the direction things are headed. It will take time of course but who really needs more wars.

UN, WHO, World Bank, World Trade Org., OECD, WIPO, WMO, UPO, UNWTO, World Food Programme, International Development,  and the list goes on.
Getting the picture yet?
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2018, 04:26:13 pm »
The larger and higher the level of government the more distant it is from the citizenry. We can see this in EU, which is starting to shed nations. The British were the first, but the Italians could be the next. Extremist parties are rising in the face of the arrogance of Brussels in ignoring the will of the people on a number of issues, most notably now on immigration/migration. France's president has admitted that if the political elites there permitted a referendum the French would vote to leave. Eastern Europe is chaffing at the demands of the EU bureaucrats to take more migrants. Greece could separate after Italy...

We are still instinctively tribal. EU nations are somewhat similar in their mentality and cultural outlook, in their values and beliefs. That was the basis upon which the EU was able to set up in the first place. Now they have millions of Muslims from the middle east and North Africa pushing their way in while the Brussels bureaucrats wring their hands and do nothing. And that is likely going to cause the breakup of the EU. Because it wouldn't keep members of an entirely different tribe from coming in and settling there, despite the overwhelmingly consistent will of the people they were supposedly elected to serve.

So the idea that western nations are going to be willing to amalgamate with the likes of African or Asian or Middle-Eastern nations is nonsensical, elitist pie-in-the-sky nonsense.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2018, 04:44:03 pm »
The larger and higher the level of government the more distant it is from the citizenry. We can see this in EU, which is starting to shed nations. The British were the first, but the Italians could be the next. Extremist parties are rising in the face of the arrogance of Brussels in ignoring the will of the people on a number of issues, most notably now on immigration/migration. France's president has admitted that if the political elites there permitted a referendum the French would vote to leave. Eastern Europe is chaffing at the demands of the EU bureaucrats to take more migrants. Greece could separate after Italy...

We are still instinctively tribal. EU nations are somewhat similar in their mentality and cultural outlook, in their values and beliefs. That was the basis upon which the EU was able to set up in the first place. Now they have millions of Muslims from the middle east and North Africa pushing their way in while the Brussels bureaucrats wring their hands and do nothing. And that is likely going to cause the breakup of the EU. Because it wouldn't keep members of an entirely different tribe from coming in and settling there, despite the overwhelmingly consistent will of the people they were supposedly elected to serve.

So the idea that western nations are going to be willing to amalgamate with the likes of African or Asian or Middle-Eastern nations is nonsensical, elitist pie-in-the-sky nonsense.

I think if your consult your Funk and Wagnells you will find out that the concept of amalgamation is not something associated with elitists.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12461
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2018, 05:43:59 pm »
You are the one who started talking about a "darkness". I simply defined what I see as the biggest global concern.

Yes, that's not it.  Although I agree we'e had setbacks of late.

Quote
From what I have read it is no more contentious than in the past. The main difference is the huge volume of discourse which technology has enabled which makes the contention seem greater (i.e. our knowledge of the past is limited by what was written in newspapers etc.).

Really ?  The recent past ?

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2018, 06:01:45 pm »
Really ?  The recent past ?
The time when dems denounce the 'illegitimate" president or when the GOP kept looking for dirt of Clinton? Or the love that people had for Mulroney or Trudeau Sr? Or the Quebec sovereignty battles or Watergate or the Civil Right Era/Desegregation. Why were the politics fights in the past 'lesser' than today? Remember that time tends dull memories to the point were past presidents/prime ministers are a lot less polarizing in retirement.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2018, 06:03:12 pm »
1) A large number of countries are not democracies and are not likely to become democracies anytime soon. This makes a universally elected body a pipe dream;
This is one of the key reasons why a general co-operative order is necessary: to bring these nations into juridically just state of existence.
2) People living in large democracies already struggle with internal conflicts between the existing jurisdictions (Scotland, Catalan, Quebec, et, al.). I can't imagine these groups would be happy to cede more power to a central authority.
They've already ceded it. Capital operates outside the boundaries of nation-states, while labour cannot.
3) The differentials in population and economic size would leave a lot of minority groups feeling powerless. I don't see this as a good or desirable thing.
That's different from now, how? Most oppressed groups are oppressed because of nation states and the history of colonial oppression that was a function of national power extending beyond state borders. The elimination of nation states would level the playing field. As opposed to minorities within states, it would be conflict between equal groups under a supranational order. We already have a framework for handling disputes between groups or people with jurisprudence. The elimination of nation-states makes these groups equal actors before what would be a supranational juridical order. What's a minority in a country when even the majority is a minority in the global order?

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2018, 06:03:27 pm »
I think if your consult your Funk and Wagnells you will find out that the concept of amalgamation is not something associated with elitists.

The Maastrich treaty was not the brainchild of a bunch of factory workers. It was dreamed up by Francois Mitterand and Helmut Kohl.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2018, 06:07:07 pm »
There are new ways coming soon, and for the better, once we get through this dark period.
We're not heading there. We are already there. We have a supranational economic system that has shaped societies in its image. Laws are tailored to it and people are physically adapted to it through the organization of labour. The World Bank and the IMF coerce governments to act at their behest, unless they wish to face the wrath of the exile of capital. Democratically elected representative governments have very little authority in the face of this juggernaut. They merely adapt or acquiesce to its demands. They can try to resist, but never get very far because they are threatened with annihilation if they do.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2018, 06:10:39 pm »
Not a chance. None of the populations of these countries have any interest in ceding power to a supranational body. More importantly, it is completely irrational to suggest they do (loss of power with no benefits).
It's interesting you say states won't do this, when political theory heavily relies on the idea that people do exactly that for freedom. You've frequently made Hobbesian arguments, which hold that people give up their freedom to be protected from the brutal violence that we would inflict upon one another for selfish survival in a state of nature. We give up our natural drives to kill one another for resources, so that we may all be free to prosper without the threat of destruction hanging over us.

Why not extend this thinking to states?

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2018, 06:14:30 pm »
I think if your consult your Funk and Wagnells you will find out that the concept of amalgamation is not something associated with elitists.
Amalgamation is not the correct concept anyway. That's still a positive state of combination. It still leaves the same system intact. I'm referring to an entirely different order without borders and without centralized power, better understood as global co-ordination.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12461
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #25 on: May 28, 2018, 06:40:50 pm »
We're not heading there. We are already there. We have a supranational economic system that has shaped societies in its image. Laws are tailored to it and people are physically adapted to it through the organization of labour. The World Bank and the IMF coerce governments to act at their behest, unless they wish to face the wrath of the exile of capital. Democratically elected representative governments have very little authority in the face of this juggernaut. They merely adapt or acquiesce to its demands. They can try to resist, but never get very far because they are threatened with annihilation if they do.

Meh.  You are too pessimistic.  I may be too optimistic but I at least hold a healthy amount of doubt.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #26 on: May 28, 2018, 06:42:03 pm »
Just to be clear, we're not talking here of a state where there is an international order, but a state where there is a supranational order. This already exists and I'm contending here that the presence of nation-states give a false sense of control over this supranational order, when in matter of fact its power is diffuse, decentralized, and without borders. I'm arguing that in response to this supranational power, we dissolve their pathways of control: the nation-state. We organize as humanity for human needs, rather than nationally for nationalist interests. This isn't about the presence of a new global sovereign. It's about destroying states altogether.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #27 on: May 28, 2018, 06:44:09 pm »
Meh.  You are too pessimistic.  I may be too optimistic but I at least hold a healthy amount of doubt.
Pessimistic how? This is a matter of fact. These forces even shape the language we use, through the media, so that we are unable to even conceptualize a state where we are not enslaved by a global economic order that operates outside state authorities.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #28 on: May 28, 2018, 06:52:21 pm »
This is one of the key reasons why a general co-operative order is necessary: to bring these nations into juridically just state of existence.
They used that argument to justify adding China to the WTO. That argument has been thoroughly discredited.

They've already ceded it. Capital operates outside the boundaries of nation-states, while labour cannot.
That is life. Any country has the option of opting out of the international system and becoming completely self sufficient. Except no one does because the benefits of getting access to the global capital markets far offsets the disadvantages. Even countries like Argentina which have been under the IMF thumb multiple times keep going back to the global capital markets.

That said, being required to run a fiscally sound government is a lot different from simply handing over sovereignty to a supranational group. The latter is alot more invasive and brings ZERO benefits to countries who choose this option. So why should anyone?

As opposed to minorities within states, it would be conflict between equal groups under a supranational order.
Right. Do you seriously believe that Quebec separatists would be happy ceding power to a supranational government when they already resent the powers being held by the current federal government? At least in Canada, Quebequers know they have a disproportionate influence on the federal government. In a global body they would be irrelevant. A lot of groups with significant local autonomy today would stand to lose and the question you have not answered: why should they? You have not articulated any real benefit of such a structure for countries that already have a stable democracy and rule of law.

« Last Edit: May 28, 2018, 07:02:14 pm by TimG »

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Are nation-states necessary anymore?
« Reply #29 on: May 28, 2018, 07:07:07 pm »
They used that argument to justify adding China to the WTO. That argument has been thoroughly discredited.
But it's not. China is still China and the United States is still the United States.
That is life.
Not good enough.
That said, being required to run a fiscally sound government is a lot different from simply handing over sovereignty to a supranational group. The latter is alot more invasive and brings ZERO benefits to countries who choose this option. So why should anyone?
Authority isn't handed over. It's dispersed. This isn't about replacing national governments with a one-world government.
You have not articulated any real benefit of such a structure for countries that already have a stable democracy and rule of law.
You haven't understood the system I'm describing yet to make that criticism.