why not get rid of the nation-state for a multi-cultural world?

Question

free-trade has rendered nationalism obsolete....if we do not buy china goods, our standard of living goes down....if china does not sell her goods, their living standard goes down..

we are interdependent...if someone fails in their economy---it sends a domino effect that affects the other...

the only barriers now that are left, are those of culture, race and religion...

race is becoming less and less distinct as more and more countries become racially diverse, same with religions...religions are become more and more hedgemonic...not even close to the power it used to have....catholic political power is nothing (now with the age of science, literal doctrine is obsolete), the only religion by which peopel still feel furor over is islam...but even that is abiding now and over generations...we will learn to accept some muslim and arab culture worldwide in exchange for peace....

so the one left is culture...

why not destroy the nation state...and require this in school:

everyone must read mandarin and english....

everyone must speak english.

everyone must symbolize in greek (greek symbols)

everyone must understand the muslim, chatholic, and jewish religion and their histories.

everyone must get a taste of the politically predominant cultures (american, european, arabic, chinese). by talking to people of those cultures and understanding fully how they think.

Then...they must choose based on those components their formulation of thought and act on it.

With this in mind...I think we could eliminate the cultural barrier...and eliminate the nation-state...and obsolete form of control nowadays that has no relevance...

united states is dependend on china for deficit...and on the jews on the american jewish lobby for protection...

these ties are political and economi representation BETWEEN CULTURES not nations. why? because jews LIVE in America, and CHINESE represent a significant ECONOMIC BLOCK in America.

the nation-state was invented in the early part of the 20th century...

before that, common bond was founded on three things:

language, ehtnicity, and geographic location...

this is how tribes found their bonds....

but then the "nation sate" was invented...to create "competition" between the european states....in order for german workers to work hard to beat the french, and the british the french...

but now, these nationalistic ties are meaningless..

would you really DIE for your FELLOW AMERICAN? no, the army knows this well, this is why they group you into units...to suffer together with your fellow buddy..

as a famous general once said about vietnam...

the bond is found in friendshipp....in esscence---was the largest weapon the overlords used---they set them up to die....because no one could live after leaving their buddy behind

what I am basically saying is this....

all you need for a good world is three things:

a good security force to track down criminals
a good economic system to supply the individual with your needs
checks and balances (institutions that abide by a common law)

so, once you have this...

you dis-associate yourself with any goverment or nation state


the whole world, is jsut a state...

and cultures are the only things to divide man.

the main objective in education would be to give people a "multi-cultural education" so they don't beleive whatever their parents beleive but rather can make up their own minds...

thus, it would be a more sterile world.

wars and things would be pointless because since cultures would be so hedgemonic, you would be basically just be fighting "society" and that would just render you a criminal...

howver to do this...you would first have to have a "multi-cultural" agreement...a base for the world state...

because culture is what really really matters in the end...once you acheive an agreement of what to follow amongst all politically significant religions (judaism, muslim, christianity) and cultural mindsets (european, american, chinese)...you just set up a "communist education system" with all inherent cultural values of ALL THESE cultures...

and eliminate the obsolete nation-state in the process...thus, eliminating associations of us and them...to just society and the individual...any individual who harms society is simply a "criminal"

some of the responders think that "decentralization" means MORE POWER..

no, it means less.

no goverment at all.--just police and institutions that abide by law.

the law, would obvcourse, be voted upon...as any tribe would do on the local level....everything else...tastes...whatever, products, whatever an individual wants, would basically be decided by markets...if you like this..the markets will respond to earn a profit...etc...

checks and balances (institutions that abide by law) would keep monopolies in check (which would be AGAINST the law, I suppose, sine the average voter in USA is against it) and thus would be dissolved by institutional and local lawyers.

Answer 1

Read you Hobbes :)

International relations exist in the state of nature. Human beings figured out a long time ago that they needed to trade some of their absolute liberty (and accompanying vulnerability) for safety. Even the strongest recognized their vulnerability to groups of people determined to defeat them. As a result, we ended up with governments (and states). In order for the state system to be replaced, leaders of states would have to come to the same conclusion. Currently, there are enough states that feel secure as they are that they are unwilling to give up ultimate sovereignty. Look at the EU. States gave up a great deal of economic sovereignty, but when the time came to pass an EU constitution, even the biggest supporters of integration balked at the idea.

Answer 2

Pure fantasy drivel.
Diversity is the most divisive force in a nation's social fabric. That means diversity--racial, ethnic, religious--all of it, is bad for a country. What was once a powerful, monolithic society is now torn apart by multitudinous self-interests.

Interdependency is also bad. For example, America has been gutted of its industrial and manufacturing base. Our economy has been coasting on what we accomplished in the 30's - 60's and it is running out of steam.

The irony is that the Government and the New World Order tribe have convinced you deadheads to think these things are GOOD for society! Drooling idiots.

Answer 3

There will always be local warlords, either in the form of nations or tribes. Also, nations are the only politial entity that is providing any check to corporate domination of the world, especially in the form of monopolies which could easily lead to a one-world oligarchy. Gotta go slower. Corporations may win out anyway, but maybe not. If the nations fall, the corporations can only win, and I mean BIG!!!

Plus, believe it or not, the UN is far more crooked than anything in the US federal government. More power willl only corrupt more. We see our government as corrupt, but travel around the world a bit, especially poorer countries, and you will discover that corruption is far worse than in the U.S. It'll cost you in other words.

The nation-state still has its role. Maybe not forever, but certainly for now.

Answer 4

Although many things are as you say, there nevertheless remains a cultural and civic identity within the nation-state (at least in the USA) which is worth preserving. After seeing the anemic responses that most nations have had to obvious threats, to lay the polity in the hands of such would be perilous indeed.

Answer 5

Its a nice idea, however people will always clump together based on commonality. Even multinational countries are not truly multinational. People in these countries tend to group together on ethnic grounds. The trouble with trying to make everyone happy is that everything ends up becoming mediocre.

Answer 6

wonderful idea, who gets to be boss? There will always be someone who feels threatened, until there is an outside source that we as a world have to unite together with (the evil alien from space) will we ever give up our differences and accept each other for what we are.

Answer 7

thats jus your point of view. the nation state could be prolifarating.