The primary change that I notice (although the changes are myriad) is the weakening of the Nation state worldwide. And one of the symbolic changes is a point that Ron Paul made in one of his speeches. He said that we shouldn't be executing terrorists without a trial that are Americans like the one we executed by drone in Yemen. I think his point is a valid one and that if circumstances were different than they presently are it should not have been done. And I think one can see that world changes are completely out of the control of any or all nation states at present here on earth. That a progressive moderate Democratic Black President would execute an American by a drone in a foreign country that we are not technically at war with would have been insane in any other era but this one presently. One would have expected this kind of action from only the most hawklike conservative Republican President in the past.
To me, it only demonstrates how the nation state itself is quickly moving towards becoming something like Queen Elizabeth II is and the royal family is in England. In other words to the English it feels good to still have the tradition of having a Queen or a King. But a nation state is sort of like this in reality now. It no longer has the actual meaning that it once did in reality. It is sort of like having a football team that represents your city. It is the pride of your city but in actuality what it is really but a social mechanism sort of like jousting was in England in medieval times?
So, what are we moving towards? I think to understand what we are moving towards lets look at what has been happening the last 30 years or so on the planet. By looking at where we have been we can better see what is coming. How has communication changed in the last 30 years worldwide. If you look, for example, at the fall of the Soviet Union, it was accomplished by the young educated and technically savvy of the Soviet Union and Eastern Block Countries. They used Fax machines, large cellphones and other devices that older more entrenched Soviet Communists did not understand. So, basically, the Soviet Union and the Whole group of countries east of the Iron Curtain collapsed out of communism in the late 1980s and 1990s much like the Arab Spring movement has collapsed old regimes out of touch with the changes in the world through cellphones, smart phones, Facebook, Twitter, etc. And the changes will continue unabated likely for years and years to come because young people realize that alone they should be afraid. But together they will succeed eventually just like in Russia and the Eastern Block nations. And likely these changes will spread further and further through all nations that don't have enough food to eat, clothes on their backs or places to live or enough legal rights not to be raped by their governments in a variety of ways. So, as all these ideas are translated into all languages worldwide through things like Google Translate, you will see amazing changes reverberate around the world more and more with no areas of the world left in the dark ages anymore.
So, will the nation state remain a viable entity worldwide? I think the answer to that is both "Yes" and "No". It will remain a viable entity where people value it and disappear where it no longer has value to those people. Likely, organizations of leaders of Nation States like the United Nations, NATO, The African Union, and other like minded organizations and others that will spring up will have more and more power and that will have to be dealt with and balanced as well. So, as nation states weaken other forces of all kinds both good and bad will try to take over the vaccuum caused by the demise of many nation states. So, the problems the world will deal with now are actually in some ways scarier than living within nation states were. So, the new problems are multi-national corporations not resident in any one country, State Capitalism which causes everything to exist for the nation at the expense of the real needs of the people of that nation, and various organizations that appear to have power but that do not allow people to vote for what they want. In other words, the more entities of power that the people of that area have no social control over the more those people's rights will be disenfranchised and the more raped in every way those people will feel in the end. So, as the nation states weaken worldwide trying to protect the people from other non-votable entities becomes the next problem to solve.
Later still: My wife who has 3 degrees including an MBA says that I didn't set this up well enough on a critical thinking level. She said she understood where I was going but that trying to compare America as a nation state to the present English Parliamentary democracy with a monarchy wasn't working for her. I'm not sure where I want to go with this from here? She also thought that the U.S. executing an American who was a terrorist was very problematic for All Americans, especially those traveling overseas. Though I agree with all her points, I also succeed the best in creating Zen like Simplistic solutions to problems. I succeed as a synthesist of multiple ideas and points of view. However, if I try to approach it in her structured "Critical Thinking" kinds of ways it doesn't really work for me. My motto has always been "KISS" or (Keep it Simple Stupid) which is based upon the concepts of "If it ain't broke don't fix it) and usually the simplest solution in any emergency is the best. Because you are more likely to survive a simple solution than a complicated one when your life is at stake. The probability of your survival decreases with the complexity of any situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment