Do we really need countries?

reply to post by BBalazs

You have answers, not that i beleive everything.
Reverting to city states wont work for 1 reasons: population.
Too large cities.
Anyway, classic city states were huge, they had a catchment area, so getting stuff not a problem.
City states is 1 idea.
I feel we need a purge.
Get rid of 90%. But thats just my idea.
[...]

I have opinions - but I day dream alot about answers, san-q tho.

But that's my reasoning that city-states are obsolete also, population - also in the sense of international coordination.

If we want radical rather than incremental change, I agree we need a purge - maybe it is as high as 90% of us don't function to further humanities evolution - but instead feed off its ever changing status-quo. But there is a lag, humanity is filled with redundant occupations, products, ideas, ways of living etc etc of bygone status-quo's. But you can't blame anyone - it's only a recent phenomena this global conciousness thing.

Good news is: global population levels are set to peak in 2040 at 9.1 billion - and may even begin to decline naturally after that (given current trends) - once population levels peak, stabilise and/or decline - more long term planning will be possible for the technocrats in government. Until then everything will remain chaotic and adhoc.

So I'm hoping a purge wont be necessary - I'd rather see a large-scale coordinated mobilisation - like the kind we saw during WW1 and WW2. Common goals rather than enemies.

When are we going to be a space race?

IMO yes, but! What's your definition? And then what is NASA and the Russian and Chinese equivalents saying? plus or minus some years/decades.

Are we going travel far and wide in space?

IMO yes, but! Same as above.

Personally I don't think we've earned the right to leave this planet yet (maybe the moon is okay).

reply to post by ghostsoldier



I agree with most of what you write, however i think that although no one can be planned, it is 2 things that can be blamed:
1. Faulty brain sofware. Inability to think ex extremes.
I think most os these people are lost.
They are of no merit.
They cannot be reformed.
They are stuck in their idioticity.
2. History has showned that idiots can rule over and kill, anihlate a far superior "race" by their sheer stupidity.
This is worrisome, and an obstacle to gradual change.
It is my feeling that the neaderthal gene is responsible for the top 3-5 %, whereas another 3-5% pure huamnoid adapted to systems thinking.
The rest is slack, garbage, free loaders.


This shows, that graduality will not work.
No one will start the purge.
I personally hope you are right,
However i also in passing wait for the comet or next cataclysm.

reply to post by BBalazs

[...] i think that although no one can be planned, it is 2 things that can be blamed:
1. Faulty brain sofware. Inability to think ex extremes.
I think most os these people are lost.
They are of no merit.
They cannot be reformed.
They are stuck in their idioticity.
2. History has showned that idiots can rule over and kill, anihlate a far superior "race" by their sheer stupidity.
This is worrisome, and an obstacle to gradual change.
It is my feeling that the neaderthal gene is responsible for the top 3-5 %, whereas another 3-5% pure huamnoid adapted to systems thinking.
The rest is slack, garbage, free loaders.

1. People are products of the environment they were raised in combined with the biological drive to survive. Change the environment and people will change and visa-versa. But the former has less people to deal with, that's why all you need is critical mass - humans are social creatures, we move as a herd, some lead and some follow, both consciously and unconsciously. Change is too fast for some, and too chaotic for others - but eventually change is gonna come. The only thing that will stop this trend is a global environmental catastrophe, nuclear armageddon or equivalent.

2. You're right. Might has equalled right for too long.

This shows, that graduality will not work.
No one will start the purge.
I personally hope you are right,
However i also in passing wait for the comet or next cataclysm.

You've had me stumped pondering for 40 minutes about point 2 and "graduality will not work" - but I take hope in knowing that crises breeds opportunity. We are in the last days of capitalism - a system based on competition - perhaps once the crises hits for real we will understand a system based on cooperation is needed to replace it. This alone would change the playing field dramatically.

So I too am waiting... But I also try to chip away at my dark section of the cave toward sunlight too.

reply to post by ghostsoldier


I agree with some points.
I still think the enviroment is second to thinking.
I also happen to think capitalism is the best form of commerce known.
Ideas get corrupted.
But money and capitalism is very simple, elegant.
It is not a problem.
But modern day capitalism is a corrupted idea, that is a symptom of something greater - stupidity.
Back to the roots I say.
Capitalism from ground up, not enforced from above, with the favoratism of the elite.
There is nothing wrong with competition, that what males us human.
The same thing can be said for cooperation.
At it core, capitalism is just a vechicle for free enterprise.
It should really motivate people to do what they are good at.
Alas it has been corrupted.
What we are living in is state sponsored elite (or agenda, or lobby) based capitalism.
It really is no capitalism at all, but elitism.
Whilst there always will be an elite.
That elite should be based on merit, not on the amount of money avaliable.
This is no somehing we fan shake of easily.
It could be the end.
We find ourselves in this position thanks to an idea.
Alas it is ideas, but specificaly one (dualism) that is at the root or evil.

No, we don't need countries but countries are a convenient sub-division for the new world order. I think there will be 3 layers:
countries, continents and new world order.

Originally posted by BBalazs
reply to post by Confusion42

 

I dont undestand how creating more states is a answer to wether we need countries at all...?
You write that more states more war, so in essence you are saying we need less or no states?
Scratching my head here.

edit on 24-1-2012 by BBalazs because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by BBalazs because: (no reason given)

Well, I see the point your making.

But, I'm not sure, are you saying that "We don't need countries" or "countries + states"?

Do we need States if there is no country?

If not, do we need cities?

The problem with no countries, IMO, is that religion would that spread like wildfire, and so would laws....

No country sounds good on paper.... but due to inherit religious factors that exist (sadly too many Islamist Radicals), No Countries would in some ways make it so that Sharia type laws would develop.

No Countries = Religion Domination = Not Good

reply to post by Confusion42


Countries are nothing more then fantasies of the mind.
Nature knows no limits.
Humans know no limits then those conjoured up in the mind or forced upon them.
I view citys as natural organising bottom up systems.
We dont need them, but human nature creates them.
Off course we are past city states, tok many of us around.
Most likely is a reset.
Cataclysm, self or economic system system collapse.
Our thought system is contaminated, it will happen.
The reset will come one way or the other.
Enjoy your time on Earth:-)

As for religion, the ultimate fantasy of the mind.
Nothing against personal religion or even religion as long as it is set aside from reality.

reply to post by BBalazs


a rose by any other name dude...

reply to post by Threadfall

well, thats exactly my point.
but as long as humans congregate, they will create cities and such. but do we need countries?

I've always gotten worked up over the fact that there are countries. I don't even think independant states are a good thing either. The way I see it, I was born on this Earth, I didn't choose which country to be born on, I was just born on Earth, therefore I should be allowed to go wherever the hell I want on my own planet.

However, nowadays the only way to get rid of the "borders" are through one world government, which is bad IMO, or a huge disaster happened, such as a war of an epic scale which managed to render Governments completely powerless over people, and we decided we can do what the hell we want.

reply to post by Master Shen long


If there was only one government to regulate what is right and what is wrong, what makes you think that said 'part' of the government will even be allowed to step out of line?

Everyone will have to obey the same laws and share the same overall opinion. Much like the fascist model.

Besides, having states within a huge government is practically the same as countries on a continent.
Just look at Europe, a majority of the countries are a part of the EU and when someone steps out of line, it is dealt with in a way of intimidation, threatening with stoppage of economical support or even eliminating their membership, which would cause huge problems within the import / export business and have a crucial effect on the country's economical surviving.


Countries are needed for now, we have way too many differences and problems accepting the various cultures in the world and for now, those who are willing to interact with people from all countries, use the internet as a media. In time countries will be abolished and we will be posed with a new challenge, if not that challenge has already been overcome, in the form of a global government.


Peace