Next revolution will seek to overthrow the privileges of nationhood

The Guardian ^ | 9/19/16 | Robert Shiller

[ek_hornbeck]

For the past several centuries, the world has experienced a sequence of intellectual revolutions against oppression of one sort or another. These rebellions operate in the minds of humans and are spread eventually to most of the world, not by war, which tends to involve multiple causes, but by language and communications technology. Ultimately, the ideas they advance, unlike the causes of war, become noncontroversial.

The next such revolution, likely to occur in the 21st century, will challenge the economic implications of the nation state. It will focus on the injustice that follows from the fact that, entirely by chance, some are born in poor countries and others in rich countries. As more people work for multinational firms and get to know more people from other countries, our sense of justice is being affected.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

Bkmrk.

[Windflier]

“the Democratic Party”

It’s Democrat.

Democrat party...

[Georgia Girl 2]

Yes example is the break up of the Soviet Union and the inevitable break up of the EU.

[Robert DeLong]

Power limited to the smallest group ensures enslavement for those who have no access to power. Leaving those in power the choice as to whom gets what, and ability becomes unimportant.

[broken_arrow1]

The democrat party has become the Marxist party...and people are too busy with Netflix and Facebook to notice. We are so screwed if Hitlery wins...

[tophat9000]

Nationhood is a subset of the concept of the individual

Ultimately all sovereignty originates with the individual the right that you own yourself.

The left is in effect seeking to destroy the concept of the sovereignty of the individual human being

You are now to be property of the collective..

[TexasRepublic]

“Internationalism” is just another term for global communism which aspires to human extinction. If that isn’t bad enough, Islam is the backup plan. We would have to kill millions to stop those twin evils even for a while, because the devil never sleeps and never gives up. In this age of global communications, everyone ought to be aware of constant danger and react to it.

[Flavious_Maximus]

So what happens when we are visited by space aliens?

Will liberals be complaining that it is not fair to be born on poor planet earth. The aliens MUST give up their richer planet to earthlings to make things more equal.

[alexander_busek]

It's nice to see two baldfaced lies smuggled into an essay that close together:

It will focus on the injustice that follows from the fact that, entirely by chance, some are born in poor countries and others in rich countries.

Not at all "by chance." Almost all the people born in poor countries are - surprise! - the children of poor people. And almost all the people born in rich countries are - again: surprise! - the children or rich people.

As more people work for multinational firms and get to know more people from other countries, our sense of justice is being affected.

Studying, living, and working abroad for more than a third of a century has sharpened my sense of justice - and my belief that it is, by and large, just.

Regards,

[JamesP81]

The problem with these internationalist government ideas is that, like national empires of old, they become too big, and smaller parts start to break away, renewing the cycle.

In a wider sense, the problem with these ideas is that those espousing them propose to seat a man on a throne to rule the entire world.

There is only one throne that grants the rulership of the entire world, and it is already occupied. No man shall ever seat himself upon it.

[Mariner]

"birthplace injustice"

I thought I had heard it all, but this takes the cake.

Smithsonian Free Trade has never occurred and never will.

The Nation-State is making a comeback is spite of lunatics like the author and Obama.

[gattaca]

bump

[Mrs. Don-o]

Interesting: a Communist International based on Free Trade.

But that’s really not a self-contradiction. Karl Marx openly admired capitalism for its ability to sweep away local customs, folkways, rustic communities and intermediate institutions such as guild, church and family -— clearing the way for the revolutionary proletariat.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Interesting: a Communist International based on Free Trade.

But that’s really not a self-contradiction. Karl Marx openly admired capitalism for its ability to sweep away local customs, folkways, rustic communities and intermediate institutions such as guild, church and family -— clearing the way for the revolutionary proletariat.

[Army Air Corps]

Their version of Free Trade isn’t truly free trade. You’re free to trade what they approve for you to produce.

[MarMema]

It will focus on the injustice that follows from the fact that, entirely by chance, some are born in poor countries and others in rich countries.

Reeking of agenda 21 social injustice.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Ironically, the nation-state isn't that old. The modern nation-state began with the Left's "big bang": the French Revolution, which led to (left wing) nationalism as a rebellion against the universal church and multi-ethnic empires.

I predict that the nation-states of China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, and Laos will be left in peace by these "internationalists."

[ek_hornbeck]

Reeking of agenda 21 social injustice

In a few years, Social Justice Warriors will be shrieking about "First World Privilege" rather than "White Privilege" on campuses across the country.

[Pearls Before Swine]

The real problem with the international government is the fact that people half a world away cannot be relied on to participate as a member of your local society.

That's one problem. The rulers and the rules are out of touch.

I believe there's another: The chain of command can only get so long, with so many levels, before it becomes ineffective or breaks. The Chinese recognized this millenia ago with their saying, "The mountains are high and the emperor is far away." In management theory, it's known that a given manager can only intensively manage a handful of people. I think a common number given for effective span of direct command is seven. More than that (obviously depending on the situation), and you need an intermediate level of management.

There's also the problem of delay in command execution, or in recognition of a situation that needs addressing working its way up the ladder. In systems with feedback, delay is death--it winds up with instability.

These imperfections in a multi-leveled chain of command can be controlled to an extent with harsh penalties. You see that in Islam. But, there's a limit to how well it works, and certainly to how harmoniously it can work.

[Lorianne]

Not to put to fine a point on it, but eliminating nationhood was the key to Hitler’s (and later Stalin’s) success. In countries where he was able to abolish their governmental structure and compromise their sense of nationality, there were far more atrocities than in countries were people at least kept some of their nationalism and systems of law and some semblance of citizenship.

The book Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin explains all this in detail and it is a fascinating (if terrifying) read.

I suspect this is why the left in general is so beset with the idea of destroying borders, nationhood and the concept of citizenship in general. If they succeeded it would give them far more control over the fate of masses of people.