Aren't you afraid the great concentration of power in one place would lead to the great corruption and to the loss of freedom?
Did you look into your own motives, like pride and desire of collective glory?
Of course my bias is naturally the shared values of Romano Hellenism modified by Judeo Christianity, modified by English Common Law.
But this "bias" includes the virtue of moderation, of self-restraint and awareness how dangerous the hubris is (look at my tagline). Don't you agree?
RE: Aren't you afraid the great concentration of power in one place would lead to the great corruption and to the loss of freedom?
No, in our society, so long as we maintain English Common Law, this is not even a remote possibility. Power is already diffuse in our market oriented society and getting moreso. It is actually somewhat of a problem.
RE: Did you look into your own motives, like pride and desire of collective glory?
I am a practical man. I look mostly at history. Most of the bullets we've dodged were due to our generally pacifist, quasi isolationist tendencies. Any move to try and become more powerful outside our borders gets challenged heavily from within not to mention without. We must exageratedly seek external span of control in order to be effective. In the Clausewitzian sense, our friction is both tangible and esoteric. We uniquely suffer from cultural friction.
RE: But this "bias" includes the virtue of moderation, of self-restraint and awareness how dangerous the hubris is (look at my tagline). Don't you agree?
The only hubris is a hubris that soft power and economics will result in a utopian flat world, and that no blood need be spilled. I am not sure of any innate cultural control of that sort of hubris, in fact, one of our cultural weaknesses is a naive view of human nature and of the behavior of other peoples / tribes / nations that projects our own characteristics onto them. That is certainly dangerous - it is a danger of underestimation of responses of others. More realism is certainly needed in this regard.