If you had to divide up the world

[Greater Nilfgaard]

No it's not.

I see where he was going. It would be absolutely impossible and a breach of so many civil rights and liberties if attempted, and wouldn't work in our world with human nature taken into consideration, and the fact that it would only last for a generation. If everyone in every generation kept having the same views as their parents it would work.

Actually our plan does take into account generational changes.
At 18, all men and women are sent to Australia for their own ideological processing.
Thus they are given the same opportunities as their parents to live in the nation of their dreams.

[Lindenholt]

just say you were forced to divide up the World - how would you divy it up

By Skin Colour?
By Religion?
By Political Leaning?
By Sex?

Or would you get more creative? Put all the accountants in one nation, short people in another, vegetarians in another and so forth?

How would you make your world perfect?

make all the americans and terroists and north koreans onto one island

I agree with North Korea, Terrorists but not with Americans

[Conscentia]

I disagree.

How? Imagine a nation where everyone is always on the same page. Imagine how efficient the US would run if it was just the GOP or just the Democrats and everyone supported the same party.

Now imagine such a nation for everyone on earth!

How dare you deny the great souled our utopia!

I. Functional democracy requires idiosyncratic noise. (Dissent in necessary.)
II. Everyone agreeing could get boring fast.
III. What if people are wrong?
IV. The human mind can have more thoughts than there are atoms in the universe. There is no way you could have a nation for every single possible political option.
V. Your plan for brining about nations where all people are in political agreement would destroy cultures, break up families, destroy businesses, & destroy the global economy.
VI. Your plan would have people living in geographies & climates which are not to their liking, even if their new nation is politically preferable to them.
etc.
etc.

[Olthar]

How would I divide the world? People who want to fuck me in one nation and everyone who doesn't in another. I'd be able to bring about world unity!

[Grand Britannia]

Beiber fans to Antarctica.

Resume global operations as normal.

[Nova Imperius]

History has taught everyone of every background cannot get on perfectly together, yet it would promote more hatred if you devided the world into zones. I say people can either completely merge or segregate themselves into little communities independently within a nation, like Amish people or consentrated immigrant districts.

[Greater Nilfgaard]

I. Functional democracy requires idiosyncratic noise. (Dissent in necessary.)

In designated democracies, there would still be debate and dissent, just about very minor things.

II. Everyone agreeing could get boring fast.

No. There would still be tensions between the differing ideological nations. Agreement would be purely domestic.

III. What if people are wrong.

Define "Wrong".
Every ideology deserves a fair chance if certain people want it.

IV. The human mind can have more thoughts than there are atoms in the universe. There is no way you could have a nation for every single possible political option.

We don't think thats factually accurate. There are ALOT of atoms in the universe.

V. Your plan for brining about nations where all people are in political agreement would destroy cultures, break up families, destroy businesses, & destroy the global economy.

All necessary for the greater good. To make an omelet you must break some eggs.

VI. Your plan would have people living in geographies & climates which are not to their liking, even if their new nation is politically preferable. to them.

All ideological zones have significant climate variance.

[Czechanada]

I would leave the world as it is, but I would annex the location where the NS servers are stored as my territory.

A continent full of left-wing atheists would just be a massive sausage fest.

[Anollasia]

just say you were forced to divide up the World - how would you divy it up

By Skin Colour?
By Religion?
By Political Leaning?
By Sex?

Or would you get more creative? Put all the accountants in one nation, short people in another, vegetarians in another and so forth?

How would you make your world perfect?

By doing absolutely none of those things.

This. Having variety is a nice thing.

[The IASM]

North hemisphere for my self and the south for the rest.

[Czechanada]

North hemisphere for my self and the south for the rest.

You just want all the white people to evolve into brown, black, and latino people, eh?

[Anollasia]

Beiber fans to Antarctica.

Resume global operations as normal.

That's a good idea.

[Nova Imperius]

I woul;d leave as is

[The IASM]

North hemisphere for my self and the south for the rest.

You just want all the white people to evolve into brown, black, and latino people, eh?

No I'm just greedy.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

I'd remove the trolls and assorted other unpleasantness. Sorta like how I get to do here on NS. A friendly reminder to folks to watch your responses - there's already been several tapdancing along the line of 'gonna get smacked for'.

[Conscentia]

I. Functional democracy requires idiosyncratic noise. (Dissent in necessary.)

In designated democracies, there would still be debate and dissent, just about very minor things.
Can't say that'd be sufficient.

II. Everyone agreeing could get boring fast.

No. There would still be tensions between the differing ideological nations. Agreement would be purely domestic.
Most people do not engage in transnational political debates.

III. What if people are wrong.

Define "Wrong".
Every ideology deserves a fair chance if certain people want it.
That's not true. Racial Supremacism doesn't deserve a chance, for example.

IV. The human mind can have more thoughts than there are atoms in the universe. There is no way you could have a nation for every single possible political option.

We don't think thats factually accurate. There are ALOT of atoms in the universe.
And there A LOT of different thoughts a brain can generate.

V. Your plan for brining about nations where all people are in political agreement would destroy cultures, break up families, destroy businesses, & destroy the global economy.

All necessary for the greater good. To make an omelet you must break some eggs.
I don't consider it the greater good at all. The world is better as it is.
Your plan would massively polarise the world. Polarise more than it already is.

VI. Your plan would have people living in geographies & climates which are not to their liking, even if their new nation is politically preferable. to them.

All ideological zones have significant climate variance.
That's part of the problem. An traditionalist Siberian Yupik nomadic reindeer herder doesn't want to live in the humid rainforests India.

I think we should stop this here. This is not the place for it.

[Xathranaar]

morlocks and eloi


More seriously, by GDP per capita and standard of living.

Make obvious what nations need work, and allow membership in a higher bracket upon completion.

[CTALNH]

People are always divided by their "class" us Comrade Marx said...

[Quintium]

I'd divide the world by nationality, which is supposedly taboo but actually a very sensible division. Those who are culturally very similar to each other deserve to live in a region where their views, their morals and their attitudes are translated into national law. The nation-state, another taboo, makes much more sense than any transnational state ever can. So if the borders are drawn, make sure they're drawn around groups of people that share the same views and interests.

[LeftNightmare]

By Sex, obviously

Why should I have to take a plan to get some

[Corporations and Companies]

Apart from my stalker troll (who seems to be shadowing my every post) there have been some interesting ideas.

I never thought of dividing by age. I wonder how a world would work like that. Being surrounded by essentially the same people for all your years.

I did like the idea of a world where national membership was fluid - as you change through life you would move to a different nation that you most identified with.

[Hippostania]

I'd unite Europe and rest of the Anglosphere as a single nation. Rest of the world can fuck off. Or maybe the rest of the world could stay the way they're now. Dunno. But a Pan-Western Empire would be better for erryone.

[Maltropia]

I'd unite Europe and rest of the Anglosphere as a single nation. The rest of the world can fuck off.

Oh God no.

[Tsalkha]

Why divide the world up? The world would be better if we became one, not 100.

[Risottia]

My choice. I'm awesomely objective about objective awesomeness, you know, don't you know?

Only the Great Souled get to decide the fate of others.

They can decide their own fate... after all, their own fate is the only thing they're really interested about.
Of course, while they join the non-awesome crowd.

At 18, all men and women are sent to Australia for their own ideological processing.

We don't live in Aeon Trinity, and not everyone would want to join the Legions anyway.