NationStates

Diahon wrote:

Punished UMN wrote:Again, have you looked at the last 120 years? The world is fragmented into more states than at any point since the 1890's. If history had ended in 1914, you could make this claim.

A short-term bump, given the raison d'etre for previous efforts at consolidation -- the right to outright conquest or annex by coercion -- has been progressively undermined throughout the 20th century.

120 years is not short-term, and apart from the 1800's to early 1900's, there has not been a trend towards consolidation.

Punished UMN wrote:

Diahon wrote:
A short-term bump, given the raison d'etre for previous efforts at consolidation -- the right to outright conquest or annex by coercion -- has been progressively undermined throughout the 20th century.

120 years is not short-term, and apart from the 1800's to early 1900's, there has not been a trend towards consolidation.

I was thinking in terms of centuries, not decades. A century by that metric is a pretty noticeable blip.

Also, yes, there is.

Push all the continents back together. Pangea will rise again. #PangeaPower

As good as the idea seems, it would never work. If this supposed world government were to run under a democracy, the bureaucracy would be too great to get much of anything done. That isn't even counting funding, welfare etc.
If, on the contrary, this government was run as a dictatorship, the people would rise up within minutes and the world would probably end, as well as that dictator being extremely overworked.

We're probably not going to see a unified government that works within the lifespan of this earth, let alone any of ours.

Diahon wrote:

Punished UMN wrote:120 years is not short-term, and apart from the 1800's to early 1900's, there has not been a trend towards consolidation.

I was thinking in terms of centuries, not decades. A century by that metric is a pretty noticeable blip.

Also, yes, there is.

There isn't. The only somewhat serious attempt is the EU which will probably fail because they can't make up their mind on whether they want to be a league, a confederation, or a federation. The AU is more like a league and used to safeguard the sovereignty of African states as opposed to trying to consolidate them into a unified state.

Also the zeitgeist against imperialism kind of precludes the ability for a unified world government at the moment.

It should unify, and then divide. And then be unified by a romantic hero or some literal who from bumfuck nowhere.
And then we'll just sort of repeat this process a few times, except for a couple times where people riding horses take the world over.

Diahon wrote:

Punished UMN wrote:120 years is not short-term, and apart from the 1800's to early 1900's, there has not been a trend towards consolidation.

I was thinking in terms of centuries, not decades. A century by that metric is a pretty noticeable blip.

Also, yes, there is.

No, there really hasn't. 1500 years ago, most of the world's population lived in only four countries, and you're telling me there's a long-term trend towards more consolidation? Give me a break.

Kubra wrote:It should unify, and then divide. And then be unified by a romantic hero or some literal who from bumfuck nowhere.
And then we'll just sort of repeat this process a few times, except for a couple times where people riding horses take the world over.

Techno-barbarian warlordism now.

Kubra wrote:It should unify, and then divide. And then be unified by a romantic hero or some literal who from bumfuck nowhere.
And then we'll just sort of repeat this process a few times, except for a couple times where people riding horses take the world over.

Only if the romantic hero is benevolent.

The Marlborough wrote:

Kubra wrote:It should unify, and then divide. And then be unified by a romantic hero or some literal who from bumfuck nowhere.
And then we'll just sort of repeat this process a few times, except for a couple times where people riding horses take the world over.

Techno-barbarian warlordism now.

The world, long divided, must unite. Atoms, long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been.

one of the reasons why poland is shaking the eu is because of there diffrent belifs, add the middle east an china to that, and see how things go,

Punished UMN wrote:

Diahon wrote:
I was thinking in terms of centuries, not decades. A century by that metric is a pretty noticeable blip.

Also, yes, there is.

No, there really hasn't. 1500 years ago, most of the world's population lived in only four countries, and you're telling me there's a long-term trend towards more consolidation? Give me a break.

Hell, at one point nearly half the world's population lived in a single empire.

AAngelica wrote:one of the reasons why poland is shaking the eu is because of there diffrent belifs, add the middle east an china to that, and see how things go,

Yeah it would be an utter nightmare. One of the largest problems faced by empires was over cultural clashes. If they were too tolerant of subjugated areas, it could breed resentment by the base population against the empire for being seen as compromising on core cultural values while attempts at assimilation have often then bred resentment by subjugated peoples which can lead to rebellions and the slow dissolution of the empire.

Yes unified and it should be called Srbija

Earth should remain divided. Unification is a terrible idea.

Only after Posadas is proven right, of course.

Unification is a delightful concept. Like Utopia.

The Marlborough wrote:

Diahon wrote:
I was thinking in terms of centuries, not decades. A century by that metric is a pretty noticeable blip.

Also, yes, there is.

There isn't. The only somewhat serious attempt is the EU which will probably fail because they can't make up their mind on whether they want to be a league, a confederation, or a federation. The AU is more like a league and used to safeguard the sovereignty of African states as opposed to trying to consolidate them into a unified state.

The last century saw the fall of various empires, the rise and fall of a Thirteen-Year Reich held together by the contradictions and insanities of one man, his party, and his country, the emergence of a Soviet Union built on mass murder and an increasingly unsustainable economic model, and the United States' brief fling with colonialism.

A speed bump, as both old and new ways of consolidation, more or less jury-rigged and coerced, are tried and found wanting. The century before that saw frenetic empire-building, after the previous century saw a period of relative calm punctuated by the American and French revolutions. So what did I miss?

Diahon wrote:

The Marlborough wrote:There isn't. The only somewhat serious attempt is the EU which will probably fail because they can't make up their mind on whether they want to be a league, a confederation, or a federation. The AU is more like a league and used to safeguard the sovereignty of African states as opposed to trying to consolidate them into a unified state.

The last century saw the fall of various empires, the rise and fall of a Thirteen-Year Reich held together by the contradictions and insanities of one man, his party, and his country, the emergence of a Soviet Union built on mass murder and an increasingly unsustainable economic model, and the United States' brief fling with colonialism.

A speed bump, as both old and new ways of consolidation, more or less jury-rigged and coerced, are tried and found wanting. The century before that saw frenetic empire-building, after the previous century saw a period of relative calm punctuated by the American and French revolutions. So what did I miss?

So we have three centuries without a trend of consolidation instead of two!

It won't.

Nobody identifies with entities comprised of 8 billion individuals.

I have a plan to unify the earth. It involves killing a few million people in a alien attack but it will unify all nations.

I have done it before... at least in the writings and confines of fiction.



In reality? Don't think we can achieve this just yet. No one is sure how the world will be like in the next decades, so... yeah! It's not likely, but not impossible for a unity.

No, no, no. Keeping the world population safely divided into many separate experiments keeps us safe from a worldwide collapse or a worldwide dystopia.

Torisakia wrote:Push all the continents back together. Pangea will rise again. #PangeaPower

Nonono. Very bad. Large continents are prone to deserts (or at least aridity) inland. Coast is good. Coast is where moisture from the oceans is added to the land's own evaporation/rainfall patter.

If anything, we should be looking to break up overly-large continents. I call this "Crust Busting"