NationStates

El Lazaro wrote:Nah, keep national sovereignty, but only for one country. It’s the same thing, but better.

The Earth is only one country.

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:

El Lazaro wrote:Nah, keep national sovereignty, but only for one country. It’s the same thing, but better.

The Earth is only one country.

"The undiscovere'd country, from whose bourn no traveller returns ..."

Bakhmut situation really isn't looking that great for Ukraine.

Farnhamia wrote:"The undiscovere'd country, from whose bourn no traveller returns ..."

That's where I want to die to meet all my hi friends -- you know, people you really don't know but just say "hi" do.

Corrian wrote:Bakhmut situation really isn't looking that great for Ukraine.

The big picture is always prettier. I just listened to a Malcolm Nance interview on SeriusXM. He said that Russia has nothing of any substance to compare with Ukraine. It is only a matter of time, in his view, before Putin is taken care of inside the Kremlin.

Corrian wrote:Bakhmut situation really isn't looking that great for Ukraine.

It might seem that way, but it's actually going as planned, (at least from where I'm sitting).

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:

El Lazaro wrote:Nah, keep national sovereignty, but only for one country. It’s the same thing, but better.

The Earth is only one country.

I’m talking about a state which currently exists.

Apocalyptic Haven wrote:

Jeriga wrote:the only way a utopian society will develop is from an apocalyptic society. So, enjoy the nation-state period of history while it lasts.

That is the pessimistic, or worst case. There is another option, but it will require a bit of sacrifice as well. One can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.

Totally not getting a "voluntarily join our peaceful, stateless utopian society or we'll invade and kill you" vibe from this at all...

El Lazaro wrote:I’m talking about a state which currently exists.

Then I'm afraid you may be out of luck. That state can only be reached through superconscious meditation.

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:

Jeriga wrote:Those are useless considering divisions between countries and would have to act more like a governing organization.

Not if national sovereignty is eliminated.

What in the world is the deal with Trotskyists and being opposed to national sovereignty? Please do enlighten me

Theodores Tomfooleries wrote:

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:
Not if national sovereignty is eliminated.

What in the world is the deal with Trotskyists and being opposed to national sovereignty? Please do enlighten me

Speculation on my part, but I suppose it's because Stalin leaned hard into Russian Nationalism during the war. And Trotskyists will always zig wherever Stalin zags.

Which, in fairness, is usually a good policy.

Vuhledar holds, enemy attempts to assault or outflank the town have failed with heavy losses. Ukrainian artillery wiped them out.

Theodores Tomfooleries wrote:What in the world is the deal with Trotskyists and being opposed to national sovereignty? Please do enlighten me

Unlike me (a heterodox Trotskyist), Trotsky was not opposed to national sovereignty. However, he believed it needed to evaluated in relation to the broader need for international revolution.

If Trotskyists were, by and large, opposed to national sovereignty, most of us would not support Ukraine against Russia. To me, I support Ukraine as a part of my broader opposition to colonialism and imperialism.

The Two Jerseys wrote:

Apocalyptic Haven wrote:
That is the pessimistic, or worst case. There is another option, but it will require a bit of sacrifice as well. One can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.

Totally not getting a "voluntarily join our peaceful, stateless utopian society or we'll invade and kill you" vibe from this at all...

A rather curious interpretation.

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:

Theodores Tomfooleries wrote:What in the world is the deal with Trotskyists and being opposed to national sovereignty? Please do enlighten me

Unlike me (a heterodox Trotskyist), Trotsky was not opposed to national sovereignty. However, he believed it needed to evaluated in relation to the broader need for international revolution.

If Trotskyists were, by and large, opposed to national sovereignty, most of us would not support Ukraine against Russia. To me, I support Ukraine as a part of my broader opposition to colonialism and imperialism.

What is defined as national sovereignty though?