NO, all nation should be atleast a little nationalistic. Otherwise you nation going nowhere. An will be enslaved or destroed by other nation.
Nation State is a modern concept. Maybe a few centuries old.
Maybe the concept of a nation is a problem.
Topic: Aren't Nationalist at the source of all problem in the world? (Read 624 times)
Nation State is a modern concept. Maybe a few centuries old.
Maybe the concept of a nation is a problem.
We're wired to live in tribes. We're not truly able to understand national or global scale.
I think the solution to this global tragedy of the commons is to move back to a city-scale again. Push back the power of national governments and shift it to the cities. That way people get to vote on and get involved with projects that directly affect them. Politics would mainly involve interactions between cities and be less about national stakes.
This would also directly take a lot of wind out of large multinationals without invalidating them entirely. It's much harder (and more expensive) to lobby on a city level than it is to lobby in congress. At the same time, people are much better able to understand a corporate agenda on a city level than on a national level.
I think the solution to this global tragedy of the commons is to move back to a city-scale again. Push back the power of national governments and shift it to the cities. That way people get to vote on and get involved with projects that directly affect them. Politics would mainly involve interactions between cities and be less about national stakes.
This would also directly take a lot of wind out of large multinationals without invalidating them entirely. It's much harder (and more expensive) to lobby on a city level than it is to lobby in congress. At the same time, people are much better able to understand a corporate agenda on a city level than on a national level.
On average, the neocortex of Homo sapiens sapiens can only handle tribes of less than three hundred people.
We're wired to live in tribes. We're not truly able to understand national or global scale.
I think the solution to this global tragedy of the commons is to move back to a city-scale again. Push back the power of national governments and shift it to the cities. That way people get to vote on and get involved with projects that directly affect them. Politics would mainly involve interactions between cities and be less about national stakes.
This would also directly take a lot of wind out of large multinationals without invalidating them entirely. It's much harder (and more expensive) to lobby on a city level than it is to lobby in congress. At the same time, people are much better able to understand a corporate agenda on a city level than on a national level.
I think the solution to this global tragedy of the commons is to move back to a city-scale again. Push back the power of national governments and shift it to the cities. That way people get to vote on and get involved with projects that directly affect them. Politics would mainly involve interactions between cities and be less about national stakes.
This would also directly take a lot of wind out of large multinationals without invalidating them entirely. It's much harder (and more expensive) to lobby on a city level than it is to lobby in congress. At the same time, people are much better able to understand a corporate agenda on a city level than on a national level.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
'Individuals' can be replaced with 'nations'. Military budgets, geopolitics and trading limits are a massive burden on the global economy. If there were no nationalistic nations then we'd already have a much higher standard living for anyone.
And that's just the direct benefit. Nationalism also misdirects masses. It allows the public to be distracted with artificial scape-goats to steer them away from the actual culprits.
Quote
individuals acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, behave contrary to the whole group's long-term best interests by depleting some common resource.
'Individuals' can be replaced with 'nations'. Military budgets, geopolitics and trading limits are a massive burden on the global economy. If there were no nationalistic nations then we'd already have a much higher standard living for anyone.
And that's just the direct benefit. Nationalism also misdirects masses. It allows the public to be distracted with artificial scape-goats to steer them away from the actual culprits.
exactly, there are national interests (that I don't understand), Corporate Interests (that I defend), and what about People Interest? It so sad that the national interest as co opted recently is only used to further the interest of those having taken control of those said "national interest" and used for their own benefits. We need People interest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
'Individuals' can be replaced with 'nations'. Military budgets, geopolitics and trading limits are a massive burden on the global economy. If there were no nationalistic nations then we'd already have a much higher standard living for anyone.
And that's just the direct benefit. Nationalism also misdirects masses. It allows the public to be distracted with artificial scape-goats to steer them away from the actual culprits.
Quote
individuals acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, behave contrary to the whole group's long-term best interests by depleting some common resource.
'Individuals' can be replaced with 'nations'. Military budgets, geopolitics and trading limits are a massive burden on the global economy. If there were no nationalistic nations then we'd already have a much higher standard living for anyone.
And that's just the direct benefit. Nationalism also misdirects masses. It allows the public to be distracted with artificial scape-goats to steer them away from the actual culprits.
NO, all nation should be atleast a little nationalistic. Otherwise you nation going nowhere. An will be enslaved or destroed by other nation.
zionist race mixer feminist homosexualists are the problem
Nationalist are a dangerous kind, if you add the social component you get the worst. You can only be with them or against them. it's a duality choice. Who are the most supporter of nationalist in any state? I mean the more crony you are the more nationalist you are? In the sense that it's only in the realm of your "national interest" that you can pursue your scam, why? because the others nationalist may have the same one running and as such know what you are doing. What to do with them? Are you a nationalist? Personally I am more a legalist, which mean that certain legal system suck in certain aspect of life and other don't. But nationalist are fun, they are so easy to manipulate for their own demise, and if you know how to play with their fiber you can even make them kill each others in grandeur in useless battles...
Jump to: