Talking about the END OF STATES.

I am generally on the polemical side on this issue, because I think on some level most people know/fear this to be the case and I think the bald statement is better than getting into degrees. I really have no way to estimate and I am not sure what criteria I would want to begin suggesting metrics around. To me I see and interlocking oligarchy making the decisions they want, generally.

It’s because they are not centers from which to control, so they are not useful tools or threats. If they get in the way of Shell or something they will get their people slapped, but there is no need to merge with their damaged in any case governmental infrastructure. Why get into that when you can still make them pay for GM seeds and eventually their own water?

OK, in practical terms, for me as a non-Russian, non-Chinese, this doesn’t matter. I guess the US would have been an empire also, then.

Yeah, I was pretty lazy. I understand the distinction, but I just plowed on through to make my main points.

Just read in the paper - mainstream European one - how the EU was taking more power. Interesting to see if England manages to secede.

The state is being undermined at the base by the resolution of the supporting institutions and loses itself upward by the insertion in getting others, always new, uncontrollable structures.

A real democracy is merely possible with very small populations or with states of polity (city states) or nations. Nations are one of the greatest Western creations, and nations function, although they have large populations, because of the states which manages the function of nations. If the state is taken away, the nation can no longer exist. A state can exit without a nation, but a nation can’t exist without a state. So if you want to have merely a little bit of democracy, you must either have a very small population or a well working state of a polity (city state) or of a nation (if you have one :wink: ). Now please combine, draw the right conclusions.

True.

When the nations are eliminated, there is no more impediment for the Glozis to eliminate the states of that ex-nations as well. First the nations, then their states. If a nation is already eliminated, then its state is not needed anymore. And if there are no nations and their states anymore, very small social unities or empires can merely be possible. An empire has its own state, and that state has nothing to do with any political participation of the people/s. So either imperial dictatorship or anarchy will follow, if nations and their states are eliminated.

What we can currently notice is the reduction of national aspects, which shall lead to the elimination of the nations, then of the national states, or even states at all, with the result totalitarianism as never before: globalism.

How much do you think the various Empires had to do with this - Roman, English and American come to mind. The last is a nation that came to be identified in practical rather than cultural terms. Any culture could function here as long as it respected the bureaucracies of the ever practical concept of nationhood. Just as anyone could become a roman and then in general any empire inevitably integrates, through various processes, those it colonizes. OH, yes and the US is also responsible for corporate personhood. That eliminated state control of corporations except to the extent that it could create them and does.

Of course nations are not innocent. I mean, they were often nationed via the royalty. Talk about BS. From there their histories were just more propaganda.

I am no globalist, but it seems to me we will have to deal with this, because the lies have to unravel and they were not going to internally. And by the way, I am not using ‘have to’ in moral terms. Though there is a hint of practical terms…we need to.

I am more of a tribalist so for me the nation builders were just early globalists working with the transportation and communications systems they had to determine their goals. I weep not for the death of nations, though I have concerns about what it will lead to.

Me I liked it back when the person who led well, got to lead the tribe and if people lost confidence, well there went the job. And there was a lot of discussion and organic decision making, with the leader almost a focal point and not a leader.

Governmentally, things have been going downhill from there.

When I was saying that nations „are one of the greatest Western creations“, I was referring to a cultural merit and to democracy and not saying that „nations are the best“, but saying that I don’t know a better social form when it comes to manage the greatest possible social form. So it was meant relatively. Empires can only be held together, if they are like dictatorships, if they are totalitarian.

From another thread:

Reformimg democracy”? ( :laughing: ). Which “democracy”?

The history clearly shows that all previous socialisms, because they were modern, were either national or - in the worst case - imperial totalitarianisms. The current globalism is also such an modern imperial totalitarianism, namely the worst case of the worst cases because it is the greatest of history.

The two ways to get out of the imperial madness are the alternatives as city states or as nation states; but because both are about to be destroyed (and even are going to destroy themselves), only one possibility remains: the very small social units, for example something like the "communal particles". But this only possibility will come again anyway, because history repeats its form.

So one could think one has only to wait. But there is another modern problem: the modern trend itself which means also - and amongst other powerful things - machines! You and other human beings will not be needed anymore. Perhaps no human being will survive because that threat with all its consequences will probably come true.

And if someone has an idea like James with his “SAM” / “communal particle” (see above), then he is threatened with lies, that he were a “friend” of the “bad socialists” of the past (for example: Babeuf, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot), although / because the liars themselves are this bad socialists, even in a global scale of imperialism.

Do what thou wilt. Ye watch thee.

The middle class has to carry everything and everyone. The only difference between former modern times and curent modern times is that the nobility and clergy have been becoming globalists.


[size=77]The middle class carries the globalists.[/size]

In my thread “Talking about the END OF HISTORY” it is said amongst others:

It is somehow scary that the state has been becoming a more and more powerless Institution; so the state has been shrinking, and probably it will disappear (=> 5.). What do you think about that?

I think that it is going as to plan. The current methodology is one of obfuscation and extortion, subtle and hidden snares to create doubt, distrust and weak confidence so as to shift power into the hands of those creating the doubt and with which, they spawn more. After enough uncertainty is cast into the population, dependency, and power is gained, a “savior” is to appear in order to help those feeling lost and gain their support. After some serious death and destruction, new order is then declared, “new states” with a new world Congress, new world religion, and new world emperor.

There many correlations (for example):

Cultural development,
– fertility development,
– demographical development,
– educational development,
– intelligence (IQ) development,
– political development,
economical development,
– wealth development,
– welfare development,
artistic development,
technical / technological development,
– mechanical development,
– civilisational development.

When the red coloured arise, then the green coloured arise merely a little bit, and the blue coloured lacks.
When the red coloured decline, then the green arise very much, and the blue coloured arises.
When the green coloured also decline, then the blue coloured declines as well, first a little bit, then much and very much.

The culture turns the light on, the civilisation of the culture turns the light off.

A sign or omen for the end of states in the relatively soon future could be the following impression:

It will likely take time before this description will become reality. But the thing is that some certain indicators have been being perceptible for a relatively long time.

And for example: Is a welfare state with billions of debts still a well working state? If so: For how long will this last? A huge crisis - and this state is really bankrupt!

The crash is only a matter of time.

Any kind of push for globalism will require a violent overthrow of all nationalist groups around the world through a kind of purge where the end of national states isn’t possible until then. Globalism versus nationalism, who will win? Shall be interesting as things escalate.

Globalism means - amongst other things - the elimination of nations, of states. And the fact that we are living in a globalistic era means - as long as this era lasts - that globalism is more powerful and thus seems to win. But who knows who will really win in the end? Globalism will end someday. :wink:

It may end but with a whimper , a thousand years is a mild estimate considering the undisputed power of an established center.

The rationale for that is, the coming to reality of a 1984 type of brave new world, with little chance of developing a reactionary outward dissent.

You mean a new thousand year kingdom (empire) is likely?

[tab]The following tree (lime) is far more than 1000 years old and can be found in Puch (near Fürstenfeldbruck):

Far_More_than_1000_Years_Old_Tree.jpg[/tab]

If they develop computerized intelligence resistant to viruses causing fungal infections why not? A thousand years of empire is not unheard of. , Romans, including Charles the Great lasted way over that. An uncontested empire solving the problem with internal decay can go on way longer.

Besides all they have to do is to redefine states as an exclusive and only existing empire as a state OR state of mind.

Just wait until they roll out a new digital currency worldwide. Bank on it.

The Holy Roman Emipre of German Nation lasted 1000 years: from 843 to 1806. The Frankish empire that Karl der Große (Charles the Graet) established was the predecessor of the Holy Roman Emipre of German Nation. Both had not really to do with the Ancient Roman empire - unless one accepts wishful thinking as reality. All of this Kaisers wanted to be like the Caesars were, but the Holy Fathers (popes) of the Christian Church wanted the same. So, we have two sides of this mytho-motivity: a more secular one and a more sacral one. This time was over In 1806, when almost everything became secularized, although after this secularization there was the Restoration, namely from 1815 till 1848 or, in some regions, even till 1870.