Kant on going global (1784)

If we don’t blow ourselves up first, of course.

“But as long as states apply all their resources to their vain and violent schemes of expansion, thus incessantly obstructing the slow and laborious efforts of their citizens to cultivate their minds, and even deprive them of all support in these efforts, no progress in this direction can be expected,” (49) “…but eventually war itself gradually becomes not only a highly artificial undertaking, extremely uncertain in its outcome for both parties, but also a very dubious risk to take, since its aftermath is felt by the state in the shape of constantly increasing national debt (a modern invention) whose repayment becomes interminable. And in addition, the effects which an upheaval in any state produces upon all the others in our continent, where all are so closely linked by trade, are so perceptible that these other states are forced by their own insecurity to offer themselves as arbiters, albeit without legal authority, so that they indirectly prepare the way for a great politcal body of the future, without precedent in the past,” (51).

  • Immanuel Kant, Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose


…ergo, the current level of global corruption and ethnic grievances.

So… on-paper, versus, reality.

I’m all for some global homogeny, but not in the form of ‘suppression-and-takeover’ of differing Countries, Nations, Kingdoms, and States.

Yeah. Kant’s actual vision for how to successfully go global spreads from the roots up. Vine-like. Preserving diversity that is “consistent with the freedom of others”—so not entirely off the rails.