I don’t have an issue with the idea of moving beyond nation-states. I lean toward European federalism, so the concept isn't foreign to me.
But let's not kid ourselves—whether you call it a nation, empire, tribe, or corporation, power structures are inevitable. Some entity will create rules, enforce them, and hold a monopoly on violence. T…
I don’t have an issue with the idea of moving beyond nation-states. I lean toward European federalism, so the concept isn't foreign to me.
But let's not kid ourselves—whether you call it a nation, empire, tribe, or corporation, power structures are inevitable. Some entity will create rules, enforce them, and hold a monopoly on violence. That’s not ideology; that’s game theory and history.
The label—nation, religion, king, tribe, or market—is just branding. The structure remains: organized authority backed by force. You can dream of no countries, but unless you’ve figured out how to eliminate hierarchy and scarcity, someone’s still going to be in charge.
I don’t have an issue with the idea of moving beyond nation-states. I lean toward European federalism, so the concept isn't foreign to me.
But let's not kid ourselves—whether you call it a nation, empire, tribe, or corporation, power structures are inevitable. Some entity will create rules, enforce them, and hold a monopoly on violence. That’s not ideology; that’s game theory and history.
The label—nation, religion, king, tribe, or market—is just branding. The structure remains: organized authority backed by force. You can dream of no countries, but unless you’ve figured out how to eliminate hierarchy and scarcity, someone’s still going to be in charge.