Old Rocks
Diamond Member
I'm not sure that there will be a population collapse anytime in the near future.
But if there is a massive population collapse, then, if history be our guide, a study of the 14th century Europe might be a useful endeavor.
The last massive population collapse we had resulted from the waves of Bubonic plague that swept across the world.
The outcome was the end of feudalism in Europe, the rise of the nation state, the eventual development of modern capitalism, the laboring class working for money, the merchant class creating wealth in conjunction with that laboring class, and eventually representational forms of government as that laboring class demanded a share of the wealth.
But the path to that world did not happen quickly.
It took nearly 400 years before what we think of as the modern world evolved into what we have today, really.
It was a tumultuous 400 years, too.
S now, I suspect we're headed toward a one world government, with or without a population collapse.
And, as much as I am fearful that a one world goveenment will be oppressive for most of us, I think that sooner or later a one world government is needed.
Why?
Because now, thanks to our own technologies, and perhaps also to the effects we might be having on the climate, we NEED a world-wide solutions for many of the problems facing mankind.
Let's recap:
1. Regardless whether the population collapses or not, we will need to be able to act as a species if we hope to survive as a species.
2. A one world government is the only way to take on problems that effect the entire world.
3. That one world government might be good or bad for most of us, That's probably up to us to decide.
4. But if we cannot form a viable world government to monitor and cope with world problems, then mankind itself will fail the Darwinist test for social creatures and nature will solve the problem of mankind once and for all.
There...
For those of you seeking a rationalization for FREE TRADE, that's about the best I can offer.
Not that FREE TRADE is making all of us wealthier, that's obvisouly not even remotely true.
But because FREE TRADE is changing the dynamic of who actually has power and because FREE TRADE is eroding the entire idea of a nation state.
And, if history be our guide, nation states are NOT suited to deciding how to use the advances that tecnology is giving us.
Nation states are amoral entities acting in the selfish interests of the nation or at least acting in the interests of those who control them,
That's just NOT going to be a good enough system of power and control for mankind in the next 100 years.
Very well said. What we are facing is the problem of the commons. We all share the same atmosphere and oceans. The degradation of the environment affects all on earth, not just those in the immediate vicinity. It has been pointed out, that because of their diet, the mothers milk of the Innuit in north Greenland would be rated a hazardous substance. The PCBs and other contaminants that are concentrated up the food chain result in extreme concentration in a people that have absolutely nothing to do with the original pollution.
Fishing treaties, pollution agreements, ect. are routinely thrown overboard by any and all nations that see that violating those treaties are to their short term interests. Nation states cannot stop this kind chicanery, even though it is against their long term interests. So, eventually, when a great enough disaster strikes, we will move toward a one world government. What form that will take will be the question.