Russian revolution (Colorized)
I just re-checked my poll. 30% of people wanting the World to remain the way it is right now (separatist world). Why?
After all that has happened in mankind history, itâs clearly because weâre divided. Itâs division that led to World Wars. Itâs division that is breaking our peace. It must stop, even if it means to get rid of nationalist emotions. Because the longer we are divided, the longer there will be war and the less likely we are to survive. Unification is the next step towards human evolution.
i voted for it because i thought it was talking about which more is most likely to happen
No, and I exactly precised âregardless of how likely itâs going to happenâ.
It was about your vision of an ideal world for humanity.
Thatâs why the last option doesnât make sense, because itâs already the case and is the main cause of our downfall.
EDIT: Hey @Evolution4Weak, just recalled this.
Fun fact: You can still change your vote on a poll.
You just have to click âShow votesâ then it brings you back to the voting options. From there you can choose another option. To stay with your result, you just have to click âShow resultsâ.
I re-opened the poll.
Link to the poll post :
I chose the way I did because itâs the most realistic way. Itâs way too evident now that people are going to stay separated and have drastically different viewpoints on things even if everything was united. No matter how you look at it, world unification will never be a thing because humans hate each other too much due to selfishness overall.
1 Like
Sorry, but I have to disagree because what you are basically saying is that weâre doomed and that we canât do anything about it. Saying so means that humanity will vanish (or that it wonât have a very bright future), and so will Thrive. I canât accept that. We canât accept that.
Humans may hate each other or even be selfish, but they are also capable of love, friendship and compassion. I am sure that with proper political strategy and a good support from the people, it would be possible to achieve something close to unification.
The UN is close to it, but not enough. They are only capable of establishing international law, yet they donât have any power on the World and are far from democratic. The EU, however, is what weâre looking for because it can give what nations want while also unifying Europe (despite UK leaving because of separatist conservatives). If such an Union has happened, there is no reason why it would never happen for the world.
The best model would be a Federation, but if it canât happen, at least a Union like the EU would make it right. Itâs not because it doesnât seem possible that we shouldnât try. Itâs not because humans are selfish that we are necessarily doomed.
Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill and Martin Luther King all agreed that a unified world is what humanity needs to prosper and to bring peace. Most people ignored their idea or said the same thing as you and look at how the World looks right now. But itâs not too late to listen to them. Itâs not too late to act. Itâs not too late to change.
It will begin with the creation of a new global organisation to fix the actual issues of the World; of the UN. That organisation will establish a peaceful supranational union, and will help democratic countries to form a Federation. The Federation will be a new constitutional and parliamentary nation, which will participate in the Organisation just as any other nations. The Organisation will encourage non-democratic countries to fix their problems, to reduce corruption and to become democratic, so that they may join the Federation. That is how humanity will survive and thrive across the Universe.
unification
you know why it is a bad idea becouse it could only work if you kill all the nationalist (including me), and the biggest problem with israel most of israeli jews are racist and more belgium like than you would expect and also it would be problem with cultures
The better idea would be a federation imo
1 Like
Why would it need to kill nationalists? It could just be achieved by education, which would be a more democratic way.
Are you suggesting that nationalism comes from a lack of education, and therefore if you are nationalist you are not educated?
Thatâs not how democracy works, you only need to have the biggest share of people on the side of unification and then youâre basically done as long as no one goes full terrorist mode
No, Iâm not suggesting that nationalism comes from a lack of education. Iâm suggesting that the idea of a peaceful Union could be encouraged through education.
Not going to lie that sounds pretty propaganda-y. Just educate them properly and then have the people make up their own minds.
1 Like
Still the earth would be âunifiedâ(for who knows how long) but the problem would be colonies in my favourite book All your tommorows it littelary starts with the âmartiansâ revolution and also who knows what the futurr will lead us to.
Yeah, I have to agree with you. Maybe not education then. But itâs clearly not by killing nationalists that it will work.
EDIT:
While this could happen because of history repeating itself, it could very well be avoided if we consider the factors that can lead to this.
Iâm not much of a historian, so I canât really be sure of it, but Iâll try.
- We are very far from Mars or the Moon, and travel takes a long time.
- Colonies pay too much taxes and are unhappy with their situation.
- Colonies donât have enough power.
Solution 1: Research and develop on faster travel.
Solution 2: Reduce taxes for the moment being.
Solution 3: Share sovereignty with the colonies/planets. Rebalance the power.
Feel free to tell me if I made any mistake or forgot something.
I would prefer if the earth wasnât totally unified. maybe a few large factions that operate seperatly most of the time, but for big things, come together to face the threat/ whatever else it could be
By âfactionsâ you meanâŚ?
I mean large unions that control a certain group of the world. for example, a huge section of a continent could be taken up by the âAsian farming factionâ something like that. similar to countries, but larger, and having a more specific goal.
1 Like
Thatâs what people probably said before WW2, and they were very lucky that UK successfully breached European coasts.
I might not agree with being separate, but at least itâs still better than having more than 196 countries (approximate number of states in the world, according to UN).
i agree, we have to many countries. but having one unified nation poses other problems like
*terrorism spreading with a government that cant watch the entire country
I think partially united factions would be a better way to go because if a large group of farmers are socialist, they can work in a socialist farming country, while a fascist technology focused group could be in a different country
1 Like
Yeah, like a Democratic Parliamentary (non-presidential) Union could be made.
- Europe
- Canada
- Australia
- USA (without His hair)
- Japan
- South Korea
- Hong Kong
Iâm unsure about the rest of the world, though.
Federation generally shares power with provinces. It means that its concerning substate has to deal with its problems and requests resources from Federal level sometimes. At that point, if people canât control themselves from spreading terrorism, Iâd apply martial law for that region for the moment being until they calm themselves.