Why are there so many countries in the world?

[Applesmack]

Do you think that it is a good thing that there are so many countries in the world? I think it is pretty stupid personally how there are "countries" occupying a few kilometers of land. I think the world would be much more stable and politics would be much simpler if there were more "union" like the EU happening in the world, don't you?

[Gobmech]

I think it's a very good thing. It allows the underrepresented governments to sometimes seriously rock the power balance, by either providing unexpected support to a larger nation, or by creating unions.

[Sidmen]

Large nations that occupy numberless different cultures and peoples hardly gives you stability or simplicity. Peace and stability needs to come first, then people can think about cooperating; and even then whose to say that their children or children's children will want cooperation?

The nation-state exists on the assumption of cultural and ideological unity; when a people are not unified and they get stuck in a nation-state together, they fight. Either politically or physically.

[Zephyrus]

I'm sure the NWO can solve thice problem nicely!

[jankren]

Tiny little countries like Lesotho and Liechtenstein are stupid and such a waste of space on the map.

The nation-state exists on the assumption of cultural and ideological unity; when a people are not unified and they get stuck in a nation-state together, they fight. Either politically or physically.

Nation states are more stable internally but they tend to fight with each other more so the suffering and the damage is the same basically. In one huge state at least overtime the population will blend racially and culturally thus lessening the differences.

The movie Hero inspired me regarding this thought. In the movie at first we thought that the warmongering Chinese emperor was evil and greedy but in the end we learned that he merely wanted to unite the entire China so warring Chinese states can finally stop fighting after millenia. Lame excuse? Probably. But does it make sense? Yes definitely.

[Watchman]

Beijing propaganda ? Oh yeah, you bet.

Nation states are more stable internally but they tend to fight with each other more so the suffering and the damage is the same basically. In one huge state at least overtime the population will blend racially and culturally thus lessening the differences.

I'd say the splinters left behind by the collapse of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire rather suggest this isn't quite the case... at least, in no way automatically.

Also, nation-states have often demonstrated a very unpleasant degree of hostility towards assorted ethnic minorities - probably because such rather concretely prove the real world doesn't work quite so nicely as the theories and ideas behind nationalism would like, but rather is far more complex and ambiguous.

[Zephyrus]

Tiny little countries like Lesotho and Liechtenstein are stupid and such a waste of space on the map.


Nation states are more stable internally but they tend to fight with each other more so the suffering and the damage is the same basically. In one huge state at least overtime the population will blend racially and culturally thus lessening the differences.

The movie Hero inspired me regarding this thought. In the movie at first we thought that the warmongering Chinese emperor was evil and greedy but in the end we learned that he merely wanted to unite the entire China so warring Chinese states can finally stop fighting after millenia. Lame excuse? Probably. But does it make sense? Yes definitely.

That movie kinda glossed over..oh, I don't know...PLENTY of aspects in the real life story that would make you cringe and think twice about what an inspiring and shining example the Chinese emperor was for the rest of the human race.

[Sven788]

Tiny little countries like Lesotho and Liechtenstein are stupid and such a waste of space on the map.

You sound like an extremist.

Поскольку большие страны имеют гораздо втекающий

I thought this was English only...

[shadyrome]

You sound like an extremist.



I thought this was English only...

I am learning russian , just testing my new skillz

[Sven788]

I am learning russian , just testing my new skillz

Lol okee good luck.

[Justice and Mercy]

Tiny little countries like Lesotho and Liechtenstein are stupid and such a waste of space on the map.

Those countries don't take up any more space on the map then they would if absorbed by larger countries.

I mean, you could cut them out of the map but that's ACTUALLY a waste of space on the map, you could use that space to demonstrate the physical position of a country... like Lesotho or Liechenstein, or something.

[Treize]

Tiny little countries like Lesotho and Liechtenstein are stupid and such a waste of space on the map.

Population is a better indicator than the size of a country.

And they aren't stupid.

[Watchman]

Anyone that small that's surived that long in an environment as hostile as Europe was until the World Wars, and got rich on the side to boot, has to be pretty cunnin' indeed...

[rodne]

People can talk all they want of a global-nation with no boundaries, but it will not happen. It will never happen.

The world is fine with parallel cultures and nations.

Nation-states, by the way, are pathetic and in no way represent one's true cultural/ethnic identity. You can renounce your U.K. citizenship, move to France and become a citizen there and claim you are French. Afterward, you can move to the U.S., become a citizen and then claim you are American.

I find something inherently wrong if this can happen on a large scale.

Oh, and by the way, one global nation is basically imperialism. Say NO to imperialism.

[Sidmen]

Also, nation-states have often demonstrated a very unpleasant degree of hostility towards assorted ethnic minorities - probably because such rather concretely prove the real world doesn't work quite so nicely as the theories and ideas behind nationalism would like, but rather is far more complex and ambiguous.

That usually happens when the nation-state contains a culture that doesn't belong to the norm, which defeats the idea behind the nation-state. Its having multiple cultures/ideologies that spurs unrest within the nation - and even then only sometimes.

[jankren]

That usually happens when the nation-state contains a culture that doesn't belong to the norm, which defeats the idea behind the nation-state. Its having multiple cultures/ideologies that spurs unrest within the nation - and even then only sometimes.

Yeah true nation-states tend to be the most xenophobic.

I'd say the splinters left behind by the collapse of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire rather suggest this isn't quite the case... at least, in no way automatically.

The biggest problem in a huge nation is the presence of 'ruling class' which create feeling of jealousy and discrimination. But with the right policy of nationalism and equality such as in USA these things can be reduced.

[Watchman]

That usually happens when the nation-state contains a culture that doesn't belong to the norm, which defeats the idea behind the nation-state. Its having multiple cultures/ideologies that spurs unrest within the nation - and even then only sometimes.

The fundamental problem is really that the "norm" the idea of a "nation-state" is based on never existed to begin with. It's an ideological fiction, pure and simple. People and populaces have been moving around and settling down for any convoluted number of reasons for a very long time, and certainly without heeding the ideological needs of late-1800s nationalists.

Which is exactly what makes the ideology of a homogenous nation-state so toxic; it cannot but end up in discrimination if not outright violence and/or attempted forcible assimilation of minorities, simply because such minorities are ubiquitous and have always been.

The biggest problem in a huge nation is the presence of 'ruling class' which create feeling of jealousy and discrimination.

Not really; the problem comes if and when the ruling elite starts to "play favourites" - as eg. the Romanovs did with the Great Russians - and generally intentionally plays the various ethnicities off against each other in a "divide and conquer" power game. A lot of the "tribal" conflicts in Africa are the legacy of such policies employed in the colonial period, for example.

I've seen it argued that ethnic, religious and linguistical divisions alone don't really amount to that much - people have been working around those for millenia, after all. It is when they begin overlapping with disparities in socioeconomic standing, access to power etc. that trouble is in store.

But with the right policy of nationalism and equality such as in USA these things can be reduced.

Erm, yeah. Even leaving aside the Black issue, it wasn't all that long ago that US Whites were discriminating against each other on ethnic ancestry basis you know...
The place's not exactly a case study in harmonious coexistence either.

I would also quibble that there arguably doesn't exist such a thing as a "'right' policy of nationalism"...

[Amadeus]

All the many countries in the world prove that humanity will be doomed to racial bigotry and petty national dipsutes for eternity

if we are really as advanced as we say we are then it shouldn't be a problem for all the people of the world to unite together despite differences.

all the different cultures in the world are great don't get me wrong
but it should be possible for all cultures to coexist peacefully

[Justice and Mercy]

Do you think that it is a good thing that there are so many countries in the world? I think it is pretty stupid personally how there are "countries" occupying a few kilometers of land. I think the world would be much more stable and politics would be much simpler if there were more "union" like the EU happening in the world, don't you?

It matters less than you think.

Unions are a bad idea. I don't want Canadians and Mexicans deciding how my tax dollars are spent. Hell, Americans are bad enough.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

I think smaller countries are better managed, make supreme political community, and become less arrogant and agressive in international affairs, even forced to cooperate with each other, which is a positive development in any historical era.