Global Union: The End Of Nations - Part 3

Kosovo has nothing to do with Serbia other than still be listed in its maps. Frisia is neither Dutch nor French, as Basque is neither French nor Spanish. Busingen am Hochrhein and Campione are within and completely surrounded by Switzerland but they're politically German and Italian territory respectively! Similarly, Spain has Llivia inside France; Belgium has Baarle-Hertog inside the Netherlands; and Russia has Sankovo-Medvezhye in Belarus. Istria, Ticino, Savoy and Corsica have been Italian for centuries and they remain so today (Ajaccio, Bastia, Fiume, Lugano, Nizza, Pola, and Zara, are all clearly Italian cities). Garibaldi was born in Italian Nizza so what is it now doing in France? Similarly, what are Austrian cities like Bozen and Meran doing in Italy? And what is Spain doing in what by all rights should be the Moroccan cities of Ceuta and Melilla? Even Poland and Germany have huge swaths of each other's territories.

These separatist ambitions are not only limited to Europe: The secessionist Wallonia and Flanders which are on the verge of ripping Belgium in half have way more in common with each other than Quebec has with Ontario across the pond! So why not let the totally different French and English Canadians go their merry way? Similarly, what is the point of Ottawa holding onto an Alberta which already believes it is far more closely aligned with Montana than Ontario? Like any other country, Canada should allow the lands which want to leave Confederation to get out, and the ones who want to join come in: The Turks and Caicos Islands even passed a referendum landslide to be annexed to Canada! So what's the holdup? Each area of any size should be able to pass a referendum on whether to stay with its current national affiliation or not, naturally always within the Global Union framework. The concept of keeping people together or apart against their will does not belong in the 21st century!

There are ample secessionist factions within the Western Hemisphere's European Union / Global Union territories with very reasons ranging between the silly and the serious as to why they should be effectively autonomous from their current outdated administrations:

Canada
Alberta
British Columbia (+ Pacific Northwestern US: Cascadia)
Quebec
Nunavut

Chile
Mapuche

Denmark
Greenland

France
Martinique

Mexico
Chiapas

Netherlands
Most of the Netherlands Antilles

Peru
Aymara
Arequipa

United Kingdom
Bermuda
Montserrat
Turks and Caicos Islands

The same applies to the nation / states within Europe:

Albania
Northern Epirus

Azerbaijan
Nagorno-Karabakh
Talysh-Mughan

Belgium
Brussels
Flanders
Wallonia

Bosnia and Herzegovina
Herceg Bosna
Republika Srpska

Croatia
Dalmatia
Istria
Serbian Krajina

Cyprus
Northern Cyprus

Czech Republic
Moravia

Denmark
Faroe Islands

Finland
Aland
Sami

France
Brittagne
Catalune
Corsica
Euskala / Euskara
Francia
Lorraine / Elsass
Nourmand
Occitania
Savoie

Georgia
Abkhazia
Samtskhe-Javakheti
South Ossetia

Germany
Bavaria
Frisia

Greece
Chameria

Italy
Aosta Valley
Emilia
Friuli-Venezia Giulia
Insubria
Liguria
Lombardy
Marche
Padania
Piedmont
Romagna
Sardinia
Sicily
South Tyrol
Southern Italy
Trentino
Tuscany
Umbria
Veneto

Lithuania
Samogitia

Macedonia
Illyrida

Moldova
Gagauz Yeri
Transnistria

Netherlands
Frisia

Norway
Sami

Poland
Upper Silesia

Romania
Székler

Russia
Adygea
Chechnya
Circassia
Dagestan
Ingushetia
Kabardino-Balkaria
Kalmykia
Karachay-Cherkessia
Northern Ossetia
Tatarstan
Udmurtia

Serbia
Kosovo
Vojvodina

Spain
Andalusia
Aragon
Asturias
Basque
Canary Islands
Cantabria
Castile
Catalonia
Galicia
León

Sweden
Sami

Switzerland
Geneva
Jura
Ticino

Ukraine
Carpathian Ruthenia
Crimea

United Kingdom
Cornwall
England
Guernsey
Isle of Man
Northern Ireland
Scotland
Shetland
Wales
Wessex

The European Union / Global Union countries would all use the (renamed) Euro, all have the same economic and legislative regulations, and all have the same foreign and internal policies. So since they're countries in name only what is the point of adhering to centuries old boundaries which have no relevance to today? Let Corsica, Ticino, and Istria be as Italian as they want! Let the Mapuche have their chunk of Chile! You'd be hard-pressed to find a single Chechen who wants anything to do with Russia! Why keep forcing Cyprus together? If Brittany wants to be as English as it was in the past, why not let it? After all, it's the original Britain! Let the European Union / Global Union have 100 or even 200 member states, based on the desire of their populations to stick together! Forced marriages such as Wallonia / Flanders, Istria / Croatia, Chechnya / Russia, Catalonia / Spain, Basque / Spain, Corsica / France, North / South Cyprus, and Quebec / Ontario were doomed from their misbegotten historical foundations! Nations are meaningless in the 21st century's Global Union!

Back To Start

More by this Author


Comments 26 comments

steve8miller profile image

steve8miller 6 years ago from Ohio Great City of Dayton

Very interesting. Reading these hubs really reminds me of the not so distant past. As well as a very uncertain future. I am sure these hubs will be more and more relevant to the rest of the people in the coming years. Good job.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Thanks for your kind words! :)


soumyasrajan 6 years ago from Mumbai India and often in USA

Hi! Hal Licino

Interesting article and view point. Nations have come in existence not that long ago. New entities may surely get built up.

But I find it interesting that your world seems to practically start and end in Europe and American continents.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Thanks for the comment. Actually, I did discuss various Caribbean islands and even an Indian Ocean location, but since the crux of the article is the EU and its expanding Free Trade Agreements, the ones between the EU and Japan and India are not finalized, so I had to stick to the ones in the Western Hemisphere. :)


Greg Panfile 6 years ago

It may be that what is being described here is actually an evolutionary trend in the social ecology of humans. That is, given that tribes, countries, nations, empires and the world population are all made up of organisms, it may be that all such follow a set of ecological and evolutionary principles by their very nature.

It could be said that over time 'government' has evolved from tribal tyranny, to theocracy, to royalty, to nationalism, to democracy. The fact that some of these forms still persist to this day, and even combine, is similar to what happens in the ecology, where for example sharks and alligators still dominate certain environments despite the existence of more intelligent creatures that have developed later.

The technology of war, it would seem, rendered the nationalist model obsolete, as the destruction caused by the very nature of the form was intolerable. Thus after both World Wars the effort was toward more democracy, and moving some authority upwards to world bodies and away from individual nations.

In the ensuing decades, there has been mostly peace, but maintaining the nations that existed after the wars introduced cultural and economic inefficiencies. The classic 'trouble spots' in Europe and Asia all reflect attempts to maintain boundaries drawn by the fallen national empires of Britain and Turkey. People lumped together by old boundaries, or separated by them, experienced daily inconveniences of several types. And it is generally no longer viable to settle these disputes the old way, by fighting, because it is just too destructive.

Hence, we may be in an evolutionary period where, indeed, the nation state is disappearing, because the most efficient way to organize the social ecology... that is, politics... is by devolving authority both up and down. Cultural matters get delegated downwards and localized; economic matters and disputes get delegated upwards, to supranational bodies, and are settled legally rather than violently. And again, the core reason is efficiency, that it works better, has lower costs, and so on. Like all such transitions it will be difficult, but if what is stated above is true, it is also inevitable and in humanity's best interest.


Ruslan Amirkhanov 6 years ago

Rather controversial but unfortunately you have a lot to learn about the world. Plenty of Chechens prefer to stay not only in the Russian Federation, but actually live in Moscow.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Greg, very interesting bio-social concept. I like it! Thanks. :)

Ruslan, of course any statement of "every one" is both a generalization and facetious, but you have to agree that overall there is very little love lost for Moscow's authority among Chechens.


Ruslan Amirkhanov 6 years ago

I would agree that most people want jobs, and want to live in a modern society, hence they move to Moscow where the money is, jsut like everyone else in the Russian Federation.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Granted, but Moscow has grown so fast and in such a greedy and mercenary way in the past few years, that it is only suitable to enjoy if you have millions of dollars.


Steven 6 years ago

What a disturbing vision, where "the union" controls all foreign policy and all member "provinces" are subordinate to the overarching will of "the collective".

It reminds me of an article I read recently that I think you should read:

http://goo.gl/1WNn

Your utopian vision is dangerous and harmful. It will not turn out as you envision - it will be a mechanism for repression and abuse... and that is just the beginning.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Geez, I dunno... It's existing right now in the EU and their 400 million people are hardly repressed or abused. You can even make a case that the 50 American states are in the same situation. :)


Steven 6 years ago

What is "existing" in the EU goes directly against the will of the people since they specifically voted *against* the constitution/"treaty" that was none-the-less signed by bureaucrats seeking to increase their power, dissolve the nation state, and implement the vision you have outlined on this page.

When bureaucrats disregard the votes of millions of people in multiple nations that is abuse, and it is one step of many along the path to repression.

The vision you describe is not utopian, it is simply dividing and conquering nations for the consolidation of power in the hands of elites.

This is my warning to you. You are heading down the wrong path. This vision of grand uniformity and rule over the masses is dangerous, we have seen it many times in the past. It will not end well.


Steven 6 years ago

Read the article, I know it's long but you will find that it is addressing precisely what you are discussing here: the dissolving of the nation state and the building of a new empire/order.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Steven, that's pure nonsense. The EU is a democratic institution and if its citizens wanted it gone it would disappear in an instant. You fear the "New World Order" but that's just conspiracy theory paranoia.


Steven 6 years ago

Don't play those rhetorical games or talk about conspiracy theory.

You wrote: "The EU is a democratic institution and if its citizens wanted it gone it would disappear in an instant."

While the EU Constitution was promoted as a way to make Europe "more democratic", that was evidently a sham. Despite massive media campaigns to promote the project, where people were given the chance they overwhelmingly voted against it.

In response the bureaucrats simply repackaged the constitution with the same substance and renamed it as the "Lisbon Treaty" - then went right ahead and passed it into law against the will of the people.

There is no "paranoia" here - there is a warning - a warning that your ideology of dissolving the nation state is a dangerous repetition of the past.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Do you get your history from the Bizarro Universe? You're just echoing the lunatic fringe Euro-opponent blather that's been around for decades. Sheer unadulterated nonsense.


Steven 6 years ago

Saying something is blather, nonsense, paranoia and fringe lunacy doesn't make it so. In fact it is simply showing arrogance.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Saying stupid things which are based only in paranoia shows lunacy. Have a nice day. :)

Sheesh... now the EU is supposed to be a dictatorship, and you actually want people to agree with you? Look! Over there! It's a flying pig! :)


Steven 6 years ago

I missed "bizzaro", and now "stupid" and a straw-man argument:

"...the EU is supposed to be a dictatorship..." is not what I said at all - for a dictatorship there must be a dictator.

Arrogance is not all you are showing.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

400 + million European are under dictatorship? And you even want me to continue this conversation? Might as well discuss that the moon is made out of green cheese. It's pointless and so are you. Bye.


Computer Rewired 6 years ago

Very well written article!


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Thanks you very much. :)


Hxprof 6 years ago from Clearwater, Florida

What you've written here does indeed strike a blow at the nation state; it's a repetition of what happened in Europe during the mid-1800's except that it was empires being dismantled by budding nation states.

It's not surprising. Borders and boundaries have been redrawn time and again during recorded history. One of the most brutal remaking of boundaries was the deportation of Germans from other states in Europe back to Germany after WWII; no matter that many of these had lived in those countries for centuries.

Do you think the US may see movement to break away parts of the southwest within another generation?


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Thank you for your comments. There is a budding separatist movement in California, and it all depends on what happens with the state economy in the next little while. If they really go down the drain in the second part of the recession, that might be an incentive, as it would be for the BC/Northwest states Cascadia federation.


Oliver 6 years ago

All those territories listed at the beginning were part of previous empires so it's natural that they would be part of the EU now if they do not wish to be independent (France allows independence but the UK doesn't. Canada would fit right in to the EU and is more similar culturally to the EU than the to the US but it will never happen. My guess is that the EU will take in all the actual European countries (including Russia and Turkey although nobody will utter it about the former) and have all but political union with the likes of Canada, Israel, North Africa and South America. That's my take. I'm all for the complete freedom of movement for people and goods.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

I'm all for free movement as well, but I'm stickin' to my guns. :)

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working