ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Global Union: The End Of Nations - Part 2

Updated on August 21, 2010

The jingoistically independent United States of America aside, Free Trade is almost always a precursor to political unity. Given that philosophy it would then follow that Canada, Mexico, Chile, Peru (and soon others) should be in serious consideration of not just joining the European Union, but changing it to a Global Union.

This Global Union should not be just a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels handing out boiler plate policy, but a new form of government, one that has not existed since the Roman Empire. At one point in human history, parts of what is now Northern England, Armenia, Sudan and Morocco, as well as everything in between were under one main Roman administration.

The Roman administration was based on the repressive power of the Legions and dictated by greedy (and lead-ingestion mad) Caesars and Senators. However, the Global Union is not to be a dictatorship at all, but a strong international administration which controls all foreign affairs, currency, legislation, and standards, while staying completely out of the strictly political engagements of individual nations.

That brings us to the concept of nations themselves: An idea whose time has come… and gone. Nations within the European Union / Global Union are totally pointless and outdated. Let's take a look at my own native Italy that I know so well. Can anyone point to anything that the Italian governments over the past 30 years have actually done, other than run for re-election or prepare to run for re-election? The head of Italy's commercial union (and Chairman of Ferrari) Luca Montezemolo's famous quote that Italy has been on autopilot for decades is completely true. For all intents and purposes the country has only the European Union as its government as even my long-supported Silvio Berlusconi seems to be in power only to keep himself out of jail from convictions on his shady financial dealings.

The measures of control that the European Union has had to exercise on Greece further prove the point. The Greek government can now effectively legislate all it wants except on anything that costs money… which is everything. The European Union runs Greece and any Greek who thinks that they still have a national government has been dipping too much into the Ouzo.

Since nations no longer exist within an European Union / Global Union framework, why not stop pretending that they still do? Countries like the United Kingdom and Spain are already nations in name only. Both of those present countries are so riddled with "autonomous" regions that they nearly outnumber the areas which are not secessionist! Thus in the European Union / Global Union world, why need they exist? The UK can easily become standalone Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, the Islands, and… oh yes… England with no one noticing except the historians! Yes, it might surprise some people who live outside the UK, but England itself wants out of Britain! Incredible but true!

What needs to be done is expand the current concept of provinces to all of these regions, not just in the European Union but the Global Union.

Continued In: Global Union: The End Of Nations - Part 3

Back To Start


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Hal Licino profile image

      Hal Licino 7 years ago from Toronto

      There has to be a tipping point where events happen faster than Brussels' stultified bureaucracy is allowing them to, and I think that the upcoming second recession may just be that time.

    • profile image

      Tim 7 years ago

      I can see where your coming from and I sort of agree that things like the Greek crisis are likely to break up the EU or force it to become a political union. No taxation without representation. No fix ups without political control either.

      But overcoming 1000's of years of political and cultural boundaries will be sloooooooow and haaaaaaard.

      I can see it happening slowly in a bureaucratic way, while avoiding annoying too many cultural sensitivities. And it will be in a two steps forward one step back way taking generations. The next step is a directly elected European president or parliament. Now that's a hurdle.

    • Hal Licino profile image

      Hal Licino 7 years ago from Toronto

      Actually Scotland uses the British Pound but is able to mint its own Scottish notes. My point is that regions can have direct autonomy and be responsible to a centralized government that is supranational and I believe we are moving towards that form of international structure.

    • profile image

      scott 7 years ago

      How you can draw this conclusion amazes me. One currency makes no sense, and, as you point out the Euro is under threat from Scotland and the need for nations to float their own currency. Germany has benefited from the Greek crisis--their currency should be richer, but that also means Greek currency should be cheaper/inflated. This loss of autonomy can't persist, and we're seeing push back.

      Might we see an EU or international governance, in someways yes, but regional/national sovereignty makes this a chimera. The ICC and other international agreements will likely become more ingrained. But, the problem with your argument is that of equivocation. The world you suggest may be something we draw closer to, but we will also, by necessity likely increase regional autonomy. There are forces that are subdividing the nation states of Spain.

      Maybe we are arguing the same thing. But, we will never see one global currency--though a new reserve currency will certainly emerge. Laws and standards, thanks to international trade will be standardized. But your argument is possible only from a lie of economics. Namely the free-market ideology. We will continue to have utilities and these require regional governance, funding and control.