Daniel Blewitt asks you to imagine a global unification plan for the future…it’s easy, if you try.
Unification. At present, it’s an interesting, if seemingly irrelevant academic concept. There are people the world over, both educated and uneducated alike that see and dream of an era of human unification. There are also people the world over that see such a concept as a thing of which to be terrified and avoided.
There are also many people that imagine neither and simply never consider within the realm of reason.
The question of unification is always a tricky one, as some see it as a question truly of one entity subsuming another, the consumption of ourselves by something from outside. When you hold it in your mind like this, all kinds of terrifying scenarios play out:
“Will I be owned by the Chinese?”
“Will this mean the imposing of Sharia law in my country?”
…All of which are equally tunnel visioned concepts when it comes to the question of unification.
The true idea of unification is the coalescing of all existing political structures into something much larger. A shared one, which is totally new and unlike anything that preceded it. The idea of unification is to recognise the nature of nationalism as a natural evolution of our tribal roots and see it for the arbitrary identity it really is.
We put a lot of stock and interest into what makes us different and the lines in the sand that we’ve drawn. We write books, movies and our media reports in a way that continuously calls attention to nationalistic ideas. Anything from another country is usually simplified for the sake of understanding, which gives birth to stereotypes and false impressions. This was as true in 18th Century newspapers as it is in today’s live reporting.
We generalise and view from a distance as though another country is truly another world. Those of us who have travelled extensively, however, come to see that the differences are truly not as great as they might appear. People are people and they want the same things: security, opportunity, happiness and peace in their lives. You grow to see things as they really are; you see the incredible death, hate and violence that has grown up around these arbitrary presumptions of difference.
You learn that the most nationalist, most aggressively protectionist people are those who have never travelled far, and have never seen the humanity that lies beyond their own countries’ borders.
Do the majority see those from other countries as human in the same manner as themselves, or as something else? Does the belief hold that we have enough in common to exist together?
Simply, imagine a single space agency for the entire planet, instead of over 40 which usually are competing to accomplish the same things. Imagine the redundancy of standing armies, the elimination of tax evasion due to unified economies and the massive efficiency gains of a single market combined with a single political structure. A single market unbound by nationalistic logic (such as the hoarding of resources by one country, to impede the progress of another country they fear).
There is much more, were it to be fully broken down, but suffice to say that we would be effectively making the entire system as efficient as possible by removing the myriad of bureaucratic and national barriers that limit our potential as a species.
The world is currently locked in a confusing, anarchic interplay of many different laws, economies and national interests. The tremendously wealthy individuals and companies of the world are able to use the threat of their leaving an economy altogether to persuade governments into doing what they wish. The threat lingers constantly over Parliament and Congress; if we push this company too hard, they can and will take their money and business elsewhere, even if it’s our duty to push.
This is a very real problem.
Further, the tax situation is frequently abused, as is the case in Europe where Apple paid a tiny fraction of their tax liability because of a complex series of accounts and loopholes that allowed them to legally circumvent European tax. While they made billions in revenue, they only paid about 1.2% of that in tax, as opposed to their actual liability which is much closer to 30%.
Right wing media is suitably terrified of this kind of thing, thus, it continuously extolls the terrible dangers of unified governance; some genuine but much invented. The reality is that were you to agree on the structure of this global governance, as a rational, secular, democratic state with a strong humanist constitution, you would end up with a far better world than the one we settle for today.
There are people all over the world that desire unification, that idealise the concept and dream about it. Those people have nothing to cling to, nothing with which to ally themselves. We have entered an age of technological development the likes of which the world has never seen and as borders become more porous and less meaningful, we too must begin to evolve politically.
Even if it still won’t occur for centuries, it’s time that those who believe that the unification of the human civilisation is warranted to create a common ground and find one another. Politics is dominated by the frame of nationalism, and it’s unlikely that states thinking nationalistically will come to this manner of conclusion on their own.
I sincerely believe the unification of humanity is possible and maybe even likely, but it won’t happen without those of us that believe in it coming together and standing up for what we believe.