To me, Nationalism is democracy at it's best. Rule for the people, on behalf of the people. And this only works when there is a discernable people that share the same values and culture. The people have to identify with their government and vice versa. This obviously doesn't exist in America anymore. We have many different demographics of people that just shouldn't be ruled by the same government. And I honestly don't think a Caesar would change that. A Caesar in this country would only be a Caesar for some.
FWIW, Bill Maher, after having dinner with Trump, said that if the looney left won the next election, they would not be allowed to take power. Personally, I think the biggest problem is Moslems.
Democracy: great for "means" questions; terrible at "ends". Great at finding the right way to pursue the common good; terrible at deciding what "good" is.
National divorce: The 2 sides have diverse philosophical ambitions. Red is localist: "Blue wants socialism and pink haired lunatics, y'all are weird, but OK." Blue is universalist: "You may not suppress human rights anywhere, ever, and we will fight you if you do." Red might coexist; Blue definitely would not. BTW: Despite claiming to be value neutral, liberalism has been universalist since the beginning (1700's). It is more like a religious theology than a political program.
Pew Survey: Weird that the United States tops the list of countries who view their fellow citizens as immoral and Canada bottoms the same list. Why?
"Intertia is the most powerful force in the Universe." Yep. That's why I'm a fat man. :-)
The ultimate "wild card" in all this is the Earth itself. I'm not not talking about nonsense like the climate change hysteria. I'm talking serious Earth changes, such as a massive subduction zone earthquake on the West coast that smashes the infrastructure, or one of the brutal years-long droughts that have historically occured in the western US long before the advent of widespread fossil fuel use, or an event such as a Yellowstone supervolcano eruption. Everyone's calculations would instantly be rendered irrelevant.
Not him specifically, but I am familiar with this, and other things in this same vein, and you're right, it gets “interesting", to say the least! One of the aspects that always fascinated me is how there always seems to be a “stasis”, long periods of apparent stability, then sudden and abrupt changes, sometimes cataclysmic, and that principle seems to apply to a lot more than the Earth, it's a fundamental law of life.
To me, Nationalism is democracy at it's best. Rule for the people, on behalf of the people. And this only works when there is a discernable people that share the same values and culture. The people have to identify with their government and vice versa. This obviously doesn't exist in America anymore. We have many different demographics of people that just shouldn't be ruled by the same government. And I honestly don't think a Caesar would change that. A Caesar in this country would only be a Caesar for some.
FWIW, Bill Maher, after having dinner with Trump, said that if the looney left won the next election, they would not be allowed to take power. Personally, I think the biggest problem is Moslems.
Democracy: great for "means" questions; terrible at "ends". Great at finding the right way to pursue the common good; terrible at deciding what "good" is.
National divorce: The 2 sides have diverse philosophical ambitions. Red is localist: "Blue wants socialism and pink haired lunatics, y'all are weird, but OK." Blue is universalist: "You may not suppress human rights anywhere, ever, and we will fight you if you do." Red might coexist; Blue definitely would not. BTW: Despite claiming to be value neutral, liberalism has been universalist since the beginning (1700's). It is more like a religious theology than a political program.
Pew Survey: Weird that the United States tops the list of countries who view their fellow citizens as immoral and Canada bottoms the same list. Why?
"Intertia is the most powerful force in the Universe." Yep. That's why I'm a fat man. :-)
Great piece. Very thought provoking.
Just a thought, but it can probably be dismissed.
The ultimate "wild card" in all this is the Earth itself. I'm not not talking about nonsense like the climate change hysteria. I'm talking serious Earth changes, such as a massive subduction zone earthquake on the West coast that smashes the infrastructure, or one of the brutal years-long droughts that have historically occured in the western US long before the advent of widespread fossil fuel use, or an event such as a Yellowstone supervolcano eruption. Everyone's calculations would instantly be rendered irrelevant.
But as I said, this can probably be dismissed.
Ever look into Ben Davidson and his theories on cyclical pole shifts? Interesting stuff in that vein.
Not him specifically, but I am familiar with this, and other things in this same vein, and you're right, it gets “interesting", to say the least! One of the aspects that always fascinated me is how there always seems to be a “stasis”, long periods of apparent stability, then sudden and abrupt changes, sometimes cataclysmic, and that principle seems to apply to a lot more than the Earth, it's a fundamental law of life.