You make an interesting point. Countries conglomerate for political reasons all the time: the European Union, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States (whose very name implies that each state is a "country", and whose legislature does too).
But generally, when it is forced, it is later forced apart (the breakup of the USSR is a good example). The EU is vastly threatened by recession and people in countries hit by recession want to get themselves out of recession rather than deepen their recession by helping other EU countries who have been seen to wilfully mismanage their finances, knowing that someone else would bail them out.
In the case of global warming, extreme overpopulation, and dwindling natural resources, there is little palatable alternative to greater conglomeration and it very well might happen. Which is not to say the unpalatable alternative might also happen. Humans are possessed of mind-blowing selfishness at times.
Will Third World countries exist in 100 years?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
You make an interesting point. Countries conglomerate for political reasons all the time: the European Union, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States (whose very name implies that each state is a "country", and whose legislature does too).
But generally, when it is forced, it is later forced apart (the breakup of the USSR is a good example). The EU is vastly threatened by recession and people in countries hit by recession want to get themselves out of recession rather than deepen their recession by helping other EU countries who have been seen to wilfully mismanage their finances, knowing that someone else would bail them out.
In the case of global warming, extreme overpopulation, and dwindling natural resources, there is little palatable alternative to greater conglomeration and it very well might happen. Which is not to say the unpalatable alternative might also happen. Humans are possessed of mind-blowing selfishness at times.