Theres all this talk of regional autonomy and economic independence and what not...regardless of whether thats a good thing or a bad thing, lets discuss for a moment why it came to be. Although the nation-states of today are largely a result of post-World War II/Cold War politics, for the most part - the current geopolitical map was defined between the 16th and 18th centuries (with a little spillover into the 19th and 20th, but that was mostly changing flags, not borders). Before the 16th century, Asia was actually quite stable (China dominated traditional Asia under Yuan and Ming dynasties, and only one more change to the Qing until the current regime, which basically has the same borders), India and Pakistan were basically India and Pakistan before they had those names (and even after the British moved in, and out, little changed there), Japan is Japan is Japan, Africa was largely left alone since the fall of Rome. What happened in the 16th century that changed everything was Spain started flexing some serious economic expansion that largely defined the world as we know it. New worlds were discovered, the balance of land power was thrown away, and everyone else was left saying we better get something or were out a chair when the music stops. The short version of the story is simply until then, the Roman Catholic Church ruled the world de facto through its divine right sovereigns. The Reformation occurred, sovereigns still had divine right, but along with the Church (instead of from, very important distinction), so Spain (and to a lesser extent Portugal) got the gold, France got the resources, England got the trade, Germany got Europe, Russia got the rest, and Islam got what nobody else wanted (including the holy land). The next 400 years were basically an exercise of that formula on a global scale. What really tipped the balance was the United States, which prior to the 20th century had been just another nation state, now was an actual world power. More than that, some of the countries decided to start playing unfair (mostly England and the United States), and were waging economic war instead of shoot-to-kill war. China became decimated economically, various European countries became decimated economically, Islam became decimated economically, and the strongest power in the respective region just started seizing assets (Russia gobbled up its neighbors, Germany gobbled up its neighbors, Japan started gobbling up its neighbors, and the US and England sort of did...just more economically than anything else). A lot of territories that were independent/autonomous states for several hundred years, now had a flag. And very soon after had wars. Real wars. Kill everybody in a country wars. And we like to pretend that we dont exist in that world anymore, but when weve had unfriendly governments, what have we done? Regime change. When Russia had unfriendly government, what did they do? Regime change. As long as the world still operates this way, autonomy doesnt really work. Countries Belgium and Holland (otherwise known as sometimes Germany) dont really survive in WW environments. The short version, we need more Canadas and Australias, and less United Statess and Russias. Otherwise, this bullshit is just going to continue. So Crimea, Catalonia, Scotland, etc. going independent? Good. Those places being gobbled up by other countries? Bad.
Posted on: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 15:57:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015