Social Advancement

DOn't think the title does the this entry any justice, but it was as close as it could get. Anyway one day I was at 68 talking to a tourist. The tourist was from Australia, and we had a long interesting three hour conversation on politics, etc. Anyway we began talking about how the world is rapidly changing, and how people are really more connected to one another than ever before. Throughout this conversation the theme of a culture war(which one professor which I will not mention names refuses to recognize that a culture war goes beyond what was going on in the 1960s. of course that was a culture war, but this doesn't pertain to what is happening now) continued to appear. The old way vs. the new way of doing things. Why older generations seem to be more into nationalism than the younger generation. People can say that it means young people simply do not have patriotism for their Nation-State. This would be true, but as the conversation got interesting we began to question if there really is a need for the current nation-state system we have. The trend right now seems to be going towards regional blocks and eventually world government. We can find plenty of conspiracy theories on world government and how its a horrible horrible horrible thing that under minds the tried and true tradition of national sovereignty. Then you realize the nation-state system and the idea of sovereignty are quite a recent development. People in the year 1230 didn't really care much about the country they lived in. The kingdom they were from unless they had some stake in it, unless they were the nobles, or the elites, or in the military. Even to be in the military in some kingdoms/countries you needed to be born in a certain social class. Most people simply only have allegiance to their local communities and paid their taxes to their gov't when the gov't wanted it, otherwise the gov't wasn't so prevailing to make them go die for their country. The Roman Empire had to promise its soldiers citizenship for them and their offspring before they would go fight, and die for Rome. The same is said today. But the concept of total war(where the entire society is expected to participate and contribute to the war effort for their nation's victory) is also a very recent modern phenomenon. The whole point of our conversation was that it is possible that in this decade we are seeing early signs of nationalism being seen as unimportant by the younger generation. Mind you 68 is a bar for students, and of course it is a place where you can see someone from Georgia having a drink with someone from Russia, etc etc. My point is simply the 21st century may be this crucial moment where people will be more connected with each other, can see what is in common with each other and can appreciate the differences. Quite possibly challenging the concept of nationalism, and the nation-state system. Simply put we see what is happening is currently a failure, with neoliberal economic policies more people are simply able to move more freely, and communicate a lot easier. It may not end up like 1984 George Orwell according to many who are conspiracy theorist. Quite possibly people will continue to question the current political system, and might find new solutions to old problems. This doesn't mean the 21st century will be the century where a world gov't forms. I have high doubts about this happening simply because at the moment we have no common enemy, and its hard for us to collectively see our common goals, and the current nation-state system is well current. You still need a passport to travel, people are still treated according to their country's economic status even if they have a high social status at home. But the whole gist of our conversation simply was this: "Governments tend to lag behind the people in progress." (Aussie Tourist Dude)
Simply put people may see more in common with each other, and even if their home countries are at war with each other, they are less likely to go at each others throat(younger generation) simply because there is a mutual understanding that their governments are at war with each other not the people, and there is also a understanding that the people have little influence on what their gov'ts choose to do concerning their foreign policy. While this mutual understanding isn't completely universal. AS there are still plenty of places where people are less educated, and more nationalistic. For the most part, people who have access to information that the previous generation didn't have are becoming more aware of what is going on in world politics. This isn't some kind of wild counter-culture revolution, but quite possibly within the next 90 years nationalism will not be the banner that everybody can easily get behind, but of course this is still too early to make such a statement, and I am only stating that form my perspective nationalism will have a less prominent role in our daily lives. I tend to avoid this topic because it is within one of my least liked subjects(Sociology). But no matter what you're into all subjects eventually have some connection with Sociology especially if you're dealing with people, and statistics.