they weren't unified because "lul you know what would be gucci?"

With Liberalism people become disconnected from their nations as a whole so it's not suprising they start to unify over a common threat

I doubt the world would fully unite the instant communism becomes fully global, but it would eventually happen once the world is "prepared" to unite

Liberalism in practice posits that man is an atomized individual divided from his surroundings.

A Consumer, simply put

China, Japan, Finland, Germany. All of them have further unified, not drifted further apart. There's no longer any Aizu Domain or Matsumae Domain; there's no longer several kingdoms vying for power in China. The various independent cliques of Germany are in practice gone, as are the various tribes of Finland that used to be hostile to one another and very, very separate.

....

what did i say?

do you think they unified just because?

Nations themselves *emerged* as repudiation of earlier forms of separation

its built-in to the very concept of nation

i'm not talking about nations

*then why do you want their destruction for that one ethnos?*

Wait are you talking to me?

i'm talking about why do you think we're unifying

they unified due to material and technical conditions; there was incentive towards unification, threats from foreign lands and further internal prosperity

@ImATomato yes, but i'm talking to the finngolian

>they unified due to material and technical conditions; there was incentive towards unification,

Derived from what?

> threats from foreign lands and further internal prosperity

whay do we call this?

greed=

what happened here?

marxist clusterfuck

w e w

And the same exact pressures are present today, albeit in a different form, pushing towards ever greater unification of the various countries of the earth. There's immense incentive towards ever-closer association of nations. The ***only question*** is how this will look like, on what terms this is achieved.

we're talking about how nations are coming togetehr rather than spreading apart

you're not answering my questions

can't see that happening any time soon

you're using the idea of unification through force as your reasoning

and also as a means from struggle

wait, what the fuck?

Cut to the chase, makes for a better conversation @aymem

these are terrible points to yoru argument

wouldn't unification through force only breed more resentment and hatred of communism?

the unification is happening fast without communism, and on real shit terms

i'm sorry but your argument for unification (and the examples you used are recent) are of forced unifications, imperialism and or struggle from enemies and then a solidified union but evercrumbling

>the unification is happening fast without communism, and on real shit terms


oh but this isn't because of capitalism or liberalism or le bourgeoisie?

that aforementioned union ain't gonna last long before it experiences some Yugoslav-esque collapse except much more bloody

it's nature?

how is such a unification occurring now?

Four i dont think i've answered your question, I dont wish to destroy ethnos I only wish to subvert the elements of nationhood in order to unite people into functional societies.

the examples he used were through force

Japan looks pretty consolidated, as does Germany and Finland. So I say that the unification that happened in these countries was quite irreversible. I don't know why the future unifications that follow same incentive trajectory wouldn't be also.

@ImATomato I don't mind, I'm guessing you mean trying to mix the cultures together to make one or something, idk