Skepticism of nationalism is understandable but based, I think, on a flawed understanding of human tribal tendencies. The nation is likely the best unit for creating democratically responsive governance.
The city-state might be more responsive than the nation.
-
-
I’m open to living in modern city-states.
-
The city-state is more responsive at first, but it inevitably either becomes the capital of an empire or is absorbed by another empire. Both are anti-democratic outcomes, making the democracies of city-states ephemeral.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It could be, but city-states cannot function any more than a nation with a cosmopolitan ruling class. It requires real roots and loyalty to ordinary people to make either work.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes but it might also create externalities for its immediate neighbors, which a (nation) state could in theory internalize.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Every decreasing level of community is more responsive. The larger the group, the harder it is to cater to the individual needs, which is just basic logic. It's probably at least partly why we naturally organize into smaller tribes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.