4 ms·

>a more integrated Earth yes, that's the ultimate fate of our civilization - becoming a gray biological mass of consumers without identity, culture, or allegia

>a more integrated Earth yes, that's the ultimate fate of our civilization - becoming a gray biological mass of consumers without identity, culture, or allegiance to anything other than global corporations I'd prefer us to go extinct, and it is thankfully certain that we will

henearkr 4y ago
You misunderstood me. I mean partitioning or integration of LAWS. This is exactly what "creating a state" means: having one's own law, which I think is bad. Good laws are most effective when they are enforced without borders. Of course I did not mean to uniformize people!! As for the link with groupism: partitioned laws are the starting point, you say "people from this state have those rights, people from other states do not have these rights even when they interact with our state". With this notion of network state, it is even unclear to me how they can discriminate what law apply to who, because there is no more "person X is geographically present on the land Y so Y law applies" principle.
- stale2002 4y ago
  You are missing the point though. Some people prefer certain laws, and other people prefer different ones. And there can be a case whether neither set of laws is automatically "better". For example, private property rights in an interesting topic. Personally, I prefer strong private property rights, but I have no reason to deny another country from choosing something completely different. If people in another country, instead prefer socialism, or more collective ownership of property, that is fine by me if they do that, as long as they let other people who disagree, choose something else in other countries.
- betwixthewires 4y ago
  Good laws are most effective when they take into account the needs of those being governed, including their self actualization as a need. The way that people in Mongolia, Bahrain, Angola and Norway want to live are very very different. "One set of laws" means authoritarian tyranny to most people of earth. Would you like to live in a world governed by one set of laws, which include theft being punishable by the amputation of a hand? Or in your perfect world with one set of laws, do you see yourself as the entity dictating what the laws are? If I am unhappy with your set of laws, is that just tough shit for me? If you found yourself in such a system and didn't like the laws, would you want a way out?

henearkr 4y ago

You misunderstood me. I mean partitioning or integration of LAWS. This is exactly what "creating a state" means: having one's own law, which I think is bad. Good laws are most effective when they are enforced without borders. Of course I did not mean to uniformize people!! As for the link with groupism: partitioned laws are the starting point, you say "people from this state have those rights, people from other states do not have these rights even when they interact with our state". With this notion of network state, it is even unclear to me how they can discriminate what law apply to who, because there is no more "person X is geographically present on the land Y so Y law applies" principle.

stale2002 4y ago
You are missing the point though. Some people prefer certain laws, and other people prefer different ones. And there can be a case whether neither set of laws is automatically "better". For example, private property rights in an interesting topic. Personally, I prefer strong private property rights, but I have no reason to deny another country from choosing something completely different. If people in another country, instead prefer socialism, or more collective ownership of property, that is fine by me if they do that, as long as they let other people who disagree, choose something else in other countries.
betwixthewires 4y ago
Good laws are most effective when they take into account the needs of those being governed, including their self actualization as a need. The way that people in Mongolia, Bahrain, Angola and Norway want to live are very very different. "One set of laws" means authoritarian tyranny to most people of earth. Would you like to live in a world governed by one set of laws, which include theft being punishable by the amputation of a hand? Or in your perfect world with one set of laws, do you see yourself as the entity dictating what the laws are? If I am unhappy with your set of laws, is that just tough shit for me? If you found yourself in such a system and didn't like the laws, would you want a way out?