![]() ![]() No matter the political party in power, and no matter the policies, rules and laws that are imposed, there is a significant minority, or in some cases majority, forced to submit to a politics to which they do not consent. One of the problems afflicting nations today is the growing polarization between those on the political left and right, between capitalist and socialist, and between those who favor freedom and those who prefer authoritarian rule. Why have decentralized political units been so common throughout history? Could it be that this form of political organization is congruent with human nature and conducive to individual and societal flourishing? To explore this idea, let’s envisage some of the problems that a decentralized world might solve. “It is striking to re-read history with eyes opened to the persistence of this tradition, because at once you begin to see the existence of the anti-authoritarian, independent, self-regulating, local community is every bit as basic to the human record as the existence of the centralized, imperial, hierarchical state, and far more ancient, more durable, and more widespread.” Kirkpatrick Sale, Human Scale Revisited From the Ancient Greek city-states to the thousand-year European Middle Ages, to the colonies of Pennsylvania and New England in early America, to Switzerland from the 12th to 18th century, the historical examples of politically decentralized regions are plentiful. Even in the last 6000 years, large centralized systems – be they kingdoms or empires – have been an anomaly. The anthropologist Robert Carneiro estimates that for 99.8 percent of human history small and decentralized political units have been the norm. The modern nation-state, encompassing vast land areas and millions upon millions of people, was born in Europe in the mid-17 th century, and this form of political organization is a historical aberration. ![]() It seems to lie in the elimination of those overgrown organisms that go by the name of great powers, and in the restoration of a healthy system of small and easily manageable states such as characterized earlier ages.” Leopold Kohr, The Breakdown of Nations ![]() “…the solution of the problems confronting the world as a whole does not seem to lie in the creation of still bigger social units and still vaster governments whose formation is now attempted with such unimaginative fanaticism by our statesmen. In his book The Breakdown of Nations, the 20 th century economist and political scientist Leopold Kohr wrote: Should the states and provinces of nations separate and become politically autonomous? Should counties, cities, and communities do the same? What is the optimal size of a political unit? In this video, we are going to explore why the nation-states that populate the world are too big, and why decentralization – not voting different politicians into power – is the cure to many of the social and political problems that ail us. “…the world would be most happily governed if it consisted not of a few aggregations…with their accompaniments of despotism and tyrannic rule, but of a society of small States.” Saint Augustine, The Political Aspects of Saint Augustine’s City of God The following is a transcript of this video. Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window).Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window).Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window). ![]() Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window).Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window).Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |