A borderless world – when and how?

[funkervogt]

Didn't China fall behind Europe because the latter was made up of many countries that competed with each other and had different rules and priorities? For example, when Christopher Columbus wanted money for his voyage in 1492, the Italian government declined, but he was able to go to Spain and get their patronage. However, China's government burned its fleet of deep water ships, abandoned all interest in world exploration and became isolationist, so a Columbus-like explorer in China would have had no way of raising government money.

With that in mind, wouldn't it be a bad idea for Earth to be one country (whether ruled by humans or an AI)?

[Doozer]

I think a key factor in making one would be if they were able to pull of the construction of an orbital elevator or two. They will be able to build homes in them, allowing millions of surface-dwellers to migrate into space and there will be way more free space (no pun intended) on Earth.

[R8Z]

I think many in this thread are confusing a borderless world with a "single-border" (nation) world. The former would only exist through advancing
technology and cultural advancement, but the latter could already exist to some extent with current violence technology (e.g nuking opponents and silencing dissenters). A "borderless world" with a single mafia ruling it is nightmare-fuel.

[weatheriscool]

Let's be honest...Humans are tribal and literally fight over everything and can't stand to be around each other with even the slightest differences of opinion or genetic make-up. No, a borderless world is very bad idea. It is probably more likely that more nations will form as people will fight to break up the middle east, Africa and even here In America in the future.

[wjfox]

Let's be honest...Humans are tribal and literally fight over everything and can't stand to be around each other with even the slightest differences of opinion or genetic make-up. No, a borderless world is very bad idea. It is probably more likely that more nations will form as people will fight to break up the middle east, Africa and even here In America in the future.

But in a post-scarcity world, what would we fight over? And with our planet becoming ever more connected, international, and globalised, how can you claim that people "can't stand to be around each other"?

To reiterate what I said before – a borderless world is a bad idea now, when resources are scarce and we're still trying to understand and respect each others' cultures. But we're talking about the distant future, when human society is a lot more advanced and homogenous. I can imagine the middle or latter parts of this millennium being like the Star Trek universe, where everyone is just accepted, war and poverty have been eliminated and technology can provide abundance.

[Tadasuke]

I think that European Union will be a federation by 2040-2045 (boomers will be out of politics by that time) and I think that all wars by cease to happen by around 2110-2120, when we all (meaning all humankind) enter our post-scarcity future.

People of the past waged wars because:
1) they were bored - their lives lacked nuance or hobbies
2) their lives were full of scarcity, including inter-war Germany or Italy for example
3) people were intolerant of other religions and cultures
4) they had no video games to prove themselves in

Future generations will be too occupied with VR to start wars. I know I probably will, let alone kids born in 2020, growing up with iPads and iGlasses.

So even if there is no borderless world by 2120, there will be no wars, because there will be no incentives for wars anymore. All people by 2120 will receive unconditional universal income.

[Doozer]

A world without borders will go against human nature. We are a tribalistic and territorial species.

[wjfox]

We are a tribalistic and territorial species.

Yeah, but why is that? It's usually down to resources/scarcity/economic concerns. A post-scarcity world, which we are ultimately heading towards, is a very different world. And furthermore – racial, cultural, and genetic intermingling will only increase over time, not decrease. This will be especially apparent when countries begin to experience population crashes due to declining fertility and need to relax their immigration policies. In the more distant future we'll also have lifelike androids and other new entities who'll be more influential and less concerned with tribalism.

[funkervogt]

We are a tribalistic and territorial species.

Yeah, but why is that? It's usually down to resources/scarcity/economic concerns. A post-scarcity world, which we are ultimately heading towards, is a very different world. And furthermore – racial, cultural, and genetic intermingling will only increase over time, not decrease. This will be especially apparent when countries begin to experience population crashes due to declining fertility and need to relax their immigration policies. In the more distant future we'll also have lifelike androids and other new entities who'll be more influential and less concerned with tribalism.

Tribalism might ease for the reasons you raise, but it won't go away. It's ingrained in human nature.

The U.S. is a rich country full of enormous opportunities for everyone, and yet its people still find things to fight over and to divide into opposing sides over.

[rennerpetey]

Tribalism might ease for the reasons you raise, but it won't go away. It's ingrained in human nature.

The U.S. is a rich country full of enormous opportunities for everyone, and yet its people still find things to fight over and to divide into opposing sides over.

perhaps, but I think the story of political development since the enlightenment is one of overcoming the human instincts that hold us back as conscious beings. I think the concept of the 'nation' is on the decline. It's certainly not dead and won't be for a long time but already academia, and eventually all of humanity, will move beyond the need for nation states. Obviously the more we work together as a civilization the more efficient we are so I think the natural inclination over time will be international integration. We've seen the integrations trends already begin as the world today is so much more 'globalist' than it was 100 years ago. Inversely the concept of a nation is only really 2 or 3 hundred years old and we are already seeing strong anti-nationalist trends across the globe (European Union, American ethnic social justice movements, the rise of global near free trade, etc...).