Will there ever be another major war between European powers again?

[KrazyHorse]

Ah. It's beginning to fall together now.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Kucinich


Not at all. I'd be horrified if people my age got the vote.

um . . . .


I meant that it's ****ed up because teeangers will get to vote.

[Kuciwalker]

Oh, OK then

[MrFun]

Now that the smoke has cleared out of your head, onto other things.

[East Street Trader]

Originally posted by Kucinich
It seems inevitable that under any federal system, the question of sovereignty will come up and must be decided by force of arms.

It is true that nation states have regularly decided issues that arise between them through wars.

But that is just what has happened in the past. Whether it happens in the future or not will be decided by us.

There is no "must" about it.

Nor do we lack for an alternative choice. Because it is not only nation states who engage in disputes. On the contrary individuals and groups routinely find themselves at odds with other individuals and groups. Disputes are commonplace. And such disputes - unlike those between nation states - are not resolved by armed conflict.

Instead the parties find an impartial (and hopefully wise) person to arbitrate between them. Indeed we go further and devise codes of law which both help to limit the number of disputes and encapsulate such wisdom as we have so as to facilitate the process of resolving those which nevertheless arise.

This is not special to any particular place or race, it has been universal in human society for a long time.

There is no reason at all why the process cannot be extended so as to be employed in disputes between nations.

And there are some signs that willingness to submit to a rule of law is gradually emerging among nations. Signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights have accepted the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights for many years now, a court enforces the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and we are beginning to establish international tribunals which judge the actions of political leaders who step outside the bounds of our common humanity.

There is even a slight movement towards acknowledging a moral force in UN resolutions. I have noticed that people now talk of actions which breach a resolution as "unlawful".

You pick on the disputes which can arise between states which enter a federation. Of course the civil war in the USA is an instance of federated states falling out so badly they go to war with each other. But federation is actually something which is done to reduce the likelihood of such conflict. And which is mostly succesful in doing so. Employing the same means - a system of law and arbitration to resolve disputes between an individual state and the federation at large.

The European Union is a sort of federation and that is the place in the world where the process of nation states submitting to a rule of law has been taken the furthest. Progressively more of the legal advice I give is advice about Europe wide law which binds the governments of all European countries as well as binding individuals.

To take the view that there always have been war so there always will be seems to me to be timid. Based on an altogether too unambitious view of our species. We have advanced an incredibly long way in just a couple of thousand years. And the pace at which we continue to advance is breathe taking. Off the back of that we are fully entitled to take an ambitious view about our capabilities and our future prospects.

There are challenges to face. The stars beckon and meanwhile we must be sure that we do not inadvertantly wreck our beautiful planet. Learning how to live together without war is certainly one of the challenges.

It is not beyond us.