Looking at this of 1900 and meditating on what a country is

There’s something less chaotic with all these unities here in 1900. I look at Switzerland and think “Do you have to be like that? Just merge!” Something more “organized” about fewer countries. Do you get that at all? Just instinctively. Seeing Belgium or Romania for instance as “troublemakers”, “nonconformists”. “What are you trying to prove, just agree.” Maybe countries are about agreements and disagreements. What would you say the Being of Country-itself is if you were a kid just looking at a map for the first time? Just seems like it would be “simpler” (in a good way) if Germany and Austria-Hungary were one instead of two. And what’s Denmark doing up there, pouting, crossing its arms? Why doesn’t it want to be Germany? A Dane reading this might be thinking, “Oh I’ll tell ya why!” Might be similar to the way a Canadian would correct someone if they mislabeled them as an American. “Ah hell no I’m not one of those.” Countries seem to be based in a sort of… well what word is more appropriate?… racism. I don’t actively try to look at everything as about racism, I try to relook at the world as if for the first time and that seems like a recurrent–even guiding–theme. I was talking about Ukraine yesterday – where is that on the above map? Apparently they have a history of agreement with Russia.

See all these disagreements we have?

At the same time we sort of do have a more “organized” unity, or union rather

I see Switzerland in the middle and now in this context don’t see it as a “troublemaker”, now I see it as brave, “individualist”. Is that what countries are, individualists? What’s with all the blue above then? Feels the same in the US, just a solid block of “agreement”, without even a troublemaker like Switzerland or the UK, let alone a Russia. Some of the less timid ones of the rightwing might count as a UK. I mean the kind that don’t even believe in democracy and aren’t afraid to say it–so rare that maybe that’s like our own Monaco, as I’ve said recently. I’m looking at this map after my meditation and the initial map I posted and I’ve flipped perspectives from feeling an instinctive “will to unity” to wondering what the point of having an independent country is if you don’t have any substantial disagreements with those at your borders. Might as well be one country if that is the case. So? And same could be said of the States of the United States. None of them substantially disagree with the solid block of agreers? Where are the States, where are the independent countries? All these hundreds of millions of euro-peoples couldn’t possibly agree enough to live in One State, which is basically the reality of today. And if people who disagreed had to live in that One State I bet they wouldn’t like it very much. I wonder how many in total disagree with the basic premises of this One State. At least a hundred million is my guess. A hundred million people who want to live in their own country – there’s certainly enough land to make that possible, we’d just have to do some rearranging. “Countries” are disagreements, to disagree is to be human, they don’t want us to be human.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: