Which one do you suggest as the axis for unity?

[C130]

 

[Arminkh]

Whilst I agree with your contention about external stimuli enforcing unity however this alone fails to explain everything. The subject we are talking about is a complex of so many variables operating, impacting on and being impacted by the social matrix of the country.

Take for example Canada. It is a extremely successful state yet you would struggle to find any external threat to it's existance. Also the borders are about as artificial as you can get, Most of it just a plain ruler line running along the lattitude. The border divides exactly similar cultures, peoples, languages, religion between USA and Canada.

Then you have the multiethnic Switzerland which has three languages and three ethnic groups. Yet despite this it has been also a very succcessful state. I might add here that the Swiss have not been really been exposed to external threats as much as many other European countries.

On the other hand, Somalia is primarily one ethnic group country, one religion yet has collapsed. So this should tell us that we need to revisit our model of "axis of unity". I think we need to look at other factors.

(i) The state must enjoy absolute sanction - By this I mean the state must have at it's disposal sufficient power to crush any groups or challanges to it's writ. In other words absolute power. This can only be possible if the state has access to sufficient economic means as to be able to sustain the instrument of absolute power. In other words the military arm.

(ii) Even with (i) in place there should exist a compact between the indivduel and the state which requires the following.
(a) That the state shall deliver social and economic justice. In practical this means making sure that the safety of the citizens, social, economic health of the indviduels are safeguarded and enabled.

I think these above requirements are the most important. As long as these are met that state will remain stable. Canada and Swizerlandare fine examples where they have been very successful on both (i) and (ii) and you can see the stability there.

Of course if you have similar culture, similar language , similar race that can lubricate everything. However by itself that is insufficient as case of Somalia shows.

***
Now a word or two about European Union. I bought a tropical plant last year. Year later it is in my living room next to the window and it has grown quite large as it grew along the trellis I secured to the wall.. In the safety of my warm room, me watering every day the plant has flourished. In the same way European Union ( EU ) is a product of various factors.

One being a common shared civilization (Western ) all have this Greco-Roman myth and firmy regard they are secular products of a Christian evolution of the Greco-Roman tradition. However all these countries were not long ago busy fighting and in state of constant rivalry similar to how we are now in our part of the world.

The unity you see today was nurtured by America. USA provided the military muscle in Westen Europe that defeated Germany. At the end of WW2 almost every West European country had US Army units that either had liberated those countries or had been deployed their in defeating Germany.

Thus Europe came under American military wing including West Germany. Eastern Europe came under Russian military control. Under US military power and the backbone provided by it European Union took root in the Franco-German alliance which evolved into what we see today.

However never let be fooled that this EU grew like my plant under the wing provided by US military backbone which itself has evolved into the NATO. Therefore EC is just a extention of USA and collectively we can call it the Western World. Uncle Sam is literally uncle of these Western countries. You in Iran should know that. If USA says no trade with Iran you will see most of the West fall in line.

The problem is in our part of the world we don't have such a "big boss" who will impose unity. We as countries are just going to have to mature and slowly build a block because we are now living in the age of "super-state". Sadly in our part of the world we have barely moved past tribal, sectarian, ethinc lines. Probably Iran and Turkey are at the level of "national state" with Turkey just about on the cusp of moving into the European super state.

This can be seen how they are slowly changing their laws in tune with EU. also in Europe the people are slowly being converted to the idea of Turkey being "European". Maybe 10 or 20 years time Turkey will be in EU. Even the Turkish membership is being pushed by American's.

I think EC will than erect it's final frontier on the Turk/Iran border. Azerbaijhan will also go down the EU route and is being prepared for that.

I think you are mixing up the a government with actual unity.

What I mean by unity is the state in which most of the members of the society feel the urge to stick together. What you mentioned will make up a strong government but doesn't necessarily buy its citizens attention and heart.

I still think what I said is true and if you read about the history of the countries that you named, you sill see the effect of external threat and challenges in their formation.

Canada is a strong country, true. But is it united? I'm not sure. There are people in one of its biggest provinces (Quebec) who have attempted several times to become independent. They already have had a poll and lost closely. So in other words, nothing has tested the unity of Canada yet. Would Canada survive a civil war like that of USA? You also need to understand that the reason that these provinces are sticking together is they do better and survive better together. Canada has a population of only 30 million. Some of its provinces have less than 5 million population. Some of them are actually really poor. Newfoundland was a British territory that they simply abandoned after WWII. Nobody else wanted it so Canada annexed it into one of its provinces. That should tell you how low in resources that province is. They can't survive alone. So in case of Canada, the provinces have joined each other in answer to a simple challenge: to survive and strive. On the other hand Quebec is highly industrialized and has a population of 8.2 million. It feels confident that it can survive on its own and there you go, you see independence movements.

External threats are not the only cause of unity. Challenges are too. Greek civilization was formed in response to the challenge of surviving in the rocky and mountainous landscape of Greece. Single, tiny tribes here and there were doomed to fail. Same is true for Switzerland. They are living in a mountainous area which used to have very harsh winters (I'm not sure if it is still the case with all crazy weather). It is such a resource-less piece of land that no one has ever bothered to even invade them. They need to stick together to survive. In this case cause of unity is a challenge not threat.

Somalia on the other hand is an example of those countries that shouldn't even exist if it was not because of other countries decisions. It was always been part of another power's territory up to WWII when it was divided into Italian Somalia and British Somalia. Then the two European countries decided to let it become independent and form a state. No threats, no challenges, no unity and there you see how well it is doing.

 

[scythian500]

Few nations are united over nationality or race or religion... Although all nations are united in certain degrees...

What can make a group of people UNITED is a set of common feelings... like:

- When same people feel they are under oppression of someone or some country..

- When people feel they have no choice but to be united otherwise, they will face extermination (Jews, Kurds, Shia, etc)

Although there are always exceptions... for example, Iran is almost united influenced by and around Shia, Iranian historical greatness and racism toward other nations, their bad feeling toward certain nations (like UK, ISrael as people feel they are backstabbed by them). In last 35 years, IRanian real policy planners used all or some of these elements to make people feel united... The factors of HOME and Religion are two most driving forces for Iranians..as it is known that attacking Iran will unite its people even more...

 

[Arminkh]

Few nations are united over nationality or race or religion... Although all nations are united in certain degrees...

What can make a group of people UNITED is a set of common feelings... like:

- When same people feel they are under oppression of someone or some country..

- When people feel they have no choice but to be united otherwise, they will face extermination (Jews, Kurds, Shia, etc)

Although there are always exceptions... for example, Iran is almost united influenced by and around Shia, Iranian historical greatness and racism toward other nations, their bad feeling toward certain nations (like UK, ISrael as people feel they are backstabbed by them). In last 35 years, IRanian real policy planners used all or some of these elements to make people feel united... The factors of HOME and Religion are two most driving forces for Iranians..as it is known that attacking Iran will unite its people even more...

I have never thought of Iranian as racists and have not seen it in action. Did you mean nationalism?

 

[VCheng]

Which one do you suggest as the axis for unity?

Where is the option C: Money ?

 

[Arminkh]

Where is the option C: Money ?

Money is not a cause of unity because if you can buy someones loyalty by money, then you'd loose him to someone else who would pay more.

 

[scythian500]

l

I have never thought of Iranian as racists and have not seen it in action. Did you mean nationalism?

I apologies if they are not... This was my perception... maybe it is changed... Iranian average people treatment of refugees are not something to be proud of... you know what I mean..