How Succession will undo Centuries of Conquest
The world changed forever on August 6th, 1945 when the USA dropped an atomic bomb on Japan1. This day marks the decisive conclusion of centuries of conquest. Few people understood the fundamental significance of that day. Tragically, Japan’s refusal to surrender resulted in the loss of Nagasaki when the USA dropped a second nuclear bomb a couple of days later2.
Many observers of WWI prematurely predicted that it was the end of military conquest. WWI was infamously known as the “War to End All Wars”3. However, like an unsinkable ship that sinks, these predictions were humiliatingly false. The invention of the nuclear weapons, however, permanently assures the end of global conquest.
What about the Cold War?
The cold war showed that nuclear weapons didn’t end warfare altogether. However, since WWII, warfare has dramatically changed. Instead of large scale mobilizations with many millions of combatants, these wars primarily involved waring factions within a single nation. And even on that limited basis, the Soviet Union struggled to justify the enormous cost of war4.
It took the Russians decades to fully comprehend the post nuclear reality. Despite the long learning curve, they eventually reached the same conclusion that most nations reached in 1945. Wars of conquest had become futile, especially on a global scale. Instead of yielding glory and prestige, like it did prior to industrialization, warfare results in mass causalities and complete destruction.
Rise of the Nation State
Prior to WWII, small nations merged into modern nation states and empires. Some were peaceful like the United Kingdom5, Italy, and Germany6. Others not so much. The Russian and Ottoman Empires expanded with wars of conquest. During this same period, of course, colonization was endemic. By the start of WWI, virtually all of Africa was under the control of a European empire or wannabe empire7.
In many cases, the mergers were only skin deep. Sure, the governments were unified, but most people remained loyal to traditional languages, cultures, and national identities. This is true for colonies and in homelands. The United Kingdom is an excellent example. To this day, nobody identifies as person of UK nationality. Instead, it is either Scottish, Welsh, English, etc.
Divorce Takes Time
With conquest a relic of the past, what keeps the merger of these nations together? The modern answer is not much. Like the fall of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, divorce from the nation states is only a matter of time8. Since 1990 and the fall of the Soviet Union, over 30 new nations have emerged9. Even though most of those are in Eastern Europe, the trend to break into smaller, less-diverse countries is truly an international phenomenon.
Some notable examples include: 1) Quebec from Canada, 2) Scotland from UK, 3) Catalonia from Spain, 4) Mapuche from Chile and Argentina, 5) Darfur from Sudan, and 6) Hong Kong from China. This list is only the tip of the iceberg. And as more people gain independence, more will surely follow.
What about the Super Powers?
It is one thing to speculate about secession from a small, weak nation. However, it is entirely different when the mega-nations are involved. All three of them (China, Russia and USA) have fought wars to prevent secession. And there is no reason to believe future conflicts will be any different. Tibet has as much a chance for independence as Chechnya does, which is to say no chance at all10. Same with any state in the USA that decides to go it alone.
On the flip side, each mega-nation would be happy to see secession in the other mega-nations. After all, the only way these nuclear armed mega-nations will fall is from within. If America really wants to defeat China, its best strategy is to assist with the breakup of China. It is no coincident that many people in Hong Kong yearn for American style democracy11.
If you Can’t Beat Them, Break Them Apart
Unfortunately, China isn’t the only place with interference from the USA. Secession can be a good thing, but not if the resultant country yields sovereignty to globalism and multinational corporations. Not only has the USA actively broken apart countries in the past, it continues to do so today.
Panama was created in 1903 for the purpose of building a canal and the wealth generated by the canal. America also played a significant role in 2011 with the independence of South Sudan. The support granted to South Sudan as opposed to Darfur is striking (both are located in Sudan proper). Guess which area has large oil reserves12.
Conclusion
Since the development mankind-ending technology, wars of conquest have become obsolete. For the first time in human history, it doesn’t pay to conquer your enemies. Instead, the trend towards breaking apart empires and nations of old will continue. And I believe the pace of separation will accelerate.
Not only do people yearn for homogenous societies, everybody wants greater political control of their lives. In the past, smaller nations were happy to forgo sovereignty for the perceived safe of nation states. Ironically, over time the larger states became the most unstable and warlike. Now, many regions would like to break off from their parent countries and return to smaller, more cohesive societies.
It is hard to see this trend reversing. Besides maybe Korea, I can’t think of a single place that wants to merge into a larger country. Ultimately, freedom, and personal liberty will increase as governments shrink, especially since smaller nations will have to work harder to attract scarce capital. It is safe to conclude that the number of countries will continue to increase, which will bring peace and prosperity to more and more people.
Concordia
In the book, Concordia, There Must be a Better Way, a new nation is formed by means of a peaceful succession from Chile. In this counter-factual scenario, the hero of the book, Paul Walters, takes great pains to assure that succession benefits both the new nation of Concordia and the Chilean government. He recognizes that without incentives for politicians and voters his project would have been dead on arrival.
What would you do if you had the opportunity to start from scratch? How would you balance freedom, liberty, and justice, while assuring that investors are rewarded for taking a risk on your enterprise.
To found out what happens, buy the book now on Amazon. It is an exciting novel that challenges your assumptions and entertains you in the process.
Recommend Reading
Support my blog with the purchase of one of these excellent books. I get a tiny commission for each purchase, but only if you purchase using one the links below.
