PAST EFFORTS AT JOINDER

POLITICAL

As i have attempted to demonstrate previosly, it appears that ideas regarding, and tendencies toward, joining together and creating unity have long existed within the mind of man.  As far back in time as 7000 BC, we see a large group of people choosing to reside together, and to build a great walled city for this purpose, which they called Jericho.  This testimony to our need and desire to exist in union with one another has been repeated afterward countless times. 

As has also been described previously, people having desire to lead and to conquer have, in so doing, repeatedly created large domains, or empires, comprised of ever-larger numbers of people under their respective rules.  During the twenty-fourth centurs BC, Sargon I subjugated Sumer, and founded an empire which extended from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf.  This form of assemblage of a large uniform political entity has been exhibited again numerous times over the centuries, and has continued into our present era.

A prime example of this concept of "empire"would be the Roman domain, which came into being around 31 BC, and existed until late in the fifth century AD.  It has been said that the Empire was composed of a politically united population composed of just about everyone in the Western world during those years.  They were members of a single political entity, and, as such, enjoyed a uniform civilization, as well as centuries of internal peace.

Comprising a later example of unifying a group of people, Norman kings imposed a centralized and efficient form of mastery upon their subjects in eleventh century England.  Possessing a good deal of power and authority, they were able to produce a substantial amount of civil tranquility, domestic order, and personal security within their realm.  In the late fifteenth century, the Habsburg rulers applied similar centralized ruling principles within the Holy Roman Empire.

In western Europe, this development into nations progressed to comprise a "supra-societal system."  As per the aforesaid, concerning the Norman kings, England appears to have been the initial factor in this process.  In becoming a nation, England had itself progressed from a rather backward society torn by internal conflict into what would be eventually described as the greatest economic and political power in Europe.  Now, other societies sought relationship with England.  Comprising a growing group, these societies needed to themselves consolidate into nations, which they eventually did.  During that period, the populace of each of these early "states" (or groups of sovereign peoples) were wsaid to possess unique and distinguishing political, territorial, and/or ethnic qualities.  Today, however, further progress within our world has operated to blur and erase these singular unique characteristic variations.  It is as if the next step in this dvelopmental process, into but one super-society, has begun to naturally occur, and is continuing to evolve.

These early forms of consolidation and organization did demonstrate their value.  Europe has been described as having been racked by chronic and marauding violence, and in danger of falling into a state of overall chaos, had not the emergence of these assertions of power and the resultant births of the various nation-states rescued the situation with its consequent imposition of order and authority upon their respective peoples, where there previously had been little or none. 

Then, in a further development which took place during the seventeenth century, the entity which was the state began to be regarded as having a separate existence of its own--separate from that of the persons of their respective monarchs.  In fact, this development further silently decreed that even he was required and expected to be attendant and assistant to this very entity that was the state.  For example, in the last years of the reign of Louis XIV, France was defined as the state of France; i.e., the native population of France--who constituted the essence and very being of the nation.  Some have attributed the development of this particular concept in France to Cardinal Richelieu, who functioned in that nation during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.  In any event, this idea assisted in ther undoing of the institution that absolute monarchy had become.  It launched the nation-state into its subsequent role as an independant form of political existence--still respectful of, but no longer dependent upon, a royal ruler.

As states sprung up and developed, they needed to interact and deal with one another.  This next step along the path of man's political activity precipitated the formation of international relationships, which made for further progress and association within society.  Many of these interactions took the form of meetings and conferences specifically for the purpose of fostering peace and security among the participating nations, their regions, or the world in general. 

For example, in 1902, a Pan-American Conference was held in Mexico City.  It concluded with an agreement among all countries taking part to peacefully settle disputes which should arise among them.  In 1907, a Conference of Central American States convened in Washington DC, to develop arbitration procedures for international conflict.  In March, 1908, an international conference on arms reduction opened in London.  And in April, 1913, an International Women's Peace Conference took place at The Hague

Unfortunately, the aforementioned emergence of nations, and its attendant nationalism, has exerted negative impacts as well.  For as nations commenced competition with each other, redundancy and conflict naturally followed.  Despite numerous conferences seeking methods for preserving peace, warfare between nations, and groups of nations, were a regular occurrence.  The culmination of this terrible process was the first great war--the "war to end all wars"--World War I.  (I will later voice some commentary concerning the massive costs and losses sustained by mankind as a result of this colossal episode of violence, and others of like nature.)

But even from the greatest tragedies blessings can sometimes flow.  Following World War I, this blessing could have been the worldwide organization anticipated by American President Woodrow Wilson.  President Wilson envisioned an association of governments that would have been a vehicle for worldwide democracy.  Unfortunately, the League of Nations ended in failure, a failure that was soon followed by the beginning of a Second World War, even more horrendous than its predecessor.