Why have attempts to unify the world under one empire always failed throughout history?

Why have attempts to unify the world under one empire always failed throughout history?

Have there been attempts to unify the world under one empire?

Romans...? Mongols...? Persians...? The British...?

Long distances and bad communication. Now that we have the technology a bunch of states gave nukes that prevent people from going to war.

>what is the EU?

None of those could be described as someone trying to unify the world under a single empire. At least not very long-lasting attempts relative to the time those empires existed.

>EU
>Not failing

Kekekekekekekekekek

EU will crumble soon.

>EU
>unites the world
daily kek, thanks user.

More than that, it's because the larger the empire the more you need to delegate power to local leaders, and those tend to either use it to become the central leader or to break off and be sovereigns in their territory. And that stops expansion.

Because having one centralized authority makes you very vulnerable, especially when this one authority is spread out very thin. When you have any volatility, let's say an earthquake or a war somewhere in your unified empire, the damage that it can cause will be much more severe in a big empire than in a small one. This is because a big empire has far more complexities and interconnectedness within it, and only one centralized organ to deal with problems within this very complex system. When problems occur in a big empire, unlike in for instance a city state, the volatility has a domino effect, causing more volatility, potentially destroying the one central authority, leading to a complete breakdown of society and outright civil war. You usually don't have any of this in the small city state, because what you have to rule over is not as complex and you will probably have no problem with a pluralistic authority, which can serve as several buffers against these domino effects.

tl;dr: centralized empires are usually too complex to be maintained for long periods

In 1556, the deadliest earthquake in history devastated the Shaanxi province in China. 830000 people died.
The empire survived without too much difficulties.

>EU
>Uniting Europe
Failed experiment at best

Because only Jesus can ever do that, it's all right there in the bible but it seems like nobody actually bothers reading it.

The ONLY attempt has been the United Nations and it will fail because the individual Narion States are unwilling to give up their sovereignty.

The U.S., Russia and China will ALWAYS say nope, Rule X doesn't apply to me. They each maintain large militaries to keep Kissinger's NWO from happening.

I want the anti-EU subhumans to leave.

The level of delusion some of you germans live under really is amazing.

because the concept itself is not very practical and it probably won't be for awhile.

I want the eu to die

The only person who tried and suceeded were the Mongols and alexander. Nothing lasts forever but they got the most done .

This pic is just cringe, and not because of the things writen on it, but because some Russian retard though this is a smart meme argument agains the EU.

Because the empires were not trying to unify the humanity under one neutral flag, but exactly the opposit - conquering the others and putting them in their own empire. There can be no unity in such an empire or coutry for that some people will be ''bigger'' than others, from the conquered enemy empires.

My point is, there was never any true attempt for unity. Humans are different. Unification will happen only when we have a common enemy, like an alien invasion. Otherwise i think we are not mentally prepared for the next step in our evolution, i mean leaving our differences and unitying as a whole under the "Humanity''.

>The only person who tried and suceeded were the Mongols and alexander. Nothing lasts forever but they got the most done .
What? The Mongols pillaged some useless land and Alexander mostly just walked around with his army.

I actually know a pro-EU lad that argued pretty much exactly like this. He studied history too and hates communism which makes it even funnier tbqhwy

Every normal person hates communism.

>le EUSSR argument
this is just pathetic
go back to /pol/ please

Sure, but it's usually for the wrong reason.
Voegelin was right about everything.

Nah' Alex was busy crafting a new persona for himself as the divine head of government. He was mixing and matching philosophies, elements of Greek and Persian government, etc. He was planning on the longview

Evil.

There will always be men who take the bait and believe that there is self worth in dominating over another in some minor or major way. They believe there's value to be gained by holding higher positions above others. It's usually due to a lack of self worth, which is a lie they believe about themselves if you get even deeper to the root of their motive to rule over another. Now it only gets more complex and worse than that. Some will even submit to the lust for that desire to rule over others and are able to get their rocks off on it...literally. Some people have orgasms to giving pain. Some it's not that serious and their gratification is less tangible, but nonetheless, they enjoy the power.

Now because of that alone people have tried to unify, but because of their innate inability to live without this disease, they wind up offending some part of masses, their opposition, which eliminates the possibility for a specific group to assimilate under the idea of one flag...after all, someone has to be on top. Even if you try to make it a counsel thing.

I don't know if I explained it as well as I'd like, but basically it's impossible because of man's unstable heart.

It's like people actually think revolutions are long term fixes, when the truth is, you have no idea what the next generation will get off on. You have no idea who will get off on offending others, which will eventually lead to mass suffering and an eventual collapse of the whole.

All because you CAN'T dictate the human heart or desire. You can't control it.

Look at all the leaders of the world throughout history. Take some thumb tacks. You put one above a line for every "good" leader or king. You put one thumb tack below the line for every "bad" leader or king. You will notice you have no trend, just random thumbtacks placed up and down.

It's impossible to dictate a "moral society".

Now that's what makes the tower of babel an interesting story. Because it's a story that appears to be cruel, when it very well could be a story of what is truly best for us. Right now we probably have the technology for a regime or organization to single handily take control of the world. But the potential for mass suffering increases because again, you can't predict stability or who will or will not abuse the power. Because again, some men take the bait or are psychological manipulated throughout life, by the consequences of life, a simple hard ship can make a man insecure and offended. Make him cruel, make him want to seek vengeance on life itself, to the point of bringing harm to others will be his only remedy when the truth is, he's just being a baby in relation to his pride. He got hurt...now has to see others hurt. This scenario can take place in every facet of life, which again, makes the story of Op's image that much interesting.

liberals and libertarians have succeeded

There isn't enough money to bother. The US couldn't subjugate Vietnam, what makes you think they (i assume you are gonna go with them since they have by a mile the best military in the world) could subjugate an entire continent of wewuz?

Jungle warfare completely shits on modern technology. The desert keeps it nice and comfycozy but when it gets wet or humid and muddy, pretty much every advantage the us has will melt away. Unless of course the Americans undergo a huge cultural shift that makes them totally okay with wanton slaughter julius Caesar in Gaul style

Sabotaged by the Eternal Anglo. Just like the Napoleonic empire.

Most people don't mind being unified in one large empire. Given that they're the ones controlling it.
That is usually where the problems come.

Crawling in my skin tier adolescent melodrama. Slave morality horseshit that takes the line of 'hurr dominance = bad' and then holds up the tower of babel as an exemplar.

1. Of course there's a value to having power over others. It;s fucking inevitable. There are infoerior and superior people, and people better at leadership than others. And for every person who's 'power-hungry' - which again, isn't inherently negative, there are those who want to serve their country and their people.
2. 'Because of that alone' fuck off you reductionist generalising retard.
3.'they wind up offending some part of the masses' irrelevant in any state before the modern state, still largely irrelevant in the modern day, takes marxist assumption that a spontaneous rising of the people can occur, which it fucking cant - the bourgeoise are the only mobile class and it needs to be organised.
4. 'Get off on offending others' Yeah, this is the only reason for power. They're all purely like those guys who bullied you in high school that mommy said just like hurting you. Holy fuck you weakling.
5. Thumbtacks -duuuh. The world is chaotic.
6. Define 'moral.'
7. Next post literally reads like a sonic the hedgehog original character do not steal backstory. Massively simplified, taking psychological sues from dark knight returns, incoherant. Have fun being 16, you;re not as smart as you fucking think, faggot. One of the worst posts I've ever read on this board.

Bullshit. None of the systematic flaws in the EU, of which there are plenty, are of Anglo origin. The inability to reform is also not because of Anglos either

I don't have a dog in this fight because I don't have faith in man.

But you don't need to plant a flag in the jungle to take over the jungle. You just need to make sure no one rises above the jungle. Suppression is the modern tactic. The kind of war you're talking about now is no more than theatrics meant to stir up people who don't know any better. Draw a line in the sand, watch the world choose their side, now you know where your friends and enemy stand.

Anyways, but yeah...the scary thing I think is that world now has the technology now to gradually suppress the world. Lion's use their strength to tear apart their food, snakes slowly bring in the borders and close them until there's no were to go. In my opinion that's more accurate of what's taking place right now. That's not to say there wont be bullets/arrows flying tearing through flesh, but that's not the kill shot. The suppression and suffocation is what's going to be attempted to finally plant that one flag. Still don't think it will work in the long run though.

Jesus, stop with the melodramatic/adolescent metaphors while you try to reach for a sense of profound forboding - it isn't working, and it sounds like something circulated on facebook. Expand your ideas, and explain them - don't couch it in flowery shit.

Eg. I have no idea what the snake/lion thing is. Lion = hurrdurr strong empire, snake = modern state but... what? 'Bring the borders and close them' either means restrict movement of people, impose them on other countries, federalising the nation state as part of a trans-national entity eg EU, or any one of other things. Your analogies lack precision, and weight.

Also 'bullets/arrows flying tearing through flesh, but that's not the kill shot.' sound like what I wrote when 14 and trying to write Rage against the Machine style rap. Ie. really, really fucking gay.

>1. Of course there's a value to having power over others. It;s fucking inevitable

It's inevitable because man is inherently weak, offended, and insecure. Whether it's penis envy or flat out jealousy, or suffering from lack of self worth to the point that the only remedy for said weak man is to feel good about himself by way of making his strength known at the expense of others. It really doesn't matter what sources you point out that cause man to play this specific game, because it all stems from irrational fear.

To be honest though, the entire world would be a better place with out weak scared men that you speak on behalf of. The lack of contentment that this world suffers from is amazing. But yeah, you can beat your chest, just don't rupture any of your lil lungs.

>irrational fear

Proof? Is wanting to make his country better irrational fear? A sense of justice? A desire to bring about change? You disregard greatness and champion the herd morality of passive acceptance of the world. Enlightened leadership is what has dragged mankind from the caves to the stars, and it always will. Also you sound like a fucking feminst cunt trying to tear down 'evil patriarchy' with penis envy, which is a discredited freudian concept expressed by women ie you're fucking retarded.

Without leaders, we'd be sitting in caves/trees. To be content is to be degenerate. The purpose of human civilisation is to constantly strive for what is better. Contentment is for the weak.

Also, I'm fucking CONVINCED you're a chick.

What's so hard to understand?

Claiming jungle warfare is some how superior to modern technology, when climate doesn't even matter anymore because the fight isn't on the ground.

No one wants the jungle and no one wants the desert. The motive is to make sure they never leave the jungle or the desert. I thought my point was obvious, because the jungles, the deserts, they make up exactly what of the entire world? Absolutely nothing. You're talking about spots on an ENTIRE earth. Smaller spots since because we're talking about nations. Let the people keep their habitats, just make sure they never rise above them. Basically keeping them suppressed. Now you study the snake and it crushes. Makes it's prey's world smaller until it suffocates. That's the modern tactic. Make the world smaller for your enemies. Keep them from resources, keep them uneducated, keep them relying on you if anything. Forget their land, forget the jungle, forget the desert...no one wants that. Outside of propaganda war is no longer about romanticized hero's and machismo. The only reason it was like that in the past, was because networking was limited. Now the world has the technology to network the entire globe, from there you could bring the walls in on anyone. Suffocate them. Keep them in their place without firing a single bullet. From there, who knows types of sick shit they would have in mind for you.

Now in the even that all this worked out, which it wont in the long run, but in the event that it did work, the suffering could magnify simply because if history has proven anything is that...assholes and degenerates eventually get their chance to rule.

The main flaw of the EU is the lack of democratic control over policies.
The main reason why this flaw remains is that the brits, more than anyone else, want to keep it as a free market and refuse political union.

Making a country better, shoot, making ANYTHING better has nothing to do with...

>1. Of course there's a value to having power over others

No offense bro, but you're disorganized in your logic. Applying concepts that don't relate to other concepts etc etc

>irrational fear
>Proof?

You do realize confrontation is basically due to being afraid of what your perceived opposition may be capable of?

Like I said, the lack of contentment, the complete inability to take our own tempers, issues, fears, and just handling them like men is the reason why the world is the way it is. Man is just weak, there's literally enough here for everyone yet we still find a way to act out of insecurities. Not only that, but some get off on conflict. I've gotten off on the conflict. But see how stupid you feel when you're urged to take responsibility for your own actions and thoughts. For me it was God. Finally was granted to see the truth about all this and felt like an idiot afterward for buying into irrational reasoning.

Another terrible analogy. Whats the most important tool in war? The nuke? Tank? Carrier? The assault rifle?

It's the satellite. He who see's the most knows the most. Irrational fears is what fueling all this behavior.

...are you joking? That;s one of the most torturous, ill-concieved metaphors I've ever read. Stick to explaining your arguments, confucius.

You aren't impressed? Well shoot...

No, confrontation is the inevitable result of two opposing ideologies in the absence of a logical synthesis.

Nope, you can't reduce all the problems of the world to a lack of contentment. If we had stayed content with things, there would have been no innovation. A lack of contentment is the driving force of human civilisation. You can still take responsibility for your own actions, but the day man says he is content with the world is the day he becomes no better than an animal. Humanity is something to be overcome.

Naturally, I think god is dead and, if he is not and he created a world to induce contentment as his ideal, then he shouldn;t have filled it with so much natural evil. Plagues/natural disasters/parasitic wasps/etc. These don;t result from human behaviour.

No, it's the ideology, motivation and moral of your population. Knowledge is power, but it is nothing without the necessary tools of execution.

...

Logistic problems. You can't control all world from one center when you need years to just send one order in distant province.

The only way the EU can hope to survive is by importing millions of foreigners and bribing them with wellfare in the hopes of creating a group of people loyal to none other than them.

The nerve of you polacks.

>Unified.
>Orthocucks.
>Protestshits.
>Catholicucks.
>Local cults.
Sure.

You're explaining a fear of losing ground. By being urged to give up your ideology for a contrasting ideology is translated by some as submitting imaginary space. It's an irrational fear of loss.

It's not like software, where you just bridge a gap with a new command or connecting command. People should be able to disagree and go their separate ways. Sometimes the best bridge for a gap, may be no bridge at all.

It's really hard you guys

Also contentment in relation to whats needed through "innovation" has nothing to do with contentment to avoid jealousy. From jealousy could come a plethora of problems. And a lack of contentment is what begets jealousy.

Also, could point out that there is really no "innovation", only discovery of things that were meant to work or meant to exist before they were ever conceived in our thought or seen with our eyes, which further points out that contentment DOES NOT hinder the new....but this isn't the place for that discussion.

Not even close. They were missing MULTIPLE CONTINENTS

>what is delegating of powers

Mongols did a pretty good job, up until the whole alcoholism thing killed their leaders in quick succession

I want deluded EU babbys to return to their hugbox.

>EU
>communism

Why are /pol/acks so stupid? Have you ever listened to one of the bureaucrats in Brussels speak? Have you ever read their interviews? Everytime they speak economics they quote people like Von Mises and Von Hayek. Not a shred of marxist ideology. Heck, they don't even give a shit about Keynesianism. The european central bank is a neoliberal lolbertarian wet dream, with it's "hurr durr I won't do shit my only goal is to keep inflation down".

pls kys

the method was always
>A) because different cultures will clash and the people behind the unification movement are all part of the same country which they are proud of, cultures that are too different must be eliminated
it doesn't work because people tend to dislike seeing all their relatives murdered because they didn't want to submit

>B) cultures must co-exist and learn from each other but share a common identity
can't happen because it is people in power who are behind the unification movement, and people in power have a hard time making their country equal to others, when their job is to make a country great to begin with

>muh austerity
t. yurops

He probably thinks Europe is Nordic.

>Why has something really fucking hard failed

Gee I dunno user must be Jews and niggers

>
>
>
HRE-tier

Someone make a version of this but with Hungary

Not enough soldiers

Not enough firepower

AH you saw god eh?

Mystery solved why this guy is a faggot with wrong ideas, he's a religious cuck, who fears daddy god for having wrong-think.

Newsflash mate: nothings gonna judge you. Feel free to subjigate, fornicate and kill when the time comes. You have limited time to destroy this beutiful world, old bean.

There is literally nothing wrong with being a sovereign nation nor pursuits of individual creeds in having dominance/seperation over others.

Stop with this 'united world' bollocks, its unattainable, even with todays tech/ social enginering and an unhealthy mindset.

Language

because yahw

fuck, imagine THAT world

Because different cultures cannot live under the same rule

Hungary is not in the European Union you cuck, they are the only ones who Stand on their feet and fight against this madneds

>Hungary is not in the European Union you cuck
Yes it is you fucking mongoloid.

Dont forget the ottoman empire.

The biggest mistake all empires did is this: they didnt take care of the interests of the conquered people. If another nation had come and brought welfare and education, better living and so on, it wouldnt be of any interest to rebell against it.

>there are people who unironically defend the EU

At one time, the Persian empire encompasses 45% of the world's population

Without a modern level of travel and communication, administration of remote provinces far away from the base of power becomes incredibly difficult.

To add to this, the only nation that's really tried in the modern era is Germany in WWII, but the downside is that now other nations can use that same technology to come wreck your shit from halfway across the globe.

I mean, at one point America was fighting in Europe and in Asia. That's nuts. Just imagine the Roman Empire trying simultaneously invade China and the Mayan empire.

We're just not ready yet
>inb4 hurr durr youre implying history has a narrative/progression
The world is still too big so to speak, at one time it'd also seem impossible for anyone to unify say Britain or Japan, they it happened in the end. Maybe once/if we ever establish sizeable colonies off-planet.

>

This will shock you, so sit down and read slowly

People

are

not

equal

and that's good so

>le East Euros are dumb subhumans who only receive money from us superior Westerners
>but Nationalism is bad amrite guyz

It's like you guys have no self awareness.

I've read it. I hope no one apposes the messiah with Iron Chariots, because not even Yahweh can deal with them.

but Poland has allready offered to take in rapefugees but they didn't want to come

Because one empire always deems other countries inferior and wants to genocide, exploit or hinder them at best. In the end you are left fighting against multiple fronts while also suffering from inner power struggles.

They don't, This board is called Veeky Forums, but majority of western europe anons only care/know about WW2 and Cold War. Anything before or after that, excluding MUH VIKINGS is terra incognitia to them.

how the fuck did a populist country like Hungary get into the EU in the first place

>Hay look ther wuz natural dizazter and this 1 time empire didnt fall

Really? Nice man.

In UK high school History we did Romans, then Tudors, then the two World Wars, and only got qualifications of the two World Wars. I didn't go higher than GCSE because it was going to be just the two World Wars again.

None of those were attempts to unify the world under one empire.

shut your whore mouth

There's nothing to unify us. Like there isn't an appealing enough banner for us to unite over. Perhaps the core essence of us all is a worthwhile cause to unify. The fact that we are all human; to me is a wonderful, and legitimate reason for us all to unite.