Europe

[Beskar]

For the security of the individual, which you profess to love, it is better to have more than one nation.
Nations are a natural entity. Simply unifying a continent is completely artificial, an exercise in control. It is wrong. Nationalism and internationalism are fundamentally different in this respect.

Nationalism is artifical in itself. Before nationalism was regionalism, taking Italy for example: there were papal states, tuscany, sardinia, kingdom of the two scilies, etc. After the great unification, as famously said "Now we made Italy, now we make Italians." and over the years they did just that.

Germany is another example, it used to be Saxony, Balavia, Prussia, Hanover, etc, then they were unified and they became Germans. These were only done in the last 100+ years or so.

What makes it so different that it can't go larger? Why are you stuck on this level and why not advocate a return to the old system of Hanover/Prussia/Saxony/etc ?

Why is this level so special compared to the previous and the afters?

Is the Federation of Germany or the Federation of the United States, evil? If not, why would Europe be?

If we get to that stage we're already , so what's the point? You say that I'm against progress for the sake of being against it, and you're wrong. This isn't progress. It isn't really regression, but it certainly isn't bringing anything good to us.

How so? You don't qualify your point at all. Tie it into previous question I asked if you like. If I am being honest, many arguments seems just to want status quo and against change/advancement.