Hoping that the people of the Earth will unite as one is strictly a pipe dream.
When members of the same family often cannot live in peace how do you expect that tribalism will disappear?
It is not human nature and if you add the way other creatures defend their special territory, it is not going to happen because it is alien to the way we are.

Sells

Thanks very much for your thoughtful comments.

What is meant by "primordial ties"?

David

Yes David, thanks for a very interesting slant on world affairs. I agree with Sells: however close we might think we come, humans can never bring Heaven to Earth. But the struggle is still well worthwhile!

Some points of disagreement, however. The “triumph” of the English language is largely a furphy. There’s a whole article in this topic, but suffice to say there is evidence that proportionately there are not many more English-speakers around the world than there were about fifty years ago.

The current popularity of English is mainly due to the economic power of Anglophonic nations over recent decades. It’s one phase in history. Around the 1920s and 1930s there was a widespread agreement that French, not English, was set to become the world-language. As the economic and political influence of France waned, so did the global status of its language.

As for Esperanto, it has huge – and largely disregarded – potential as an instrument for bridging cultures and nations. Esperantists do not propose it as a replacement for existing languages. It is designed as “a handshake between nations”, a means by which people of different cultural backgrounds can meet and interact on equal terms without the fear that one language will usurp the position of another. Thus it can be a way of actually helping to protect the cultural roots of each community while also allowing it to do business, conduct research, share social events and so on with communities which speak different languages.

And world-government only possible through dictatorship, Philo? Surely it will be just another step in the perpetual increase of organisation of humanity! My ancestors no doubt swore that only tyranny could unite them under one rule in Britain and Germany. Here in Western Australia a few sandgropers still cry for secession from the Commonwealth because “their” resources, money and effort are “misappropriated” by Eastern oppressors. The United Nations can work if the member nations make it work, just as our nation can succeed to the extent that its individual citizens help it to do so.

“Primordial ties” is part of the quote so I can only guess what it means. I guess it means ties to country, place, language, tradition, story, religion, music, food etc. These are the things that define us. It is often the case that anomie results from the loss of these ties as in native cultures overrun by alien culture or in immigrants. There is the danger of MacDonaldization, the reduction of all building to look like any international airport or 5 star hotel. When you get rid of difference what do you replace it with? Sovereignty may not be eradicated without loss of identity.

About how the birds lump together and discriminate, I prefer to hear the opinions of ornithologists. And let the theologians discuss about the meaning of the tower of Babel.

I don´t know about ornithology and theology, but I do know about languages and, especially, Esperanto, which I speak every day. I regret that David James has a mistaken idea about Esperanto. This language is spoken nowadays by two millions people in 120 countries. It is an easy-to-learn language, that allows to people of different ethnic tongues to communicate on an equal footing. Besides, I should like to point out that Esperanto doesn´t have the pretension to replace the national languages.

All the masterpieces of the world literature (Shakespeare, Dante, Cervantes, etc.) are translated into Esperanto, and there are many books originally written in this language.

Course of Esperanto by Internet:
http://www.institutoesperanto.com.ar

David,

A somewhat unique view of the future of our world and of our place in it, all 'lumped' together. The last throes of apartheid?

I am interested in your 'work in progress' - what is the focus of 'I Just Want My Children to be Happy'? Is it an observation piece on the state of the world or a proactive discourse on how we can be happy? Does it follow the same themes as this article? Genre? Target audience?

Are you, in fact, a 'serious ornithologist' as your article suggests?