The New State · Chapter
XXXV: The World State explained
This chapter extends the group principle to international relations, arguing that true peace and progress require a genuine community of nations built on interdependence, not on similarities or coercion.
What happens
This chapter extends the group principle to international relations, arguing that true peace and progress require a genuine community of nations built on interdependence, not on similarities or coercion. It redefines patriotism as rational, self-conscious participation in building one's country and advocates for a League of Nations that respects national differences while creating a larger sovereignty through mutual interdependence.
Themes in this chapter
Integration of Occupational and Neighborhood Groups
The group principle is extended to nations, advocating for a federal world-state built on interdependent national groups.
The Unifying State vs. Political Pluralism
Argues for a unifying international sovereignty that emerges from the interdependence of nations, rejecting isolated sovereignty.
Rejection of Crowd Psychology and Mass Rule
Critiques herd-instinct patriotism and cosmopolitanism, advocating for group-based loyalty and recognition of differences.
Characters to notice
- Narrator
Presents the argument for a world-state based on group psychology, redefining patriotism and sovereignty.
- We the People
Implied as the collective that must learn a new patriotism and participate in building international unity.
Key passages
“Patriotism must not be herd-instinct. Patriotism must be the individual’s rational, self-conscious building of his country every moment.”
True patriotism is not blind following but active, thoughtful participation in shaping one's nation.
Redefines patriotism as a conscious, constructive process rather than instinctive loyalty.
“Internationalism is not going to swallow up nationalism. Internationalism will accentuate, give point, significance, meaning, value, reality, to nationalism.”
International cooperation enhances national identity rather than erasing it.
Argues that nationalism and internationalism are complementary, not opposed.
“Sovereignty is got by giving to every unit its fullest value and thereby giving birth to a new power—the power of a larger whole.”
True sovereignty emerges from empowering each part, creating a greater collective power.
Rejects the idea of sovereignty as a zero-sum game, advocating for interdependence.
“The object of every proper 'cession' of sovereignty is to make us freer than ever before.”
Delegating certain powers to an international body increases freedom, not diminishes it.
Presents the paradox that giving up some sovereignty enhances overall liberty.
“International peace is never coming by an increase of similarities (this is the old-fashioned crowd-philosophy); international peace is coming by the frankest and fullest kind of recognition of our differences.”
Peace arises from valuing and integrating differences, not from forcing uniformity.
Critiques cosmopolitanism and emphasizes the importance of diversity in international relations.