I think we should have one nationality - EUROPEAN.
I think you are very ambitious in your vision as the fathers of Europe were.
It is nice to pose this question. And if you would formulate it as a Future I'm sure it woudl be rated as "highly desirable".
So a related question would be: how to progress in the integration process? :)
Hmmm - not sure about the US model! That's not doing so well at the moment. But I do think we need a system change. In very many ways.
What if we were to move away from any of the known models and create space for the emergence of something completely new? I'd be happy to see the role of the nation states dwindle and give way to an interconnected and interdependent meshwork of bio-regions all celebrating their diversity and collaborating to support the wellbeing of their neighbours.
Fascinating Helen. But sorry, much of what you say is embedded in the very core of the EU project.
Recently I contributed to a training for public administrators at the Committee of Regions and, speaking about the smart cities of the future, some of the participants raised the issue of new forms of decentralisation. In the future we may see a disgregation of the power of states in favour of an aggregation of citizens' power around cities/villages to decide their destiny at the very local level. Would a future of city-states similarly to the middle-age's be possible? Enablers of that future woudl be the increased possibility to produce and consume locally (thanks to local automation), and the decreased dependency from states in what concern the relations to the world (yes today, individuals and small communities can be known entities at a global level without any mediation...). This new form of dis-intermediation (from the power of central states) gives already the possible future you are envisaging (speaking obviously from a mere technical perspective. But there is an antropological perspective either, which would be important to understand... but there I'm really not the right one...
Franco, in anthropological terms, the Commission is also breaking ground in its exploration of how to convene broad participation in order to folster the emergence of collective wisdom from collective intelligence. Right now we are exploring that inside our own organisation - and DG Connect is leading the way there, too - and starting to take baby steps in stepping beyond our organisational boundaries to host collective inquiries with privileged stakeholders.
All of this is, of course, still very much under the rader - certainly still off the map of what is even considered by mainstream political strategists (although the UK tory government's call for Big Society shows awareness that it is desirable). However, the practice of empowering participation is gathering momentum, also, at grass-roots level in many parts of Europe. I think about the 'transition towns' movement that started in the UK and has spread to all the continents of the world, and certainly is now present and active in most European countries.
It is interesting that you mention an urban space. Pandering to stakeholders is a less adequate substitute for serving the public interest.
Nice that you say so. It is a good time and there are good hopes that at the other end of the transition path we will all have a better world.
But the way ahead is still long and risky. There is increased awareness and there are promising steps. We need to pick the opportunity.
The two examples you mentioned are good signs. And let me say here that the transition cuts across old structures and ideologies and that creates tension, which may evolve in all directions…
Indeed. in my view there is an ideological gap left as traditional models (socialism, liberism...) have shown their limits, pushed by three main drivers:
- advent of large scale automation (ICT in primis),
- the Internet as a global social and human phenomenon
- a new geo-political order which sees the world 'mid-class' (with its own lifestyles) growing with the world population, at the expenses of the planet…
- the raise of new fundamentalisms.
There are many more drivers. But I think that the transformation is irreversible and soon we will have to learn new patters of life based more on resource sharing, co-decision and renewed values.
An interesting blog here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ervin-laszlo/cosmic-symphony-a-deeper_b_532315.html
I met Erwin Lazlo last year at a conference organised by UCL. Should we contact him for a nice Futures conversation?
Maybe we should have this dialogue elsewhere on Futurium.
Maybe around one of the Futures or a blog.
Otherwise we deviate from the core question posed by Sandru.
Yes, Franco, let's move this to another place - and YES to engaging with Erwin Lazlo! :-D
Well, probably not, as the situation is not at all the same.But that does not mean that some changes that simultaneously would make the system more unified, but more democratic also, might be needed (eg, https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/futurium/en/content/development-tran...).
© Copyright 2013 European Commission