This isn't really a "political theory" topic, but I was hoping it gets a good response in the humanities section. I was wondering what you guys imagine to be the future of the international order. By that, I mean the basic structure of the global political and economic relationships. Just splurge your thoughts on what you think is most likely to happen, whether you like it or not, so on and so forth.

IMO, within a few decades, the world will be composed of several trade blocs at various stages of internal political, social, and military integration. The formation of trade blocs as "free trade agreements" is clear to see, as they can be found all over the world; however, I do not think that all these agreements will ever be cleanly brought under the governance of the World Trade Organization. The deadlock of the Doha Development Agenda could be a signal that the dialogue offered by the WTO is not enough to resolve the different interests of developing and developed states. It's hard to say at all how the composition of these trade blocs would look. The dichotomy of developing/developed and G20/G8 seems rather shaky as prominent developing states begin to slide more into the "developed" category and drift further from weaker states. Perhaps the blocs will follow the model of continents: EEA (Europe), NAFTA (North America), Unasur (South America), AEC (Africa). These may be less clear cut than they appear to be, and the situation in the Middle East and across Asia is similarly hazy. The contests between the several powerful countries, such as China, India, and Russia, may leave open many possibilities. Where the various institutions like the World Bank, IMF, or BIS fit into this is hard to say. With all that said about the economic order, I do not believe that the international political structure around nation-states can survive. Nevermind the challenge to national sovereignty by international organizations and multinational corporations, I believe that economic integration within a trade bloc and protectionist measures without a trade bloc will lead to greater political and social integration. As Europe shows, it takes iniatives and is subject to setbacks, but it is occurring.

This appears, from my perspective as a rather casual observer, to be a general and sketchy trend in the global political and economic order. I do not believe that a worldwide free market will be achieved, nor do I think that the United Nations will take the reigns as world government. The former is fragmented by too many competing interests and the latter is too weak to implement its goals. I don't really suspect that each trade bloc will become its own little economic world, however, and I doubt that a global political institution like the UN will disappear.

The important question about all this is, though, is it a good thing? IMO, a restructuring of the world isn't necessarily good or bad. It depends on the consequences for citizens and the world's poor. I don't see why a "continent-state" would be inherently less democratic than a nation-state, but I'm open to possibilities. The greater the concentration of power, the greater the possibility of abuse--but is there a necessary connection between the size of a political territory and the likelihood of power abuse? That said: if we can't fix some problems on a national level, how the hell are we supposed to fix them on a continental level? Some issues require an international approach, such as smuggling or illegal immigrants; others, like a social safety net and health care and democratic activism, may be even more hampered. In the end, I think it is very hard to predict just how these events, assuming they occur, would impact everyday citizens around the world. Thoughts?

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne