The nation-state model started in Europe in the 17th century, and we have good reason to believe it's coming to an end, sooner rather than later, in the 21st century
It wasn't coincidence that the nation-state model started in Europe - it is a Euro-centric model that befits Europe's geographical and cultural landscape
Look at a topographic map of Europe and you'll start to see that geography (and history) meant that certain populations occupied certain areas, leading to a situation where land = people = language was a fact.
But this idea that land = people = language is very Euro-centric. Outside of Europe it rarely existed, and arguably never existed.
With colonialism - in the 19th and 20th centuries - European exported the nation-state model across the world, in many cases forcing its adoption in regions of the world to which it was alien, and indeed very counter-productive
In some areas of the world, the adoption of the nation-state model lead to positive development; in other areas of the world, it lead to a trainwreck that continued for decades or even a century.
But the thing is, there are groups of people who, when the nation-state model was globalized, were denied their own nation. And they continued to be denied that all the way, until the nation state model itself came into question.
For someone deeply scripted in the nation-state model, a people without a nation-state "don't exist", and have no political agency. Ever heard the line "there is no such thing as Palestinians"? Coz only nation states exist.
To these people - nation-state fundamentalists - nation-states have *inherent* rights - such as an imagined "right to exist", a right to use force to defend itself, and a right to restrict movement of people or goods arbitrarily.
Anyway - to a few key regions of the world, the nation state model itself was and is a colonial construct. And we had to contort to adapt ourselves to it - culturally, economically, politically, etc - for so long, that we lost our original shape, and forgot how to stand upright.
The nation-state model was globalized maybe 100-150 years ago, and our world has outgrown it, but during these 100-150 years the Palestinians, Kurds, and other people didn't even get a shot at it.
It'll be a good thing when our world order evolves beyond the nation-state. A model developed in 17th century Europe is unfit for the 21st century globalized, hyperconnected world.
If you wanna help build the future then better step outside the old models that are falling apart, and just start building the new ones.
Oh, and btw: Islamism was an attempt to cram Islam into a nation-state model.
Also: It's annoying that when I say "we're outgrowing the nation state" you get people thinking that I want to "go back" anywhere. I don't want to "go back". I want to go forward towards a new model that is more fair and more befitting our world and planet.
When we predict (or argue for) the end of the nation state, we do not mean the end of nations or end of the state, fwiw. We mean the end of a particular kind of relationship between nations and states.
We can argue over what might the world order evolve into, past the nation state - but please let's avoid oversimplified tropes such as "you're a Marxist anarchist" or "you're a neoliberal globalist".
