Quite so, and I admit it doesn't look good.

religion is a politically useful smoke screen to hide economic and social control behind, sometimes as a saviour, sometimes as a threat.

he is pragmatic in his self interest, you've got to give him that.
Then, of course, most tyrants are.

The only point I was trying to make with that line was we haven''t evolved much in two thousand years excpet for telephone, TVs and computers. We still get into fights and have wars.

No the whole point of 1984 was divide and conquer, it was anti-globalist, lots of "nation" states and empires perpetually fighting one another as an excuse for exploitation and control of the masses.

@Green_Chile_Type he who controls the flow of information and "truth" available, creates the individuals. That is why eradication of dissidents is essential.

@Green_Chile_Type Individuals are not created by socal orders, they create themselves mostly by way of their own logic, reasoning, morals and ethics, etc, those exact same things with which we are all born with.
And No, the ideology behind the words in "1984" was to hold and have maximum 'control' over everyone and everything including thoughts, actions, etc, etc, i.e. Big Brother IS always watching you, in other words, STOP the Individuals in theur tracks, stamp them out for the good (???) of society.
Individuality is the bane of Totalitarianism it is not the child of it.

Please let me know where that quote comes from. It's certainly not true in ants. It's certainly not true of Communist Chinese under Mao.

@Aristippus Try Google or any of the other Search Engines.

How can any country and its people see themselves as 'one entity'when we still cannot accept that we are ALL of the ONE race, i.e. the Human race?
America, like almost every other country/nation has been divided amongst itself since the very first days has it not?

Like all words, "globalism" can have more than one meaning.

If you're thinking of it as a shorthand for the way industry treats the world as a market for raw materials and cheap labor from one half, and a market for selling at high prices to the other half, then I tend to agree.

But others may think of globalism as meaning that it's time to put petty nationalist disputes behind us, and unify behind things that matter- like climate change, ending war and poverty, decent health care and education for all, things of this nature. And to do that, we need to educate everyone into a new mindset, including those in the Middle East, that conflict is not the way forward.

Unfortunately, we in the US, one of the three remaining superpowers, are currently presided over by a President who doesn't believe in climate change,, sees international relations as a zero-sum game where someone has to lose for the other party to win, and withdrew us from the international treaty on land mines because he felt it was inconvenient. And he also thinks torture is something we should do. In other words, the exact opposite of the leader we need to help usher in an era of global cooperation.

I think money talks, & people have to start really promoting group funding for companies that have solutions. There needs to be a formation & promotion of a global non-profit whose goal it is to find the companies with the best solutions to the world's problems & aggressively promote said companies & seek donations to make grants to build them up. There are many good start-ups that cannot get enough capital raised simply because it would disrupt the incomes of those who hold the power in a particular industrial sector. In addition to this, they are in essence black listed by governments who answer to those industries that hold said power. Protests are not going to solve this problem. Again, money talks, & the average Joe needs to start donating to those who are willing to provide actual solutions. I donate to all the campaign funds of the "radical socialist populists" running for office in the U.S. & they are starting to build effective systems of organization to promote their cause & share & advocate for donations & support for each other. A similar network of radical corporations needs to be formed & they need to advocate for one another as well - but as corporations compete aggressively, this would likely have to be replaced by a non-profit that does this advocacy on their behalf. Then companies with solutions could compete for the non-profit's endorsement & business grants. There are such organizations already in place, but just as the radical politicians are doing, they need to join forces & create a supraorganization to effectively tackle this enormous problem.

On the topic of group dynamics: The evolved instinct for our species to maintain group divisions will most definitely be our downfall. In the past it may have served as a check on over-population as when tensions rose we responded with our evolved instinct to eradicate those not belonging to the group; but with the rise of global capitalism, such wars will increasingly become less common as the condition of "peace" serves the interests of those who own the rights to exploit the world's resources. And we'll end up causing total collapse of our ecosystems in the process. But all these divided corporate interests are not seriously considering how many people will starve to death when this happens. They obey their own insular group dynamics as well. There unfortunately is no effective supraorganization planning for the inevitable. The UN, WHO, etc. have all been infiltrated by the controlling interests & have largely become ineffective. We must take seriously the need to create our own supraorganization of existing groups of environmentalists, dedicated scientists, concerned citizens, radical corporations & radical politicians to tackle this head-on. But how to get them talking to eachother & attempting to form such a group?