NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm revisting an old topic.
The world situation can be described in terms of its polarity. A unipolar world is dominated by a single power. In theory there would be no soverign nations or rebelious organizations. A bipolar world has two competing powers and their subordinates. In theory there would be no one who did not attest loyalty to one of these two groups. You can guess what a tripolar world and a Quadrapolar world is. The last is a multipolar world-- it contains a large number of unallied or losely allied nations.

While these theoretical states have never really been achieved in our history (except perhaps the last one, multipolar) we have come close. The cold war is quinticentially bipolar in my opinion, certianly the closest we've come. WWII works well for tripolar. The Pax Romana, Pax Britania, and Pax Americana resemble the unipolar world, although neither power had the capacity to control much outside thier own borders.

Which Bring me to the question-- which system is best?

You can guess what a tripolar world and a Quadrapolar world is.
Quadripolar would be the correct term.

In respect to your question, though, I think that a non-polar world would be best. Although the bipolarity of Earth is actually pretty nice...

Quadripolar would be the correct term.

In respect to your question, though, I think that a non-polar world would be best. Although the bipolarity of Earth is actually pretty nice...

The spelling is debatable, but a QuadrApolar world is unlickly, so it doesn't matter. Anyway, how is Earth Bipolar? It was Bipolar (USvUSSR) and its moving back (USvPRC) but right now is in between multi-polar and unipolar-- at least that's how I see it. What do you mean by non-polar? Do you mean multipolar?

The spelling is debatable, but a QuadrApolar world is unlickly, so it doesn't matter.
Well, the prefix comes from the Latin quattuor, and the two prefix derivatives are "quadri" and "quart". That is why it is a "quadrilateral" and not a "quadralateral". And, just because I'm an etymology freak, "polar" comes form the New Latin polaris, and which came from the Latin polus, which is where "pole" came from. So, that really would be the correct spelling for this neologism.

Anyway, how is Earth Bipolar? It was Bipolar (USvUSSR) and its moving back (USvPRC) but right now is in between multi-polar and unipolar-- at least that's how I see it.
By that I mean that there are two poles--the north pole and the south pole. I was referring to the planet, not its hominid occupants.

What do you mean by non-polar? Do you mean multipolar?
By non-polar, I mean that having no poles would be nice. If people did not define themselves that way and separate themselves, I think the world would be a better place. Factions are never good, although they may have a few bright aspects. But to think this could ever happen would be naïveté, and I know I'm just being an idealist with no hope of my dream ever coming true with my species.

I'd like it to be multipolar myself, though i'd settle for Bi- or Tri-polar. Even if that dominating country is one I can closely agree with, I'd still be way happier with the freedom of choice in a multipolar world. The only problem is: no Socialism. Socialism can only really work in a unipolar world, thought it might have limited success in a bi-polar world.

The only problem is: no Socialism. Socialism can only really work in a unipolar world, thought it might have limited success in a bi-polar world.
Actually, unipolarity is more necessary for fascism than socialism. Socialism could actually work with a multipolar population, although it'd be harder, but it would still be possible.

Actually, unipolarity is more necessary for fascism than socialism. Socialism could actually work with a multipolar population, although it'd be harder, but it would still be possible.

But what about a brain-drain dilema, where all the smart people queitly find their way out of the country for more capitalistic lands?

I think Fashism is more about making a unipolar world, which would ironically be its downfall becuase their would be no one left to fight.