Latest / Diplomacy and International Relations / Summer 01: The Violent Invention of the Modern State

Transcript

Summer 01: The Violent Invention of the Modern State · Diplomacy and International Relations

0:00
Look at a map of the world today.
0:02
I mean just picture. It Yeah, the classic classroom
0:04
map. Right.
0:05
With the exception of, you know, the frozen wasteland of
0:08
Antarctica. Every single inch of land on
0:11
this planet is carved up, it's claimed, and it's rigidly
0:16
categorized into one of exactly 195 sovereign States, and we
0:21
just take this completely for granted.
0:22
We really do. We just assume that dividing
0:25
humanity into these neatly bordered boxes, you know, with
0:29
capitals, flags, standing armies, is just the natural
0:33
order of things. Exactly.
0:34
But it isn't, not at. All No, it's a relatively recent
0:37
invention. Which brings us to today's
0:39
topic. Welcome to the first installment
0:41
of the summer series of Diplomacy and International
0:44
Relations. We're so thrilled to have you
0:46
here for this journey. Absolutely.
0:48
It's going to be a great series. And real quick, if you find
0:50
yourself enjoying the the meticulous unpacking of global
0:54
mechanics we do here, we highly encourage you to follow and
0:57
subscribe. It really makes a difference.
0:58
It does. Also.
1:00
Subscribing to the Patreon fundamentally helps keep this
1:03
operation running. It grants you access to extra
1:06
installments as well as our exclusive weekly and monthly
1:09
briefings on Danish politics. Which are highly recommended by
1:12
the way. Definitely.
1:13
You can find that link right down in the description.
1:15
So to situate today's source material, we are kicking off
1:18
Part 1, The Basics. Right into the foundation.
1:22
Exactly. We are examining A fundamental
1:25
defining mystery, namely, how did a messy, overlapping, highly
1:30
localized medieval world transform into the neat 195
1:35
state modern international system we see today?
1:38
Yeah, and to really understand the invisible architecture of
1:40
that modern system, we basically have to completely abandoned our
1:44
contemporary assumptions about power and geography.
1:46
Because the past is a foreign country, right?
1:48
Exactly. If we rewind to medieval Europe,
1:50
which is really where the DNA of our current global order was
1:54
entirely sequenced, the concept of a border in the modern sense
1:57
was, well, it was just absurd. But you couldn't just walk up to
2:00
a checkpoint and show a passport.
2:02
Not at all. There were no hard lines on a
2:04
map. Instead of a centralized state,
2:07
you had this decentralized, overlapping network of
2:10
jurisdictions, right? Think of it less like a modern
2:13
administrative grid and more like an open source
2:17
decentralized blockchain of authority.
2:20
Oh, that's a great way to put it.
2:21
Yeah, we're no single entity holds the master key, and the
2:24
rules are constantly conflicting.
2:26
Political power was intensely localized.
2:29
Because most people didn't. Travel.
2:30
Right? Exactly.
2:31
The vast majority of people were peasants.
2:33
Their entire universe was maybe a five mile radius.
2:37
Their supreme authority was just the local feudal Lord.
2:40
Who basically operated as a private contractor of violence
2:43
and justice. Precisely.
2:45
That legal landscape must have been an absolute labyrinth.
2:48
I mean, a single person could simultaneously be subject to the
2:51
local Lord's feudal decrees and the customary laws of their
2:54
specific village, plus the merchant laws if they went to a
2:57
trade fair, and then on top of all that, the Canon law of the
3:01
Catholic Church. It was a bureaucratic nightmare.
3:04
It's like living under a decentralized Fiat system where
3:07
four different entities claim the right to tax you, but none
3:11
of them actually provides comprehensive public services.
3:13
Yeah, that is spot on. The layers of contradiction were
3:16
just staggering. I mean, kings existed of course
3:18
in places like France or England, but their practical
3:21
power was astonishingly weak compared to, say, a modern Prime
3:27
Minister. Right, because they didn't have
3:28
the infrastructure. Exactly.
3:30
A medieval king was essentially just the most successful warlord
3:33
in a given region. His authority really only
3:36
extended as far as his immediate military presence or his
3:40
personal relationships with other Lords.
3:42
He couldn't just send an e-mail to the provinces and expect them
3:44
to obey. No, he possessed no massive
3:47
bureaucracy, no standardized tax collection system, and
3:50
crucially, no standing national army.
3:53
If a king wanted to fade a war, he had to, you know, ask his
3:55
Lords very nicely to temporarily lend him their private militias.
3:59
Wow. But then, hovering above all
4:01
this fragmented hyperlocal reality, you had these two
4:04
massive universal institutions, right?
4:07
Yes, the ones that claimed absolute continent wide
4:11
authority, the Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire.
4:14
And the church wasn't just like a spiritual guide, it was the
4:17
largest landholder in Europe. Oh, by far.
4:20
It was the supreme appellate court for a massive range of
4:24
legal disputes and basically held an absolute monopoly on
4:27
literacy and administration. Yeah, it was a transnational
4:30
political heavyweight. The Church could literally bring
4:32
kings to their knees just through the threat of
4:35
excommunication. Because it controlled the
4:36
operating system of European intellectual and political life.
4:40
Exactly. It utilized Latin as the
4:42
universal administrative language.
4:44
It collected its own taxes across borders.
4:47
You know, in the form of ties. And its bishops often functioned
4:50
as sovereign Lords themselves. And alongside the Church you had
4:53
the Holy Roman Empire, which was centered in German speaking
4:57
Central Europe. Claiming the legacy of ancient
4:59
Rome. Right asserting a universal
5:01
right to rule over all Christians.
5:03
But structurally, it was a sprawling, loosely structured
5:07
federation of hundreds of independent principalities, free
5:10
cities and Dutchies. So not an empire in the Roman
5:13
sense at all. Not at all.
5:15
The Emperor was elected, which meant he constantly had to
5:17
negotiate with his nominal subjects.
5:20
That drastically limited his centralized power.
5:23
OK, let's unpack this because the transition out of this era
5:27
isn't just some peaceful administrative update, it's a
5:30
violent 2 front war. Oh, highly violent.
5:34
To use an analogy like the medieval system was a messy,
5:38
unregulated roommate situation where everyone shares everything
5:41
but no one cleans the kitchen. That's a very vivid picture.
5:44
Right. And the modern state system is
5:46
like drawing strict property lines and setting up a ruthless
5:49
homeowners association. The entity we now call the state
5:53
had to carve out its existence by crushing the local feudal
5:56
Lords below it to monopolize violence while simultaneously
6:00
rebelling against the universal claims of the Pope and the
6:03
emperor above it. Yes, and that structural
6:05
pressure is precisely what generated the modern state.
6:08
The initial fractures actually happened in northern Italy
6:11
during the 14th. Century with the city states.
6:13
It's exactly places like Florence, Venice, Milan.
6:16
They pioneered a survival strategy of extreme pragmatism
6:21
because they were geographically trapped between the territorial
6:24
ambitions of the Pope to the South and the Holy Roman Emperor
6:27
to the north. They just began playing these
6:29
two universal powers against each other.
6:31
Smart just shifting alliances to survive.
6:34
Exactly. By constantly shifting
6:36
alliances, these city states essentially bought themselves de
6:40
facto independence. And concurrently, in Central
6:43
Europe, constituent members of the Holy Roman Empire started
6:46
doing the same thing. Capitalizing on the Emperor's
6:49
prolonged conflicts with the Papacy.
6:51
Right to assert their own local sovereignty.
6:53
It's the ultimate opportunistic power grab, and this accelerates
6:57
wildly when the ideological monopoly of the church shatters.
7:00
The Reformation, yes. The Reformation in the 16th
7:03
century isn't just a theological dispute about grace and
7:06
salvation. I mean, it is that, but
7:08
geopolitically it is the perfect cover for ambitious rulers to
7:11
consolidate power. Oh, completely.
7:13
When Martin Luther and John Calvin create theological
7:16
frameworks that explicitly reject the authority of Rome,
7:20
secular rulers suddenly have a moral justification to just
7:24
expropriate the Church's massive wealth.
7:26
Which they absolutely do. The economic incentives of the
7:29
Reformation were profound. Kings and Princess realized that
7:34
if they adopted Protestantism, they could immediately
7:37
nationalize vast tracts of church owned agricultural land.
7:40
And cut off the taxes. Completely cut off the flow of
7:44
tax revenue to Rome and position themselves as the supreme heads
7:48
of their own newly formed national churches.
7:50
This fundamentally shifted the balance of power.
7:53
The universal authority of the Pope was replaced by the
7:56
sovereign authority of the territorial ruler.
7:58
And the sources provide a really vivid Nordic example of this
8:01
mechanism in action with Gustav Vasa of Sweden in the early
8:05
1500s. Yes, page 10 highlights this
8:07
perfectly. Because he doesn't just embrace
8:09
the Reformation out of some pure spiritual awakening, right?
8:12
He has massive debts to the Hanseatic League that he
8:15
desperately needs to pay off. He was essentially bankrupt.
8:17
Yeah, so seizing church assets and centralizing authority
8:21
solves this fiscal crisis while simultane spontaneously
8:24
eliminating the bishops as political rivals.
8:27
But this monopolization of power was totally devastating for the
8:31
rural populations. It was State Building was an
8:34
inherently extractive and honestly brutal process.
8:38
As rulers like Gustav Vasa dismantled the power of the
8:41
Church and stripped the local nobility of their autonomy, they
8:45
needed to replace those ancient structures with new centralized
8:49
state machinery. Like bureaucracies to count the
8:51
wealth. Yes, and standing armies to
8:53
protect it. That required an unprecedented
8:55
level of capital. Kings began levying heavy
8:58
standardized taxes directly on the peasantry, completely
9:01
bypassing the traditional feudal intermediaries.
9:04
They just cut out the middleman and went straight for the
9:05
peasants pockets. Exactly.
9:07
And they also began conscripting commoners into professionalized
9:10
state armies. And the friction of that
9:12
transition triggered massive pushback.
9:14
As we see on page 11, the early modern state was basically
9:17
treating its own population as a resource to be mined.
9:20
Which naturally led to revolts. Huge ones.
9:23
You have the German Peasants War in the 1520s, which involved
9:27
hundreds of thousands of people and resulted in a catastrophic
9:30
death toll. In Sweden, Gustav Vas
9:33
centralization sparked major insurgencies like the Jack War
9:37
in the 1540s 40's. The peasants in Smallin fought
9:40
back furiously against the new tax burdens.
9:42
And against the confiscation of church silver, which they deeply
9:45
resented. Right.
9:46
And the ban on cross-border trade.
9:48
Similar violent resistance erupted in Croatia, Switzerland,
9:52
England. It was everywhere.
9:53
Because the peasants were fighting to preserve a
9:55
decentralized world that was rapidly being swallowed by the
9:59
bureaucratic state, the state, driven by the absolute necessity
10:03
of financing wars, became a highly sophisticated machine for
10:07
resource extraction. This era really birthed the
10:10
concept of political economy. Where the economy is just a tool
10:13
of statecraft. Exactly.
10:15
Economic development was not viewed as a separate sphere of
10:17
human activity. States sponsored the mapping of
10:20
their territories to locate timber, iron and copper.
10:23
They began meticulously recording births and deaths.
10:26
To quantify their taxable manpower, presumably.
10:29
You got it. They established universities
10:31
explicitly to train a loyal administrative class.
10:34
The economy existed solely to serve the state's military
10:37
capacity. Which creates A terrifying
10:39
systemic dynamic. You have these newly
10:42
centralized, highly efficient, resource hungry state machines
10:46
emerging all across Europe, and they are packed tightly together
10:49
on a single continent. It's a powder keg.
10:51
Seriously. With the universal authority of
10:54
the Pope and the Emperor eroding, there is no referee
10:57
anymore. Which brings us directly into
10:59
the Crucible of the 30 Years War from 1618 to 1648.
11:04
The 30 Years War was the systemic climax of this entire
11:07
transition. As detail on page 12, it was the
11:09
most destructive conflict Europe had ever seen.
11:12
The numbers are just horrifying. The demographics are staggering.
11:14
Regions of Germany lost roughly a third of their total
11:17
population, and the destruction wasn't just battlefield
11:20
casualties. No, it was civilian suffering.
11:22
It was the systemic devastation of agriculture by massive
11:26
mercenary armies that sustain themselves entirely by looting
11:30
the countryside, spreading plague and famine in their wake.
11:33
And the Swedish Empire under Gustavus Adolphus was a major
11:36
catalyst in that devastation, right?
11:38
They utilized highly disciplined, innovative military
11:43
tactics that basically turned the Swedish Army into a
11:46
terrifyingly effective instrument of state policy
11:49
across Central Europe. They were an incredibly lethal
11:53
force. And it's frequently framed in
11:55
popular history as a religious war, Catholics versus
11:58
Protestants. But the mechanics suggest
12:00
something entirely different. Yeah, religion was the pretext.
12:04
Hegemony was the true objective. The war was the ultimate contest
12:08
to determine the operating system of Europe, right?
12:11
Would the continent be dominated by a single universal imperial
12:14
real power? It's specifically the Habsburg
12:16
dynasty controlling Austria and Spain.
12:18
Or would be a fractured system of independent states.
12:21
And the proof that it wasn't just about religion is France.
12:24
Exactly. Catholic France actively
12:26
financed and allied with Protestant Sweden specifically
12:29
to break the power of the Catholic Habsburgs.
12:31
The geopolitical imperative of preventing any single state from
12:34
becoming too powerful entirely overrode religious affiliation.
12:38
So the exhaustion from that incredible violence finally
12:42
culminates in the peace of Westphalia in 1648.
12:45
In international relations, Westphalia is the ultimate
12:48
buzzword. It really is.
12:50
It marks the formal codification of the modern state system.
12:53
It establishes that international politics is no
12:56
longer a hierarchy with a Pope or emperor at the top.
13:00
It is a horizontal plane. Yes.
13:02
The treaty, signed in 1648 established the principle of
13:06
state sovereignty as the foundational rule of
13:09
international law. It formally recognized that a
13:11
sovereign ruler has absolute authority within their defined
13:15
territorial borders. And no one else can interfere.
13:17
Right. No external power has the right
13:19
to intervene in their domestic affairs, including their choice
13:22
of religion. Furthermore, it established the
13:24
concept of formal legal equality among states.
13:27
So on paper, the massive Kingdom of France and the smallest
13:30
independent German principality possess the exact same legal
13:33
rights on the international stage.
13:35
On paper, yes, Yeah. But if every state is completely
13:38
sovereign and they are all formally equal, that
13:42
fundamentally changes the nature of the international arena.
13:45
It creates what international relations scholars call anarchy.
13:49
Which is a very specific term. Yeah, I want to clarify this
13:51
terminology because it's crucial.
13:53
When we say anarchy in this context, we aren't talking about
13:56
chaos, riots, or lawlessness in the streets.
14:00
We are describing a specific structural condition, the
14:04
complete absence of a supreme overarching authority capable of
14:09
enforcing rules or guaranteeing security.
14:12
It is a pure self help system. Think about it, in a domestic
14:15
society, if someone breaks into your house, you call the police,
14:17
right? Right.
14:18
A centralized authority with a monopoly on violence.
14:21
Exactly. In the Westphalian international
14:24
system, if a larger state invades a smaller state, there
14:27
is no global 911 to call. States are entirely responsible
14:31
for their own survival. Which sounds incredibly
14:33
stressful. Oh, it generates the classic
14:35
security dilemma. Because you can never be
14:37
absolutely certain of your neighbor's intentions.
14:40
You must constantly build up your own military capabilities.
14:43
But wait, your defensive build up looks inherently offensive to
14:46
your neighbor. Right, so that prompts them to
14:48
build up their military, creating a perpetual spiral of
14:52
paranoia and armament War, or the constant threat of it, is
14:56
structurally baked into the system.
14:59
If states are formally equal but completely sovereign, doesn't
15:02
that just invite constant paranoia and war?
15:04
I mean that seems like an absolute nightmare scenario for
15:07
any state that isn't a massive military superpower.
15:10
How did small or medium sized states like Denmark or Sweden in
15:14
the post imperial era survive at all without being constantly
15:17
devoured by larger neighbors? It's a great question, and it's
15:20
addressed on page 13. Survival required the invention
15:24
and institutionalization of modern diplomacy.
15:27
Because the environment was so precarious, the cost of fighting
15:30
constant total wars was unsustainable.
15:33
States had developed highly reliable mechanisms for
15:35
communicating signaling intentions and negotiating
15:38
alliances to balance against dominant powers.
15:41
They needed a way to talk without shooting.
15:43
Exactly. And the Italian city states,
15:46
having dealt with this miniature and Arctic environment centuries
15:49
earlier, had already invented the tools.
15:52
They developed the practice of establishing permanent resident
15:55
ambassadors in foreign capitals. So instead of just sending an
15:58
envoy when a crisis erupted, you have an official living in the
16:02
rivals capital, constantly gathering intelligence,
16:05
analyzing the political factions, and maintaining A
16:08
continuous dialogue. Exactly.
16:10
By the mid 17th century, this Italian model had scaled across
16:14
the entire continent, encompassing France, Spain,
16:18
Russia, the Ottoman Empire and crucially, the Nordic states.
16:22
And to make this constant communication viable, they had
16:25
to invent diplomatic immunity, right?
16:26
They did. An ambassador had to be able to
16:28
deliver a declaration of war or a hostile ultimatum without fear
16:33
of being, you know, executed on the spot.
16:34
Which used to be an occupational hazard.
16:36
It really was so. Embassies were recognized as
16:39
extraterritorial spaces, diplomatic pouches were
16:41
inviolable, and envoys were legally protected.
16:44
It created this exclusive club. To be recognized as a legitimate
16:49
European state, you had to participate in this specific
16:52
diplomatic network. For a small state like Denmark,
16:56
mastering this diplomatic architecture was the only
16:59
substitute for overwhelming military mass.
17:01
Exactly. You secure your borders not just
17:03
with fortresses, but by meticulously maintaining
17:06
alliances that ensure your larger neighbor would face a
17:10
coalition if they attacked you. Diplomacy didn't eliminate the
17:13
anarchy or prevent wars, but it regulated the friction.
17:16
It provided a shared operational language.
17:19
Yes. However, the state machinery
17:22
that participated in this diplomacy up until the late 18th
17:25
century was fundamentally dynastic and bureaucratic.
17:29
The state was still basically the personal property of the
17:31
monarch. The people were just subjects.
17:33
The general population was entirely excluded from political
17:36
life, but that dynamic violently shifted when the bureaucratic
17:40
apparatus of the state merged with the emotive, psychological
17:43
identity of the nation. Here's where it gets really
17:45
interesting. This is where we move from the
17:47
bureaucratic state to the nation state, and the vocabulary shift
17:50
is vital. It really is.
17:52
A state is the physical hardware right, the borders, the tax
17:55
collection agencies, the standing army, the legal courts.
17:59
The nation is the software, the shared identity, the cultural
18:03
narrative, the common language, and the collective history of a
18:06
people. That's a perfect analogy.
18:08
Prior to this, the hardware functioned entirely without the
18:11
software. A Habsburg emperor didn't care
18:14
if his subject spoke German, Hungarian or Czech as long as
18:17
they paid taxes and provided recruits.
18:19
Right. The integration of the nation
18:21
into the state fundamentally rewired the concept of
18:24
legitimacy. The catalyst was the American
18:26
Revolution in 1776 and even more explosively, the French
18:30
Revolution of 1789. Which turned everything upside
18:33
down. Completely, the revolutionaries
18:35
introduced the concept of popular sovereignty, this
18:38
radical idea that the ultimate authority of the state does not
18:42
descend from God to the King, but rather emanates from the
18:45
people themselves. The state apparatus was no
18:48
longer the property of the monarch, it was the instrument
18:50
of the nation. And that changed warfare
18:53
forever. When the newly formed French
18:55
Republic found itself invaded by an alliance of terrified
18:58
European monarchies who wanted to crush the revolution, the
19:02
French leadership realized they couldn't survive using
19:04
traditional small professional mercenary armies.
19:07
So they changed the rules of the game.
19:09
They implemented the Lavey Amass Universal conscription.
19:13
They essentially told the population this is no longer the
19:16
King's war, this is your war. The state belongs to you and
19:19
therefore you must bleed for it. Wow, the weaponization of
19:23
patriotism that created a total paradigm shift in military
19:27
capacity. Traditional armies were
19:30
incredibly expensive and prone to desertion, so generals
19:33
maneuvered carefully to avoid total destruction.
19:35
They treated their soldiers like expensive chess pieces.
19:38
But the French citizen army, motivated by nationalistic
19:41
fervor, could absorb massive casualties, mobilize rapidly,
19:45
and wage war with a shocking ferocity.
19:47
This ideological mobilization allowed Napoleon Bonaparte to
19:51
field armies of unprecedented size, sweeping.
19:54
Across Europe and systematically dismantling the old dynastic
19:57
armies. But the conquests of Napoleon
19:59
triggered a massive unintended consequence, didn't they?
20:02
By conquering and humiliating the fragmented German and
20:05
Italian principalities, the French inadvertently exported
20:09
the virus of nationalism. They really did.
20:11
The Germans, reeling from their defeat, realized that despite
20:15
sharing a language and a cultural heritage, a nation,
20:18
they lacked the unified bureaucratic state hardware
20:21
necessary to protect themselves in an anarchic.
20:24
System. So they needed to build the
20:26
hardware to protect the software.
20:27
Precisely. The Holy Roman Empire was
20:30
formally dissolved in 1806, clearing the way for a century
20:34
defined by the violent struggle for national self determination.
20:38
This culminated in the unification of Germany and Italy
20:40
in the late 19th century. So the system evolved into a
20:43
truly international order, operating on the same
20:46
Westphalian logic of sovereignty and anarchy, but with the added
20:50
combustible element of romantic nationalism.
20:53
Combustible is the right word initially.
20:56
Liberal philosophers like Adam Smith, whose Wealth of Nations
20:59
was published the same year as the American Declaration of
21:01
Independence, believe that empowering the people and
21:04
focusing on free trade would render war obsolete.
21:07
The logic was that rational citizens would prefer the mutual
21:10
enrichment of commerce over the destructive taxation of war.
21:13
Right. It's a compelling theory.
21:15
If our supply chains are completely integrated and we're
21:19
both getting rich trading manufactured goods, blowing up
21:22
each other's factories is economic suicide.
21:25
But that liberal optimism tragically underestimated the
21:28
psychological power of the nation state and the multiplier
21:31
effect of the Industrial Revolution.
21:32
It absolutely did. The industrialization of the
21:35
19th century provided the state with terrifying new
21:38
capabilities. Like railroads, allowing states
21:40
to rapidly deploy massive armies right to their borders.
21:43
Yes, the Telegraph enabled instantaneous centralization of
21:47
command, mass printing, homogenized national languages,
21:50
and disseminated nationalistic propaganda, turning rural
21:53
peasants into fervent, loyal citizens.
21:56
When the pursuit of industrial resources and secure markets
21:58
intercepted with aggressive national pride, the result was
22:02
the total mobilization of societies.
22:04
And the ultimate horrifying expression of this combined
22:07
machinery was the 20th century. The First and Second World Wars
22:11
weren't just conflicts between armies, they were existential
22:14
clashes of fully mobilized industrial nation states.
22:17
Total War. Between 1939 and 1945, the
22:20
state's capacity for violence, optimized by bureaucracy and
22:24
fueled by ideology, resulted in over 60 million deaths.
22:27
It birthed the industrialized genocide of the Holocaust.
22:30
And even after the devastation of Europe, the logic of the
22:33
system persisted right into the Cold War, bringing the entire
22:36
globe to the brink of nuclear annihilation.
22:39
That global expansion brings us to the most critical mechanism
22:42
of the modern era. While Europe was tearing itself
22:45
apart and refining its state machinery over 4 centuries, it
22:48
was also relentlessly expanding outward.
22:50
Which leads us to the big question.
22:52
To understand why the entire planet is now organized
22:55
according to this highly specific, intensely violent
22:57
European model, we have to examine the economics of empire
23:01
and colonialism. We do as outlined on page 16.
23:05
If we look at the global balance of power, around the year 1500,
23:08
Europe was essentially A stagnant provincial backwater.
23:12
The truly massive, sophisticated engines of human organization
23:16
were the great empires of Asia, the Ming Dynasty in China, the
23:20
Mughal Empire in India, the Ottoman Empire.
23:22
Right. These entities were vastly
23:24
wealthier, technologically advanced and organized on
23:27
principles completely alien to the competitive, fragmented
23:30
European model. So how did the Global center
23:34
gravity shift so dramatically? The shift was initially driven
23:37
by Europe's desperate need to bypass the Islamic empires that
23:41
controlled the overland trade routes to the immense wealth of
23:43
East Asian markets. In 1497, the Portuguese explorer
23:47
Roscoe da Gama successfully navigated around the southern
23:50
tip of Africa, opening a direct maritime artery to India.
23:53
And the Portuguese were rapidly followed by the Dutch, who
23:55
innovative the joint stock company, the Dutch East India
23:58
Company. The VOC, established in 1602,
24:01
was essentially A heavily armed autonomous protostate.
24:04
It was wild. It had the power to mint its own
24:06
coins, negotiate treaties and wage war independently of the
24:09
Dutch government. The European strategy in Asia
24:12
initially wasn't outright conquest, right?
24:15
The Asian empires were simply too powerful.
24:17
The Europeans basically just acted as aggressive, heavily
24:20
armed maritime traders. Initially, yes, but in the
24:23
Americas, the European expansion was apocalyptic.
24:26
The Spanish systematically dismantled the Aztec and Incan
24:30
empires, facilitated massively by the accidental weaponization
24:34
of European diseases like smallpox, which absolutely
24:37
decimated indigenous populations.
24:39
And the conquest of the Americas provided Europe with a crucial
24:42
economic lever, an astronomical influx of silver from mines like
24:46
Poachasi and Bolivia, extracted through brutal, coerced
24:50
indigenous labor. This silver provided the
24:53
European powers with the capital necessary to forcefully buy
24:56
their way into the Asian economies.
24:58
Over centuries, this dynamic of extraction laid the economic
25:01
foundation for the Industrial Revolution.
25:03
And once the Industrial Revolution takes hold in the
25:05
late 18th and 19th centuries, the dynamic changes from trading
25:08
to outright domination. The European nation states
25:11
develop an insatiable appetite for raw materials to feed their
25:15
factories, and they need captive markets to buy their mass
25:18
produced goods. This economic imperative drives
25:21
the aggressive systemic colonization of the globe.
25:24
You have the British consolidating control over the
25:27
entire Indian subcontinent. You have the Scramble for
25:30
Africa, initiated at the Berlin Conference in 1884.
25:33
Where European diplomats literally just drew arbitrary
25:36
lines across a map of Africa. Slicing right through ethnic and
25:40
linguistic groups solely to divide the continents resources
25:44
among themselves. What's fascinating here is that
25:47
by the dawn of the 20th century, the competitive logic of the
25:50
Westphalian system have been violently projected onto the
25:54
entire planet. But the deepest irony, the
25:57
central paradox of the modern international system, is how
26:00
that European model actually achieved universal
26:02
standardization. Because the colonial empires
26:04
themselves did not spread the state system right?
26:07
Colonialism was the absolute antithesis of Westfieldian
26:10
sovereignty. Exactly.
26:12
A colony has no self determination.
26:14
Its borders are mere administrative divisions managed
26:18
by an imperial metropole. The state model became truly
26:21
universal only through the process of decolonization.
26:24
This is a profound mechanism. In order for colonized
26:27
populations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East to break free
26:31
from European domination and be recognized as independent actors
26:34
on the world stage, they were forced to adopt the exact
26:37
political template of their oppressors.
26:39
They had no choice. The international system,
26:43
institutionalized heavily by the mid 20th century through bodies
26:46
like the United Nations, operated strictly on European
26:49
legal concepts. So to gain membership to the UN,
26:52
to secure loans from international banks OR to
26:55
establish diplomatic relations, an aspiring nation had to
26:58
demonstrably look and act like a European state.
27:02
Right. They had to maintain the
27:03
arbitrary fortified borders drawn by colonial
27:06
administrators. They needed a centralized
27:08
capital city, a bureaucratic foreign ministry, a standing
27:11
army and the symbolic trappings of a flag and a national anthem.
27:15
The tragic consequence of this process is that count
27:18
alternative indigenous methods of organizing human society,
27:22
decentralized networks, nomadic structures, fluid confederations
27:27
were systematically marginalized or entirely extinguished.
27:31
The European Modern wasn't universally adopted because it
27:34
was inherently superior for the local populations.
27:37
It was adopted because it was the only configuration that the
27:40
dominant global architecture would legally recognize.
27:44
Exactly right. That historical inheritance
27:46
completely defined the contemporary world order.
27:50
We are operating within an architecture designed by 16th
27:53
century European monarchs and hardened by 19th century
27:56
industrial warfare. It really makes you look at the
27:58
globe differently. It does, which provides the
28:00
perfect transition for our guest segment.
28:02
To analyze the contemporary impact of this architecture, I
28:05
want you to shift your analytical framework.
28:07
I'm going to ask you to view this strictly through the lens
28:09
of a historian of international order.
28:11
All right, historian, hat is on. Excellent.
28:14
Let's examine the broader implications.
28:16
Speaking as a historian, how do you explain the global
28:19
transition from massive, diverse, sprawling empires to
28:23
the rigid, highly structured modern state system we have
28:27
today? Well, looking through that
28:28
historical lens, the distinction fundamentally comes down to the
28:32
purpose and efficiency of the political organization.
28:35
Traditional empires were vast, culturally heterogeneous and
28:39
territorially fluid. They weren't trying to
28:40
micromanage everyone. Exactly.
28:42
They prized stability and tribute over deep integration.
28:45
They could afford to be decentralized.
28:47
The European state system, however, was forged in a
28:50
localized pressure cooker of relentless existential military
28:54
competition. So to survive, a state had to
28:56
achieve maximum efficiency in resource extraction, taxation
29:00
and mobilization. Precisely, the state became an
29:03
incredibly aggressive, highly optimized machine when European
29:07
powers expanded. This optimized model simply out
29:10
competed or violently dismantled the looser traditional imperial
29:14
structures. The rigid, homogeneous state was
29:17
the only organizational form capable of surviving the violent
29:20
geopolitical environment Europe had created and subsequently
29:23
globalized. OK, applying that historical
29:25
reality to the present day, how does this specific violent
29:29
origin story dictate the diplomatic and security
29:32
realities facing small states today, particularly looking at
29:35
Denmark? Because the core Westphalian
29:37
principle of anarchy remains fundamentally intact, meaning
29:40
there is still no global sovereign or ultimate enforcer
29:43
of international law. Survival for small state relies
29:46
entirely on the strategic tools developed in the 17th century.
29:49
So the old Italian city state playbook.
29:51
Essentially, yes. A small state like Denmark
29:55
cannot secure its territorial integrity through unilateral
29:58
military mass. Therefore, its entire survival
30:01
strategy must be diplomatic, involves meticulous adherence to
30:05
international law, the relentless cultivation of robust
30:08
diplomatic networks and, most importantly, deep integration
30:12
into powerful strategic alliances like NATO and the
30:15
European Union. Small states must constantly act
30:18
as agile balancers, leveraging institutional frameworks to bind
30:22
the power of larger, potentially aggressive neighbors.
30:24
Exactly. In an anarchic system, a small
30:28
state without a sophisticated diplomatic apparatus is
30:31
structurally defenseless. It is a sobering assessment.
30:34
Stepping back into our broader synthesis, we have covered an
30:37
immense expanse of historical mechanics, from the
30:39
decentralized overlap of medieval jurisdictions, through
30:42
the Crucible of the 30 Years War, the emotional mobilization
30:45
of the nation state, to the extractive paradox of
30:48
colonialism. We've covered a lot of ground
30:50
today. So what does this all mean for
30:52
you, the listener, whether you are analyzing current events,
30:55
studying political science, or practicing statecraft?
30:58
There are three definitive, actionable insights you must
31:01
extract from this deep analysis. First, sovereignty is a
31:05
historical construct, not a natural law.
31:08
It was engineered under specific geopolitical pressures in
31:11
Europe. Recognizing that the state
31:13
system was forged through specific historical conflicts
31:16
helps diplomats understand that international rules can and do
31:20
evolve. They're carved in stone.
31:22
Exactly. Second, the concept of the
31:25
nation is a powerful double edged sword.
31:27
Fusing the bureaucratic capability of the state with the
31:30
emotive psychological identity of the nation mobilize societies
31:33
for unprecedented economic development, but also for
31:36
catastrophic warfare. Nationalism remains a highly
31:40
volatile mechanism. Third, the legacy of colonialism
31:43
shapes every modern institution. The fact that the European state
31:47
model was universally exported and legally mandated through the
31:50
process of decolonization remains a fundamental dynamic in
31:53
understanding modern global inequalities and diplomatic
31:56
tensions. Those 3 pillars are absolutely
31:59
essential for decoding the Daily News cycle.
32:01
As a quick housekeeping reminder, if you want to
32:04
actively apply these historical insights to real time
32:07
geopolitical shifts, strongly consider utilizing the Patreon
32:10
option to access our upcoming exclusive briefings specifically
32:14
analyzing Danish foreign policy and domestic politics.
32:18
The link is right there in the description.
32:19
It really is the best way to see the theory applied directly to
32:22
practice. That officially wraps up this
32:24
first installment of our summer series on diplomacy and
32:27
international relations. If you value this kind of
32:31
rigorous mechanical unpacking of history, please follow the show
32:34
and take a second to rate it five stars.
32:36
It is the primary way this knowledge can reach an even
32:39
wider audience. We appreciate every single
32:41
review. Make sure you tune in for our
32:43
next installment, where we will build directly on this
32:45
architectural foundation and focus specifically on the
32:48
granular evolution and daily practice of diplomacy itself.
32:51
I will leave you with one final structural provocation to
32:54
consider. If the universal 1000 year old
32:57
institutions of the Middle Ages, the Papacy and the Holy Roman
33:00
Empire eventually buckled and collapsed under the pressure of
33:04
changing economics and military technology to give way to the
33:07
nation state, is it possible that the nation state itself is
33:10
just a temporary phase in human history?
33:13
As the friction of hyperglobalization,
33:15
transnational capital and borderless digital networks
33:17
accelerates, what might replace it next?