In my statement, I wanted to stress on your word 'regionalism', not really the size of a country that bar the development of its economy and democracy. The only but great disadvantage of 'Small' (i will clarify it below) countries is when someone simply decide to swallow them and quickly accomplish the deed (the scenario is very likely if "each only sticks to its own business''), thus rendering all development a waste of time.
Nothing is guaranteed. I meant larger regions than Luxembourg. Might be even big country, which is divided for few regions, where central goverment is responsible for defense policy, foreign policy and maybe something else. The rest should be in competences of regional leaders. Most likely Swiss direct democracy should be practiced.
The question is in a hostile and suspicious atmosphere,
how big is big enough? My examples of Luxi and Sing are somewhat extreme, but as big as the old USSR, the survival was not assured if there were many that hated and tried their best to destroy it. Now forgo the 2 extremes and return to something quite in a middle: Switzerland. I agree that Swiss internal system is one of the best in the world (keeping such a diverse country intact, even enlarging it, throughout the great turmoils of Europe in 8 centuries is quite an impressive feat!). It is indeed natural that some positive aspects of this model should be incorporated into EU (as a EU citizen, you can help to do it) or into the bigger world government.
However if you meant that a certain country can adopt the stance and model of Switzerland to be free, prosperous and safely forget the rest of the world, then you are kinda utopian now (in a worst sense). The Swiss were only spared in the 20th century thanks to its neighbour (we know who) was clever enough to realise its utter uselessness other than being a 'temporary' docile safe for stolen money (there is no doubt that had Hitler fulfilled his goal, he would have finished off "Helvetia" as old Bonaparte so smoothly did centuries before). And in later time did it lie diffirently from its current location (say, in Balcan or Middle East), the oh-so-famous model would either not exist or be quickly consumed.
The Swiss model of neutrality and prosperity is ironically inimitable as long as everyone still 'stick to their own business' but it can well be universal if everyone is ready to foster a more 'cooperative' atmosphere (at high level). But of course, when countries are at such cooperative level, they may not hesitate into forming up into one body (just a little step further). And then the Swiss model with its idiosyncratic neutralism will be disposed of. Quite a sweet irony!
Anyway, I want to conclude my discussion with you by summerizing all my points so far:
-There is no country in the world safe to develop itself and its citizens as long as there is negative dog-eat-dog atmosphere, which is so prevalent today.
-The establishment of a world government in its true sense is neccesary to cleanse that atmosphere, bringing prosperity and equality to all particating nations and accordingly to every citizen. Thanks to that, it will be the thing all governments dream to be: Sustainable.
-This establishment will take a very long time but it must be developed consistently and simultanously with advanced education of every person (on citizenship and high tech communication). I stress again that proficient knowledge of communication is vital to guarantee that
every citizen can watch, react and participate in all actions of this massive government if they so choose. That will make the old ideas of Centralization or Regionalisation become of much less consequence. And principally, it will make any abuse of power and corruption easy to detect and be denounced. Again it is the business of a hundred years so any more details might be a little more early.
-The EU is the first step toward that necessary future. It has the fortune (can be the cause too) of founding in the region most advanced in economy and education. The benefits it has brought to many of its members clearly outweight any of its defects (which is mainly due to its inexperience). I believe whatever imperfections the Eu may have, until the foundation of a world government, I challenge anyone to find a state or an international entity that has made such
a great effort and
has succeeded in bringing prosperity, equality to
more people or member states. Just don't mistake obligations with oppression and it will be okay.
-In that New World Order, Polish people has nothing to fear. Poland
will lose its statehood in the end, but the gain for its people is immense: Universal prosperity and safety, multiplied heritage, the firm sense of equality and freedom. The idea that serves to unite people for good causes is good as long as it not blocks another idea that serves to unite more people for better causes. I believe sooner or later, the idea of Poland, after having accomplished its historic role of uniting the Poles to resist tyranny, will have to be replaced by a higher, more universal idea. (Of course, in case something bad happens in this rather rosy scenario, no one forbids Poles to turn back to their old Polish root anf strike another round of 'Za Wolność naszą i waszą'!)
-And finally, before even the thing is kicked into action, everyone must be vaccinated with a nice and hefty dose of anti-cynicism!
