Amid all the flag-waving, chants of "USA, USA," and other nationalist hoopla that characterize mainstream politics in the United States, it's easy to miss the fact that most Americans favor global governance.  Although a great many Americans do feel a sense of identification with the United States, a majority also supports moving beyond the traditional nation-state system.

Although critics of the Biden administration's Build Back Better plan to increase funding for U.S. education, healthcare, and action against climate catastrophe say the United States can't afford it, there are no such qualms about ramping up funding for the U.S. military.  Indeed, despite the fact that the U.S. government is already, by far, the world's biggest military spender, another substantial rise in U.S. military expenditures is set to occur.  The reason has less to do with national security than with inflamed nationalism and, especially, the enormous influence of self-interested military contractors.

The governments of the United States and China are currently on a very dangerous collision course -- one that could lead to war, possibly even nuclear war.  At the same time, these two countries operate the world's largest economies, have the biggest military budgets, and are the leading consumers of energy.  Therefore, the world would benefit enormously if they cooperated in addressing global problems.  Will they do so?  It's certainly possible.

Although there has been ample warning about three developments that threaten continued human existence -- preparations for nuclear war, climate change, and disease pandemics -- governments have not taken adequate measures to safeguard human survival.  The explanation for this failure to cope with these looming catastrophes, despite public support for doing so, can be found in the dominance of corporate priorities and the weakness of global governance.

Is it possible to build social solidarity beyond the state?  Given our currently divided, war-torn world, It's easy to conclude that it's not.  Even so, over the course of modern history, social movements have managed to form global networks of activists who have transcended nationalism in their ideas and actions.

During the late 1950s and early 1960s, as debate raged over the dangers of nuclear weapons testing, volunteers in St. Louis collected hundreds of thousands of baby teeth in an attempt to discover the impact of radioactive nuclear fallout on human health.  Although that question never received the kind of scientific scrutiny necessary to provide a definitive answer, a major study now underway at Harvard University, based on the long-forgotten teeth, should finally produce conclusive results.

The United States and China, the world's mightiest military and economic powers, are currently heading toward a Cold War or even a hot one, with disastrous consequences.  But an alternative path is available, and could be taken.

Although, beginning in about 2015, nationalist parties made enormous advances in countries around the world, recently they have been on the wane.  Consequently, possibilities have re-emerged for addressing global problems on a global basis.

In this crisply written, well-researched book, Lesley Blume tells the fascinating story of the background to John Hersey's pathbreaking article, "Hiroshima," and of its profound impact.  It's a story of how a small group of determined journalists dared to challenge the nuclear weapons priorities of major nations and, remarkably, succeeded in breaking through a wall of official silence to reveal the human effects of nuclear war.

After decades of progress in reducing nuclear arsenals through arms control and disarmament agreements, all nine nuclear powers are once again busily upgrading their nuclear weapons capabilities.  They can plunge ahead with their nuclear arms race and face the terrible economic and human consequences.  Or they can take the path of sanity in the nuclear age and join other nations in building a nuclear weapons-free world.