Given that the foundation of the American state is the ‘Bill of Rights’ as well as the U.S. Constitution which encompasses the ‘Bill of Rights,” and in turn the foundation of the ‘Bill of Rights’ and the U.S. Constitution is the overthrow of an individual or a set of individuals who advance a policy of global hegemony – with the policy of global hegemony now being a contravention of international law since the advent of the UN Charter – it follows that the foundation of the American state is the individual who sheds light on the corruption and abuses of power which result from a policy of global hegemony that is advanced by an individual or a set of individuals. After all, as Hegel wrote: “The essence of the state is the universal, self-originated, and self-developed – the reasonable spirit of will; but, as self-knowing and self-actualizing, sheer subjectivity, and – as an actuality – one individual.”
Without the individual who is discrediting and de-legitimizing the individual or the set of individuals who are advancing a policy of global hegemony, the state collapses. “If we take thee away, We surely shall take vengeance on them.” Thus, in a sense, the individual replaces the state because without the individual, the state will cease to exist because of its corruption and war crimes resulting from a failed policy of global hegemony.
“Then We appointed you viceroys in the earth after them, that We might see how ye behave.” As a result, the individual who replaces the state is the self-actualized individual, in a world where less than one percent of the global population self-actualizes. In turn, the self-actualized individual manages world affairs, but is not a dictator. “Thou art not a dictator over them.” Conflating the oversight and management of world affairs to dictatorship is yet another false dilemma. One can oversee and manage world affairs in an age of internet and global connectivity without having to resort to dictatorship or a policy of global hegemony.
Thus, whereas the state resorts to a policy of global hegemony to control or influence the minds of individuals around the world, the self-actualized individual (“Insan al-Kamil”) uses global connectivity and logic to oversee and manage global affairs. “See ye not how God hath made serviceable unto you whatsoever is in the skies and whatsoever is in the earth and hath loaded you with His favors both without and within?”
This is where the concept of “hyper-centralization amidst social fragmentation” which has been highlighted by Fukuyama comes to the fore in postmodern thought, with natural religion being one of the four major ontological states (essence of being) in the postmodern epoch, in addition to modernity, Marxism, and populism. Whether concepts such as “hyper-centralization amidst social fragmentation” and theories such as realism and economic interdependence which are at play in the international system are a priori in human minds or impinge upon the human mind through experience and external reality has been subject to debate through the course of Western history. But perhaps the individual can best explain the evolution of the international system – as well as the concepts and theories which have prompted this evolution – in the postmodern period.