from tribalism to religionism to nationalism to... ?

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=2f608f0e-0cd2-451c-bf24-1c40aae3b7b1

First a simplified context. Our survival once depended on living in tribes led by a strong leader. Gradually the groups became larger as the smarter (or desperate or beaten) leaders aligned themselves with stronger leaders. Low-level conflict was inevitable. Eventually groups aligned themselves along religious lines, leading to larger more brutal conflicts culminating in WWII. We still can't all agree on which god/being(s) is/are supreme - but at least for the last 60 years or so that argument has been more or less irrelevant and the world's borders have been relatively stable (thanks in part to the UN's slowness (aside: I wonder if it wasn't designed that way to allow emotions to simmer)). This assurance of stability permitted investment in infrastructure and private enterprise, improving our standard of living significantly. We may not have the same religion, but there is consensus and respect of each other's national borders, which is why I still believe the state - you and I and everybody else - must maintain a meaningful presence in society, actively investing in the threads stitching our social fabric together.

What comes next though? Advances in transportation facilitated massive migration around the world, where people gathered naturally (sometimes more, sometimes less) in specific areas of every city. Nationalism, democracy, hard work and a common conviction in human rights eventually broke down the barriers separating them and respectful integration began. More recently, however, human rights excesses, cultural districts reaching critical mass and more particularly advances in communication almost eliminate entirely the need (and sometimes the will) to integrate themselves with their host nations and national borders lose their relevance.

if not a centralized government system, who will we (people in general) sign a social contract with next, to decide what is best for us, ensure social justice, defence of our interests and ways of life? Since "we" are increasingly divided along cultural and religious lines, is there still hope to reconcile and (re)integrate the more extremist groups, and if so, what who gets to decide what means are justifiable? Or are we past the tipping point?

I believe people come to this country because of perceived ideals and opportunites for a better way of life. If they are disillusioned upon arrival, is that is not our fault? and is it not the natural tendency for them to gravitate toward areas where their old culture has already been reestablished, which may be less than ideal, but at least is familiar to them? (Mis-)application of current policies only accelerate this phenomenon and our disrespect for them anyway further compounds the problems. So, shouldn't we start looking at approaches to realize an environment where ideals and opportunities for self-actualization and interdependency really exist? Such a Canada was once valued as important and achievable and that perception still exists abroad. I personally still believe in it, but if we collectively "know better" now that that ideal is wrong or that it is just not achievable, do we not have a responsibility to ourselves and the rest of the world to admit it, agree on something better, and move on?