World Federalism is True Globalization

Rodrik's political trilemma offers the conditions in which a truly globalized world economy cannot function.  According to him there are three necessities of pure globalization: democracy, the nation-state, and economic integration.  The trilemma states that governments can only utilize as many as two out of three of these, but never all three.  Any effort to infuse a third quality tips the balance.  Those with strong nationalism and global trade, like China, are called "golden straight-jacket" governments, for their lack of interest in democracy.  Those with strong nationalist and democratic policies are categorized by the "Bretton Woods compromise", a fancy way of describing all the international institutions that regulated economies after World War 2.  Those with only democratic policies and economic integration in mind are leaning toward "world federalism", a concept that does away with the nation-state, focusing instead on election-based globalist policies. 

I used to shun globalization for all the adverse effects it caused.  Pollution and lopsided trading, leading to the idea of there being "third world countries", were two of my biggest concerns.  But the positives might outweigh the benefits on one condition: that we get rid of the nation-state as one of these political "necessities".  A purely globalized world economy can only exist if the nation-state corner of Rodrik's trilemma is done away with entirely.  I believe that national economic institutions should be limited to promote democracy and free trade with other countries.  War would decline more than it already has, and countries would work together to create higher standards for countries who are behind on infrastructure.  By definition, purity as it relates to globalization should not depend on national institutions at all, for these are only concerned with the state and not the global economy.  

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to reject all the preconceived notions and cultural biases that are the building blocks of our national pride.  Every country has proud citizens, no matter what age we are living in.  The idea is impractical at this stage in our social evolution, yet all the available evidence tells me it's the only possible way to still save this planet.   

Which will prevail, nationalism or globalism?  I don't think humanity can progress using both, certainly not the former.