Global progressivism is an ideology that challenges the world order based on a system of states. It aims at the removal of state and at the establishment of a new form of community and governance. Perhaps there is no more com-prehensive theoretical expression of this ideology than Empire of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, who support globalization for they believe that it would ultimately lead humanity to the liberation from all oppression. In this paper I examine the arguments of Hardt and Negri. I try to show that it is unlikely that in the future the state system with be replaced by a global earthly community as they envision. I argue that in their attempt to construct a new earthy city and a new post-human being, they overlook something that can be called the other suppressed side of human beings. Like other revolutionary thinkers before them, they do not pay enough attention to human passions, and especially to the desire for recognition. Furthermore, against Alexander Wendt I argue that it is unlikely that in the future there should be a world state. If those two future possibilities, a global city or a world state are excluded, this means that in the future there should still be states. I end this paper with some concluding remarks in which I say that the future state system should be organized on the model of international society, which should nevertheless included transnational actors at various levels of decision making process.