Two things - pointing out all the conflicts you can name going on today as proof the world is getting more violent is a classic example of selection bias. The list on makes sense if you're comparing it to other times in history and how many conflicts were going on then. Given the extent of global media and telecommunications connectivity, plus the fact that of course you know more about the current time because it's happening right now, its not surprising to think that there's more war today than in previous years. But so many wars in previous years haave just been forgotten or were never in the public consciousness. Between 1998 and 2001 350,000 people died in violent deaths in the Congo War plus an extra 5 million or so preventable deaths caused by conflict related issues such as famine, lack of access to health care, etc. That shark never made the news. In the 50s 60s and 70s there were heaps of deaths from civil wars all over the world, genocide and ethnic cleansing in places like Burundi and Ethiopia which are largely forgotten today plus big ones like the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. The stats that Ryan has linked to look at all conflicts, not just the ones which make the news.
The second thing is about people trumpeting the end of the nation state. This has been talked about for years but there's no indication that it will happen. The EU experiment is often touted as proof but putting aside that (and it's worth noting that it's hardly a resounding success) most of the world is actually trending in the opposite direction. The break-up of the USSR, Yugoslavia, and now Iraq and Syria shows that ethnic groups in larger states want their own nation states. Plus the entire framework of global politics is state-based, and the big powers outside of the EU all cling to that very hard. The US, Russia, and China are all staunchly in favour of maintaining state soveriegnty as much as they can. Sure, mass migration is challenging nation state ideals in Europe but challenging is very different to threatening, and it's still only a small proportion of the total planet. Growth and development across the rest of the world is in general strengthening states, not weakening them. And the lure of Europe to migrants is that it has wealth, social services, health care, less crime, etc - which have all come about through strong, stable national governments.
That's not to say nation states are the best way or running things but they're an embedded system which will be very hard to move.
