4 ms·
> we'll have first internet countries (USA), second internet countries (China), and third internet countries (both) This does not seem to be limited to network
by donavanm 6y ago
> we'll have first internet countries (USA), second internet countries (China), and third internet countries (both)
This does not seem to be limited to network connectivity. The same balkanization is occurring with trade, movement of people, and defence spending as well. I would also say that its not as discrete as “USA”, “China”, “other” and is probably better expressed as “US aligned” when you start looking at nations who are already members of groups like N Eyes, EEA, Belt & Road, etc.
Im particularly interested in India. Will they be successful enough to create their own sphere, fall into US influence, or defacto continue as a large unaligned “other.”
- scottlamb 6y agoYou're describing the Cold War-era First World (US-aligned countries), Second World (socialist countries), and Third World (unaligned countries).
- donavanm 6y agoI understand the parallels. I was trying to prod gp that it extends to dimensions beyond “internet” and they seem to be trending in the same direction. I do disagree that the old First/Second/Third characterizations are directly applicable. It looks to be more multipolar. The interesting points to me are, roughly, EU federalism/integration/defense, how closely/how many N Eyes will cluster with the US, and which “BRICS” will be large enough to stand on their own or even pull small “others” in to their sphere of influence. We’re not just swapping PRC for USSR. My guess is, roughly, sustainable alignments to the US, EU, and China. Sufficiently independent & influential states of India and Russia. Brazil & South Africa I dont really see them developing their own sphere nor being large enough to sustain independent major economic development along the lines of Hauwei, Airbus, TSMC, Qualcomm, Boeing, etc.