4 ms·

Simply put, that is ridiculous. I find it remarkable to see apparently very intelligent people predict insane xenophobic doomsday scenarios as the future. Often

by jbrun 18y ago

Simply put, that is ridiculous. I find it remarkable to see apparently very intelligent people predict insane xenophobic doomsday scenarios as the future. Often, they seem to be reminiscing about a simpler past they were familiar with and how we [the young] have shot it all to hell, and are thus on a path towards self-destruction and reckoning.

run4yourlives 18y ago
There is a 37signals lesson in here somewhere about expanding sales... the guy predicted the recession, so now is the time to preach doomsday on that record. I'm sure Oprah's secret followers will lap it up.
electromagnetic 18y ago
I love that they claim they're predicting things from the past, but actually aren't. They claim the future will see a 'polycentric' (see: multipolarity; they got the name wrong) world where we will be ruled by many powers instead of one. Aside from the fact this has rarely been seen in history, and only during transitional periods (After WW2, briefly we had USA, USSR and the British Empire as superpowers) when it has been seen. When we look back, with hindsight it becomes clear that there is a direct line of superpowers back to the dawn of civilization and, largely, one superpower passed off the power to its successor. The example here would be that the British Empire, instead of fighting to the death stepped aside for the USA. This has been played for thousands of years, during the Classical period it was passed between Greece and Rome, who was the super power. After the Roman Empire was defeated by the Hunnic Empire (Atilla the Hun) the power moved so far to the east no one in Europe had a clue, which led to the Dark Ages, because the people who had spread their technology (the Romans) rarely taught the locals how to build it themselves. This meant that after the Roman Empire, and the fairly swift collapse of the Hunnic Empire with the death of Atilla, Europe was left without a power and so was the world. It was quite ironic, it would be like if the USSR had beat the USA in 1990, and a year later still collapsed. The effect was profound, especially moving into the medieval period, due to the fact that people relied on these Empires to shift around technology and without them there was no one big enough to move the information. (Ed: This is also why when moving into the late Medieval Period and the Colonial Era, we had multiple powers all handing the superpower status between them as one got a clear advantage. In hindsight this largely centered between England and France, a play reminiscent of how Greece and Rome passed the superpower title between themselves many times during the classical period, but at no point was there two true superpowers.) I find that their predictions are based on personal opinions, and they choose to use history to back themselves up whenever it's convenient, but in many of the examples they wholly ignore it. There's no historical basis to assume suicide bombings, it's an exceptionally rare development with the invention of compact explosives and religious brainwashing. Why would a pirate perform a suicide bombing, it's absurd they're in it for personal gain not religious gain. This article is very stupid merely for trying to predict the future. I'll trust a Sci-Fi writer on the future before I trust an economist, if we could trust economists to predict the future then we wouldn't be in the financial crisis we are.
- run4yourlives 18y ago
  Europe was left without a power and so was the world. Europe yes, but power for the world as you suggest moved east, and remained in the Muslim world for most of the middle ages. While people in London were dying in plagues, the folks in Constantinople were enjoying their new found success.
  - thingie 18y ago
    Constantinople wasn't part of the muslim world in the middle ages, it was the center of eastern orthodox christianity, it lost its fight with the western branch, and eventually was conquered by the muslims :) (well, depends on your definition of middle ages, but the opinion that middle ages ended with the fall of Constantinople is quite popular).
- eru 18y ago
  Don't you confuse history as a story with the real thing? The greeks were only a super-power in their limited sphere. China and Rome/Greece did not even interact that much.
  - electromagnetic 18y ago
    Aside from the Silk Road, communication between Europe and Asia was relatively small and the prospect of war was extremely remote. During the Classical Period, China definitely had some of the elements of a superpower, but they're questionable on the political and military front. China was quite insular, combating themselves with numerous political upheavals. However, the Roman Empire (more so than Greece) managed to stay the infighting between factions until unification and what we all perceive as the Roman Empire that stretched across a huge area. China's history is the Dynasties, which up until the Mongol Invasion and the formation of the Yuan Dynasty, the country hadn't had one single ruler of the whole territory. Probably in around 1200, when the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire) itself divided into three states, the Yuan Dynasty and thus China probably became the worlds superpower. After 1206 when Genghis Khan united the Mongols there's little doubt that the Mongol Empire was the super power. At its height it controlled over half of Eurasia, meaning at the time it essentially controlled over half of the world. Even when it broke into the Yuan Dynasty, Ilkhanate, Golden Horde and Chagatai Khanate. However, the Yuan Dynasty was largely recognized as led by the Great Khan, but the other Khanates didn't seem to care, they just never attacked each other.
rms 18y ago
You'd think these smart people would have figured out what globalization means by now. Here's a big hint: world government.
- cmars232 18y ago
  And when that government becomes corrupt, there will be no refuge, nowhere left to run.
thingie 18y ago
It is not a doomsday scenario. It will be simply a different world, and people will get used to it (well, at least, they will have no other option). Our problems of today aren't very happy either, and if you told someone in 1950 how the world will look in 2009, he would call it insane and doomsday scenario too :)

by jbrun 18y ago

run4yourlives 18y ago

There is a 37signals lesson in here somewhere about expanding sales... the guy predicted the recession, so now is the time to preach doomsday on that record. I'm sure Oprah's secret followers will lap it up.

electromagnetic 18y ago

I love that they claim they're predicting things from the past, but actually aren't. They claim the future will see a 'polycentric' (see: multipolarity; they got the name wrong) world where we will be ruled by many powers instead of one. Aside from the fact this has rarely been seen in history, and only during transitional periods (After WW2, briefly we had USA, USSR and the British Empire as superpowers) when it has been seen. When we look back, with hindsight it becomes clear that there is a direct line of superpowers back to the dawn of civilization and, largely, one superpower passed off the power to its successor. The example here would be that the British Empire, instead of fighting to the death stepped aside for the USA. This has been played for thousands of years, during the Classical period it was passed between Greece and Rome, who was the super power. After the Roman Empire was defeated by the Hunnic Empire (Atilla the Hun) the power moved so far to the east no one in Europe had a clue, which led to the Dark Ages, because the people who had spread their technology (the Romans) rarely taught the locals how to build it themselves. This meant that after the Roman Empire, and the fairly swift collapse of the Hunnic Empire with the death of Atilla, Europe was left without a power and so was the world. It was quite ironic, it would be like if the USSR had beat the USA in 1990, and a year later still collapsed. The effect was profound, especially moving into the medieval period, due to the fact that people relied on these Empires to shift around technology and without them there was no one big enough to move the information. (Ed: This is also why when moving into the late Medieval Period and the Colonial Era, we had multiple powers all handing the superpower status between them as one got a clear advantage. In hindsight this largely centered between England and France, a play reminiscent of how Greece and Rome passed the superpower title between themselves many times during the classical period, but at no point was there two true superpowers.) I find that their predictions are based on personal opinions, and they choose to use history to back themselves up whenever it's convenient, but in many of the examples they wholly ignore it. There's no historical basis to assume suicide bombings, it's an exceptionally rare development with the invention of compact explosives and religious brainwashing. Why would a pirate perform a suicide bombing, it's absurd they're in it for personal gain not religious gain. This article is very stupid merely for trying to predict the future. I'll trust a Sci-Fi writer on the future before I trust an economist, if we could trust economists to predict the future then we wouldn't be in the financial crisis we are.

run4yourlives 18y ago
Europe was left without a power and so was the world. Europe yes, but power for the world as you suggest moved east, and remained in the Muslim world for most of the middle ages. While people in London were dying in plagues, the folks in Constantinople were enjoying their new found success.
- thingie 18y ago
  Constantinople wasn't part of the muslim world in the middle ages, it was the center of eastern orthodox christianity, it lost its fight with the western branch, and eventually was conquered by the muslims :) (well, depends on your definition of middle ages, but the opinion that middle ages ended with the fall of Constantinople is quite popular).
eru 18y ago
Don't you confuse history as a story with the real thing? The greeks were only a super-power in their limited sphere. China and Rome/Greece did not even interact that much.
- electromagnetic 18y ago
  Aside from the Silk Road, communication between Europe and Asia was relatively small and the prospect of war was extremely remote. During the Classical Period, China definitely had some of the elements of a superpower, but they're questionable on the political and military front. China was quite insular, combating themselves with numerous political upheavals. However, the Roman Empire (more so than Greece) managed to stay the infighting between factions until unification and what we all perceive as the Roman Empire that stretched across a huge area. China's history is the Dynasties, which up until the Mongol Invasion and the formation of the Yuan Dynasty, the country hadn't had one single ruler of the whole territory. Probably in around 1200, when the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire) itself divided into three states, the Yuan Dynasty and thus China probably became the worlds superpower. After 1206 when Genghis Khan united the Mongols there's little doubt that the Mongol Empire was the super power. At its height it controlled over half of Eurasia, meaning at the time it essentially controlled over half of the world. Even when it broke into the Yuan Dynasty, Ilkhanate, Golden Horde and Chagatai Khanate. However, the Yuan Dynasty was largely recognized as led by the Great Khan, but the other Khanates didn't seem to care, they just never attacked each other.

rms 18y ago

You'd think these smart people would have figured out what globalization means by now. Here's a big hint: world government.

cmars232 18y ago
And when that government becomes corrupt, there will be no refuge, nowhere left to run.

thingie 18y ago

It is not a doomsday scenario. It will be simply a different world, and people will get used to it (well, at least, they will have no other option). Our problems of today aren't very happy either, and if you told someone in 1950 how the world will look in 2009, he would call it insane and doomsday scenario too :)