united nations

[jonathankaplan]

I have been thinking some about the next century, and, feeling like the USA is going more socialist, I have had a few thoughts about the way the old frameworks are going to change for the new. The only rule in life (I think) is that everything changes

Comments

[ext_1460]

Today is the best predictor of tomorrow. I'm not sure I buy that geography as organizational unit was as arbitrary and recent a choice as you seem to think; I suspect "ability to apply coercion" is the driving force there. Which means that as long as states serve the same role (stationary bandits, milking their subjects in return for protection from others), they're likely to be based on geography.

And I think most of the big ones are good enough at it to survive minor changes in economics or public sentiment.

Singularity-like topics (free energy or materials via nanotech, or brain upload onto cheap compute resources) change all this, but not much else will.

[jonathankaplan]

I think that geography as an organizational unit is an ancient determinant, I just reread what I wrote, sorry to imply otherwise. I agree with the coercion comment, for sure.

As for the rest,...we'll see. You are correct, it is hard to predict singularity-like events, except, it does seem to me, that as I get older, those type of events are occurring more and more often. Life is just getting faster, everywhere, everyhow.

Thanks!

[kenshi]

I answered "None of the Above" simply because the time scale for your question is long enough to include some major transitions.

Our current political order is going to die and be replaced by the Fifth Republic sometime in the next twenty years. Whatever the Fifth Republic is, it will likely share a nominal relationship to the previous four political orders (Continental Congress, Constitution, Union, and New Deal), but be actually very different in how it works and what it does. At this point, I'd say the odds are that the Fifth Republic will be considerably less "free" than our current order (at least initially), but will trend toward becoming much more free as it entrenches itself. By 2105, it ought to be near or just past its apogee and ready to fall due to its own excesses. After that, who knows what we'll get.

[jonathankaplan]

Yes, that time scale may have been too large, given my thoughts written in reply right above yours. I like your specificity, and can't fault it in any visible way. Certainly a higher probability.
THanks!

[sabyl]

I think moving toward World Governance is a good thing, but a world government is BAD IMO.

[jonathankaplan]

I agree, but once the world starts sliding away from national sovereignty, it is going to be difficult to stop at an intermediate point, maybe. Hopefully, we'll see.
Thanks! And another Congrats!

[smandal]

I wonder if we will need superpowers 100 years from now.

I don't know if that's an optimistic or pessimistic view.

[jonathankaplan]

Without further definition, I'd say Both.
Thanks for replying.

[jonathankaplan]

Perhaps not that far, but yes. We are doomed in the same financial way. The fact everyone wants our currency as reserve creates some serious flaws in the system, going forward, I think.
Can't wait to see what happens.
Thanks!