...The list could really go on. Ukraine and Venezuela are "new". Pretty much throw in all the "Arab Spring" states. +, +, + .
I'm really not saying there is some big multinational conflict on the horizon. I am saying, about all the little stirrings we see lately, that I expect things to ramp up as opposed to simmering down in the next 5 years. There is a new tenor in this day than any time I remember, that I only identify in the context of history books reading about the world in the decade leading up to the first world war. I again am not saying that I expect any large multinational conflict, but I do think it's becoming clear that the post WW2 model that has stabilized the world for generations has become obsolete and is gradually losing function.
The nuclear deterrent still remains, but I think the best way to put it is that, deterrent or no, nations are losing their ability to avoid rubbing shoulders. Because, as much as world powers have gotten peace right thanks in no small part to this deterrent -- they have gotten so much domestic policy wrong, the day is coming when so much can't be swept under the rug and it's all going to spill out for the citizens of nations to see.
Ultimately, there's a lot more going on than just these little rumblings up above. There are more problems in Europe and the United States: financial and economic turmoil in Greece, Spain and Ireland. Rising unemployment around the world. Rising food prices. Not good indicators.
My question, as always, is where's it all going to lead?
Non Sequitur: I think the thing people miss when these things happen, is that it did not all come about for a good reason, to the extent where you could say, "Well that was unavoidable". All these little collusions, it's all the result of willful mismanagement - kicking the can down the road, instead of fixing things while they're an option, not a mandate. In the states, in Europe, in Russia, in South America, in the Middle East. Mismanagement at home; mismanagement abroad.
Blame democracy too, sometimes there is just no political will for doing what really needs to be done in both specific and general terms; the voters, like their representatives, are often much more comfortable voting for the prolonging of denial, which is enjoyable, rather than the timely accountability, which is difficult. Illusions aside, we're not such great places. We pretty much all get the governments we deserve.
Much as we'd like to think otherwise, unsuspecting people are going to come around to the rude awakening that the big world wide "corruption index", if there possibly could be such a thing, actually would look a lot more like this:
If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
DCB wrote:Everything was so peaceful until Obama showed up.
Wow, that's a stupid comment. Is U.S. electoral politics the only prism through which you're able to view world affairs?
Neil Page wrote:It's like going on a date
with a Chatty Cathy doll.
There should be a string on your chest
that I pull out.
Except I wouldn't pull it out, you would.
Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!
In other words, if I won't make it a political argument, you just stroll up and add the politics yourself. Not only do you have your side picked, but you have everybody else's parts picked too. That's probably convenient if your entire goal is to run through a script of predetermined arguments, that's something that seems to be an important function of ideologists - to constantly hypnotize the mind in a circular, looping pattern. Not my cup of tea though.
I'm really more interested in talking about these events above in the context of history.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests