No. Violence is not human nature. Acquiring power is human nature. If one can acquire power without being violent, then one will go that route. People are generally not violent for the sake of being violent. This is a cliched stereotype without much basis in reality.
Ehhh, I’d say the majority of those killed in the 20th century by state violence were killed unnecessarily. The Nazis only killed maybe tens of thousands :eek: from pure political power consolidation yet they still managed to hold absolute power by the end of WW2. So that implies that the millions that Stalin and Mao killed were not necessary along their roads to power consolidation. With Mao I can understand maybe a mixture of thinking that causing a bit of suffering was necessary to consolidate power, combined with a bit of incompetence. But knowing a little about Stalin, it’s hard to believe a lot of it was not sheer malevolence. (And of course the Holocaust is a given instance of violence without any possible power-acquisition motive.)
That’s a question of methods though. Even then, the killing wasn’t THE POINT. The killing was a means to an end. It might have been misguided and unecessary, but then again, maybe not. Maybe the goals of Stalin or Mao couldn’t be achieved without violence. That doesn’t mean that the violence was the ends. For Marxism/Communism as a whole, the end to violence were the ends. Unfortunately the belief in the Dictatorship of the Proletariat held sway.
Following what will be called the Muslim Wars, most of the Middle Eastern countries that were created by the Europeans after WWI will collapse in civil war. A new, more secular federation will emerge comprising Saudi, Oman, Yemen, the UAE, parts of Iraq, Syria and Jordan. Much of the un-federated territory will belong to a new Kurdish nation, or will be absorbed by the new federal republic of Persia. Parts of the formerly know country of Pakistan and Afghanistan will be absorbed by Greater India, the Republic of Persia and the new Kurdish republic.
As for Europe…following the inevitable collapse of socialism, many European nations will face complete economic collapse due to the increasing weight of their social programs. When coupled with internal ethnic friction, a change in global climate which brought on much cooler temperatures and the expectations of their citizens wrt their social safety net, this will cause a general collapse of the EU as a viable economic entity and will bring about a shift to a tighter federation of European states, similar to the United States, with many European nations joining this new combine nation which will almost certainly rival and surpass the US in the next century. Notably, the United Kingdom will not join, instead it will increasingly move to integrate itself more fully with the United States, though in no way giving up it’s own sovereignty.
The United States will emerge at the close of the next century as the uncontested superpower, culturally, economically and militarily, despite the near collapse of it’s economy brought on by the Muslim Wars, the economic collapse of the EU and the collapse of the Chinese economy and the series of civil wars that wracked that nation. This was brought on by a combination of factors, but historians concede that the president Obama’s 2 terms had a tremendous impact on the re-emergence of the US as a major economic superpower. Coupled with later administrations decisions to develop and exploit space born resources as well as the US’s advances in bio-tech have eventually made it THE economic power in the world.
Ok, some of that was tongue in cheek…it’s fun to play what if with history though. I DO think that the Euro’s will eventually form some kind of federation, not just an economic union…and I do actually think they will hit the wall this century wrt their social programs. To me, they are stretched already, and if (as I suspect) there are any kinds of additional military stresses put on them, they will collapse like a house of cards. Just my opinion there. I also think there is a good chance that this century China will hit it’s wall…the stresses between it’s economic growth, environmental destruction and it’s communist core will explode and either a new, more open nation will emerge, or it will fragment or it will become completely isolationist and stagnate. I also think that the ME is on the verge of some very bad times, though I was just kidding about how it will turn out. No idea what will happen, just that it will probably be bad.
-XT
I don’t think the EU has been militarily vigilant enough, if it would collapse like a house of cards, it would be because we Euros haven’t been using our military aggressively or abundantly enough to counteract any threat, rather than being overstretched.
How were you able to make that map???
xtisme has a point. Demographic decline in Europe and Japan will lead to a questioning of the very basis of the welfare state as welfare systems become necrotic due to the lack of available workers. As such they will turn to immigration, which will cause brain drain in the third world and will turn Europe into a multiethnic polity, essentially obliterating their prior ethnic character.
Not a chance.
I simply say that Russia will never cede Siberia peacefully. And we all agree that China will want, even need it.
Africa… will not be a factor for a hundred years. East Asia may sock China hard.
I can’t say a damn thing about Mexico or South America except that Chavez is his own worst enemy. He may create a united South America, but probably as a reaction to him, rather than under his wing.
The graying of the EU will not help matters much there.
It’s already happening…peacefully.
Hmm, I think Africa will start to show some positive signs around mid-century.
Mexico is practically a failed Narco-State. Brazil is the country of the future, and always will be.
Nope, it’s a serious issue.
After reading the cite, I’d say no more than the USA becoming Chinese.
Used a program called Paint.Net, although you could easily use just Paint to do similar.
Huh? From that article:
OK, so the Russians in Siberia buy a lot of Chinese goods. How does that equate to “Siberia is becoming Chinese?” By that measure, America is becoming Chinese.
I guess I posted the wrong article. Basically Russia is granting concessions for Chinese workers to develop Siberia to send the raws back to China. I assume the Chinese companies are paying taxes to the government or at least kickbacks to the oligarchs.
Just what threats is the EU facing, or likely to face, that the military could counter? (N.B.: Terrorism does not belong on that list.)
The EU doesn’t have a military and couldn’t counter a flea infection. What threats individual EU countries face within the next 100 years is impossible to predict. But how about: Could the Netherlands pull off A Falklands?
A tad hyperbolic? The EU doesn’t have a military but it’s constituent countries do and whether or not there is a formal agreement to mutual defence in place or not, I think if someone were to invade an individual EU country others would assist it.
I don’t think saying the EU is unable to defend itself and then using the inability of a smaller EU nation with a limited military and airforce to re-capture a territorial holding on the other side of the world as an example is a very sound argument.
Russian irredentism, as per my post.
You think? A rather high expectation. And not one that smaller EU countries like Denmark currently subscribe to. Many European countries have learnt the hard way that depending on the goodwill of larger European nations is a very risky business.
”territorial holding”? What’s that supposed to mean? Do you consider the Dutch claim to the islands to be dubious? But as far as the EU is concerned the Caribbean is not on the other side of the world, as there are many areas in the region that are directly part of the EU. If the EU is unable to defend those parts of EU because the EU has no military and the individual EU nations of which the regions are a part are unable to defend them because of limited military and airforce strength, what would you call it if not the inability to counter a threat? Or perhaps you want to redefine EU to be only continental Europe + Britain? Are we to write off Iceland (once they get membership), the Faeroes and Greenland too? The Azores, the Canary Islands, etc.
There will be one world called iLand. Steve Jobs and his progeny will benevolently rule over us all.
It could happen.