Dog Ear

I read non-fiction intermittently when a good title catches my eye or I hear about a book on NPR. This book came to my attention while I was browsing the New York Times best seller list. It reminded me of the type of forecasting I learned about during the Mid-Atlantic Library Future’s Conference in May 0f 2007. Ray Kurzweil and Bob Treadwayspecifically touched on processes similar to those used by Friedman to predict future events.

Friedman begins by closing the door on the European Age and the dawn of the American Age (the 21st century). His mantra: Expect the unexpected. China will fragment and therefore exclude it from being a major player in the 21st century. Japan, Poland, and Turkey will emerge as threats to the United States and require monitoring. The battleground for late 21st century war will take place in space.

All of Freidman’s geopolitical forecasting is founded on a handful of statements. First, that “the inherent power of the United States coupled with its geographic position makes the United States the pivital actor of the twenty-first century” (p 5). The U.S. has access to both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans with naval bases around the world as well as a presence in space.

Secondly, “the United States doesn’t need to win wars. It needs to simply disrupt things so the other side can’t build up sufficient strength to challenge it” (p 5).  The current U.S. – Jihadist war, for example, has effectively kept the Islamic world fragmented. A unified enemy is much harder to defeat.

And finally, the United States owes much of its current power to its well armed and advanced global navy. The future of its power will reside in advancements in space. “Where humanity goes, war goes. And since humanity will be going into space, there will be war in space” (p 183).

Backing Friedman’s forecast for war in space and the use of robots is P.W. Singer’s presentation (Military Robots and the Future of War) on the current state of robotics in military use or prototype stages during the TED convention (filmed February 2009).

This book has challenged much of what I thought I understood. As I read it, I often thought, “I don’t know what I don’t know.” Of course, anyone who has read Ursula Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” will understand the concept of ‘utopia’ (industrialized countries) based up on the abject suffering of others (third and even second-world countries). As the United States exerts its will to remain the global superpower, other countries will be forced to keep to themselves, to keep quite (though many will not), else risk the subtle wrath of an economic, political and militaristic giant (and so be chastised). After reading The Next 100 Years,I am put in my place, if you will. It is humbling and humiliating to realize what our position has cost us morally and what it will continue to cost but I am not so hypocritical as to denounce our actions. Nor do I see droves of the religious walking away from Omelas.

Perhaps our comfort and complacency will lead to our eventual collapse, but, according to Friedman, it won’t happen in my life time, nor that of my children’s. And there is no guarantee that our successor will be any more judicious. In fact, Friedman’s mise en scene slants toward Machiavellianism.

Now, what does this mean for Libraries? Equality within an unequal and chaotic system? Truth within a corrupt system? Compassion within a cruel system? Because Freidman’s forecasting is based on one more important truth: history repeats itself. We are, essentially, stuck in a system, following a pattern of behaviour driven by a fundamental truth: we cling to that which we were born into – our country. Countries that have fought will fight again. Countries that have crumbled from within will do so again, and this time, their vulnerability in a global society will spell almost certain doom for them.