What will be the future of the world?

God only know what the future of the world looks like, but we can attempt at guessing. Honestly, I do not know whose guess is better. One thing for certain is that we will never be a benevolent society.

Kaplan's "The Coming of Anarchy Theory" is one of those theories that we all, including Kaplan, wish that will be wrong. We don't want it. We want to prevent it. But do we have the power and resolve to prevent it. All civilizations have a beggining, a golden era and a fall. How close are we to that fall? What will cause it? Will it be our own greed? Maybe. But im a hopefull. I'd like to think that Kaplan's example of the limo is a true one. In New York City, there are the really rich, the middle class and the poor. They share the same streets but live in completely different worlds. However, one of the reasons I love my home town, is that there is not real reason, except in cases of extreme neglect or abuse, why anyone would starve, go without medical attention or not get educated. New York City takes care of the need of the rich, but it also helps the poor. Every child has guaranteed meals through out the year. Milk and bread are subsidized. There is not tax on food or clothing. There are many free clinics. There truly is much opportunity in New York City if you know where to look. Still, the fat cats are fat and happy. If NYC can do it, maybe the rest of the world can too.

The Clash of Civilizations--- assignment

The summery of what we talked about it in class:
Cold War might have been a good thing because it prevented the clash of civilizations
now the clash of civilizations is inevitable
so cold was might just have been a god thing
westerners believe that they now the answer to life, the universe and everything
this may anger other civilizations
other civilizations will gain military power
civilizations will clash
civilizations are more likely to clash then communities within civilizations. when communities within civilizations clash the effects
will be lesser then when civilizations clash.
certain civilizations are more prone to war with each-other then others.
all previous point are Huntington's view of the world

the clash of civilizations

With all due respect I think this article is a classic case of a scholar coming up with a thesis and then finding the evidence to prove the theory. With this startegy almost anything can be proven right. I proved Andrew Jackson was a good president in 7th grade with a lot less education the this guy.

Anyone can find ways to classify people and then identify that as their main conflict. I actually think the theasis that we will go back to our old riverlies is lazy. Just because the ideologies wars have "ended" does not mean that we wont find a new way to ague.

Huntington included the best argument against him in his own article. Japan does not "clash" with the west, but they have different cultures. Further, unlike what Huntignton would like to believe cultures that are alike have wars all the time. britain vs ireland. russia vs poland. russia vs georgia. france and all of europe.

the end of history?

how self centered---- just because most people in the world live under some form of democracy does not mean that we have reached the end of history. There was a point in time where most people lived under a monarchy. That did not make it the end of time. And honestly how egocentric it is to think that we have it figured out--- all of human civil evolution lead to.... -drum roll please--- democracy! We live under the best conceptual social structure possible to man-- philosophers dont need to philosophies, soldiers can put down their weapons and we can all be happy!! we have it all figured out. I think in a few hundred years from now people will laugh at this notion. Kind of like we laugh at people who thought the earth was flat.