kalu_miah's new world order, a road map for the future

[kalu_miah]

While see this with optimism I don't agree with a world government and erasing all borders.

You personally do not need to agree to it, I am pretty sure in our lifetime, we will not see demolition of all borders and a formation of world government. I projected that to happen in 2100-2200, but it could take centuries longer. That will be for our future generations to decide.

 

[kalu_miah]

As for an Asian Union does that mean all of Asia ? don't think something like this could ever be done not in 1,000 years.

Asia will integrate heavily with road, railways and free movement of goods because of free trade regimes, but political unions between nation states are the subject in OP. Also, Asian continent is bigger than what you show above, I think you left out Middle-east.

Technology, access to information and education and increased level of individual knowledge will fundamentally change the political landscape of the future, and it will not remain like the past. But rather than concentrating on far future, my focus is more on the immediate next steps, which are stages 1 and 2 in OP.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

What if pick oil doesn't start and the theory itself is a distance myth then would the follow up occurrences take place?

that's not possible.

peak oil is not a theory. its a fact and an observation. a single oil field behaves this way. oil discoveries behave this way (discoveries peaked in the 60's). why wouldn't all oil behave this way? You can't drill oil if you can't find it. Well we're not finding much anymore and the ones found are heavy oil and other things that cost huge amounts of energy to refine.

in fact oil production has already flatlined. i was being VERY GENEROUS with 2030 prediction for peak oil. peak oil is actually right here right now. but that's not the interesting part. the interesting part is just past the peak when things start going down and demand collides with production.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

And shows you are joker

Cars and economies of the world will run on oil only for another 2 decade maximum,after that either man will invent alternate for oil,which is eco-friendly or oil will run out and cars will stop

wrong. nothing has higher energy per unit mass-volume than oil except uranium, but uranium has to be mined with oil burning machines. in addition, uranium is not a liquid transportation fuel.

there's nothing that can replace oil without reducing net energy avaliable to humans. as the powerful are also the ones who burn the most energy, they will take energy away from the already poor with military force.

let me give you an example of why energy is important.

there's a concept called energy return on investment. its how hard you have to work to produce energy or energy equivalents.

sustinence hunter and gatherers get very close to 1:1. They permanently live on the edge of starvation. that's why they have no real "civilization".

agriculture gave humans writing, science, government, politics, military and medicine. their EROI is about 1.2:1. yep, a guy with a donkey pulling a cart doesn't get very far but it let the farming civilizations totally dominate the hunter gatherers. This tiny edge allowed Spain to decimate the natives.

now, here comes industrialization with coal. Coal is 15:1. Now you know why Britain dominated everyone else? 1 British was literally the same as 10 Indians (or Chinese) back then.

now oil, is anywhere from 100:1 to 20:1. it is so much superior to coal that the country that had the most at the 20th century (USA) dominated over the old coal based powers in Europe. Only the other oil producing power Russia came close. Now, energy isn't the only thing, technology to extract the energy is equally important. oil in the ground is worthless. That's why Arab states are weak. Their energy is dug up by the Westerners, who ship it back home for some scraps.

once oil runs out, things start going back to the 15:1 level of coal, solar, wind, hydroelectricity, etc.

the problem is this: the population has adjusted to 100:1 energy. going back to 15:1 would kill off quite a bit of people.

 

[kalu_miah]

wrong. nothing has higher energy per unit mass-volume than oil except uranium, but uranium has to be mined with oil burning machines. in addition, uranium is not a liquid transportation fuel.

there's nothing that can replace oil without reducing net energy avaliable to humans. as the powerful are also the ones who burn the most energy, they will take energy away from the already poor with military force.

let me give you an example of why energy is important.

there's a concept called energy return on investment. its how hard you have to work to produce energy or energy equivalents.

sustinence hunter and gatherers get very close to 1:1. They permanently live on the edge of starvation. that's why they have no real "civilization".

agriculture gave humans writing, science, government, politics, military and medicine. their EROI is about 1.2:1. yep, a guy with a donkey pulling a cart doesn't get very far but it let the farming civilizations totally dominate the hunter gatherers. This tiny edge allowed Spain to decimate the natives.

now, here comes industrialization with coal. Coal is 15:1. Now you know why Britain dominated everyone else? 1 British was literally the same as 10 Indians (or Chinese) back then.

now oil, is anywhere from 100:1 to 20:1. it is so much superior to coal that the country that had the most at the 20th century (USA) dominated over the old coal based powers in Europe. Only the other oil producing power Russia came close. Now, energy isn't the only thing, technology to extract the energy is equally important. oil in the ground is worthless. That's why Arab states are weak. Their energy is dug up by the Westerners, who ship it back home for some scraps.

once oil runs out, things start going back to the 15:1 level of coal, solar, wind, hydroelectricity, etc.

the problem is this: the population has adjusted to 100:1 energy. going back to 15:1 would kill off quite a bit of people.

Peak oil is very important and an excellent point. I have to think about how it will affect the future projections I made. Although I doubt any change in oil price will change people's desire to seek security, maximize power and protect themselves from unfavorable changes. The timing of peak oil seems to be a big issue.

Also, peak oil will force nations to trade with nations that are closer to home or may reintroduce newly designed sailing ships, which will be a positive development.

Many aspects to consider, I will post more later.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Peak oil is very important and an excellent point. I have to think about how it will affect the future projections I made. Although I doubt any change in oil price will change people's desire to seek security, maximize power and protect themselves from unfavorable changes. The timing of peak oil seems to be a big issue.

Also, peak oil will force nations to trade with nations that are closer to home or may reintroduce newly designed sailing ships, which will be a positive development.

Many aspects to consider, I will post more later.

peak oil doesn't affect all countries equally. it affects countries who 1.) import most of their oil, 2.) most of their energy is from oil, 3.) do not produce enough food for their entire population. Global trade will definitely slow down, if not grind to a halt altogether.

Japan and South Korea depend on oil for 30-40% of their total energy; China depends on oil for 17% and US 25%. Japan and South Korea grow only 30-40% of the food they need. Britain is also underfed without imports of food, but they have oil. There's no way for Japan and South Korea to boost their productivity faster than the price of oil and food are rising. Due to their extraordinary dependence on imported oil and imported food, the first 2 countries to go down will be South Korea and Japan.

Now here's the thing though - when oil is running out, its not the only thing running out. When oil starts to run out, everything else starts running out because most of it is transported by oil and mined with oil. Therefore, there will be a global inflation floor imposed by the price of oil; all prices must rise faster than this floor.

Add on climate change which will benefit some countries (China, Canada, Russia) more than harm, while harm other countries more than benefit (rest of the world). In the extreme case, global warming can disrupt things like the monsoon, Gulf Stream, dry out semiarid lands and turn them into straight desert, etc.

 

[kalu_miah]

The effect of peak oil:
Mitigation of peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Doomer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Will add more later.

 

[Sasquatch]

Asia will integrate heavily with road, railways and free movement of goods because of free trade regimes, but political unions between nation states are the subject in OP. Also, Asian continent is bigger than what you show above, I think you left out Middle-east.

Technology, access to information and education and increased level of individual knowledge will fundamentally change the political landscape of the future, and it will not remain like the past. But rather than concentrating on far future, my focus is more on the immediate next steps, which are stages 1 and 2 in OP.

We can have integration between smaller countries but big ones unlikely. and creating something like the EU won't happen unless all disputes and relations improve. there are many maps of Asia that Include the ME and don't this is just one of those.

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

More like:

2010-2020: things stay on the same trend; China becomes world #1 economy just ahead of US at 15000 GDP/capita in 2018.
2020-2030: US and Europe suffer further stagnation and recession. China becomes the last industrial superpower on planet earth. peak oil starts.
2030-2040: peak oil devastates every economy. numerous small conflicts erupt in Africa and the Middle East over resources. US Great Plains dry up and dust bowl conditions return. smaller resource importers like South Korea, Japan and Britain start sinking as their value added cannot keep up with resource prices, global warming starts reducing world crop yield as population increases.
2040-2050: global population decrease due to famine and disease. last ditch effort by the UN for fusion power fails. grid goes dark in many countries.
2050-2060: possible WW3 and nuclear holocaust.

Who will buy your goods, if the U.S and Europe continue to decline?
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164837-china-records-huge-february-trade-deficit.html

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

kalu_miah’s new world order:

Premises:
- Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, so concentration of power should be avoided
- big states have economies of scale, so playing field is automatically skewed in their favor, in terms of competitive advantage
- big states and powerful countries want the rest of the world to remain under their influence, so they follow a policy of divide and rule
- free and fair trading of goods, free travel (but not migration) will boost prosperity and is in the interest of all countries
- unions of states can be formed only according to democratic free will of the people of concerned states, so by definition, an advanced level of democracy, preferably direct democracy using online/internet remote voting will be essential prerequisite for movement towards these new trans-formative unions
- it is natural that people who have ethnic, linguistic, cultural similarities and/or some common historical past, will seek to join in a union more easily, but it can also be for purely economic and strategic reasons

Plan: create a new collection of small states in regional unions to usher in a new multi-polar world, to protect against harmful influence of large states

current status:

1. China: ancient union of nations, first cobbled together by Han Wu Di, recreated by Yuan Mongol, one written language (spoken becoming standardized as well)
2. India: ancient union of nations, first created by Ashoka or Murya dynasty, recreated by Mughal, but remains multi-lingual
3. EU: European nations first unified by Romans, but now working towards a US of Europe
4. USA (recent union formed after European migration to North America)
5. ASEAN: 10 nations of South East Asia
6. UNASUR: all nations in Middle and South America, Mexico is contemplating to join
7. GCC and Arab League
8. Central Asian Union (5 former soviet stan’s)
9. African Union
10. SAARC

(please google for details)

important points:
- all customs or free trade areas will not end up in the future as a full political union, but some may
- EU, ASEAN, UNASUR, GCC, CEU, AU may become the starting point of new unions that may end up as future political unions, but SAARC is going to remain a free trade group only

Stage 1 (2020-2040):

1. China+Taiwan
2. India+Nepal+Maldives+Bhutan (Sri Lanka may remain a member of SAARC but stay out of full political union with India)
3. EU+Russian speaking countries
4. USA+Canada
5. ASEAN+Japan+Korea (Bangladesh will want to join this group, but may not get entry, unless it can show itself to be worthy)
6. Latin American Union: UNASUR+Mexico
7. expanded GCC to include all non-Maghreb Arab countries
8. Central Asian Union (7 stan’s+Mongolia, if Russia provides land bridge)
9. African Union (Maghreb will remain part of Arab League, but due to economic and geographic reason, form political union with rest of African continent, Nile river usage being the main reason for Egypt)
10. Iran

Stage 2 (2040-2070)

1. China+Taiwan
2. India+Nepal+Maldives+Bhutan (Sri Lanka may remain a member of SAARC but stay out of full political union with India)
3. EU+Russian speaking countries+USA+Canda+Oceania (ANZ)
4. ASEAN+Japan+Korea (Bangladesh will want to join this group, but may not get entry, unless it can show itself to be worthy)
6. Latin American Union: UNASUR+Mexico
7. expanded GCC to include all non-Maghreb Arab countries
8. Central Asian Union (7 stan’s+Mongolia+Turkey+Azerbaijan) (Iran will trade but not join political union)
9. African Union

Stage 3 (2070-2100):

1. China+Taiwan
2. India+Nepal+Maldives+Bhutan+Sri Lanka
3. EU+Russian speaking countries+USA+Canda+Oceania (ANZ)
4. ASEAN+Japan+Korea+Bangladesh
5. Latin American Union
6. expanded GCC to include all non-Maghreb Arab countries + Central Asian Union (7 stan’s+Mongolia+Turkey+Azerbaijan) + Iran
7. African Union

Stage 4 (2100-2200)

1. Global federation, no more countries and borders

Your thoughts please. If necessary, separate threads can be created for study of each region. Please remember that you have heard it here first, it did not come out of any think tank, it came out of the brain of yours truly, after many years of analysis and thought.

Jokes are welcome, as well as serious discussions.

Thanks for your posts, kalu_miah

Perhaps, the trend will be collaboration with other countries groups as you anticipate. However, I think it is only true to a certain extent. For example, the countries will associate together in the fields of economy, trade, investment, culture, politics ... But it cannot go to the UNION.
In terms of national independence, even it tends to go opposite. For example, Tibetans, Xinjiang... are struggling demanding their independence from China ...
The same way, Timor Leste has been successful in the struggle for their independence....

ASEAN is aiming to establish "ASEAN Community", but not the UNION of ASEAN.
We always welcome Bangladesh.
But why is not your country in the group of India, Maldives, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka...?

 

[kalu_miah]

Thanks for your posts, kalu_miah

Perhaps, the trend will be collaboration with other countries groups as you anticipate. However, I think it is only true to a certain extent. For example, the countries will associate together in the fields of economy, trade, investment, culture, politics ... But it cannot go to the UNION.
In terms of national independence, even it tends to go opposite. For example, Tibetans, Xinjiang... are struggling demanding their independence from China ...
The same way, Timor Leste has been successful in the struggle for their independence....

ASEAN is aiming to establish "ASEAN Community", but not the UNION of ASEAN.
We always welcome Bangladesh.
But why is not your country in the group of India, Maldives, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka...?

I think countries will not go into Unions, unless they are ready. So community of nations is the first step, just like it has happened with EU. Some parts of many countries want separation, but they will be part of other bigger Unions of countries, just like former Yugoslavia has broken to many parts, but they are all becoming part of EU. Places like Xinjiang, Tibet, Kashmir and North East India, I believe are pretty much lost causes for complete separation, for the foreseeable future. All we can hope for is maintain, regain and increase further autonomy of these regions and ensure the rights for indigenous minority living there, putting world pressure on the concerned large states.

In a future that will be dominated by large states, no small country, I believe, will afford to remain isolated and without its own team, even at the expense of loosing some level of sovereignty. When countries in a community are developed to a certain extent, they may not need to migrate to other places because of economic reasons, so without migration, there is no threat to culture and social harmony.

Bangladesh is in SAARC group, but this group has no future, other than economic relationship. As you may know, Bangladesh was the Eastern part of Pakistan before 1971 and became separate in 1971. The original reason why Bangladesh land mass became a separate country from India in 1947 still exist. There is a trust deficit between majority Hindu India and majority Muslim Bangladesh. From knowing India well, we understand that India's Hindu nationalists are a threat for Islam and Muslim people anywhere in the world, including Bangladesh. It is because, some in India have not been able to come to terms with the fact that Islam has spread in the subcontinent and has brought great demographic change in the region. Many Indian websites openly call for attacking former parts of British India, such as Pakistan and Bangladesh and convert the population in these regions back to Hindu. Indian Muslims live under discrimination and in most big cities Hindu's do not even accept them as tenants or buyers of property in most of part of the town or city. So Muslims are forced to live in Ghettoized small restricted areas. But these are just the tip of the iceberg. There is a particular type of Hindu nationalist that consider Islam and Muslims as existential threats. Like Neocons who spread the canard that Muslims want to engage in Jihad and take over the whole world in a conquest and make it Muslim, and thus establish a world wide Khilafat, this brand of Hindu nationalists believe in this same wild theory with a passion, and use it to dehumanize Muslims, and to justify any acts of current and future aggression against Muslims, including total annihilation or at least brutal subjugation and genocide. After the 9/11 incident, this same tactic was used in the US to start the GWOT and the result continues today. They currently use this same theory to justify putting dams on all of the common international rivers that run from India to Bangladesh and end in Bay of Bengal and divert water as and when needed. Farakka Barrage has caused desertification and increased salinity in large parts of Bangladesh. Bangladesh politics is also controlled by India using its agent political party called Awami League. Also, they spread baseless rumors that Bangladeshi Muslims have migrated in large numbers, in order for them to create a case to take away citizenship of Bengali Muslims of India in the future. For the long term, Indian Hindu nationalists want their "civlization space" back from Muslims and also eliminate Islam from the face of the earth, so it no longer remains a threat for them. On this issue they find willing fellow traveler with Zionist Islamophobes, which is the main basis of close relationship between these two states, India and Israel, although on Iran issue, this relationship has frayed of late.

The solution for Bangladesh is to reach out towards ASEAN, build roads and railways through Myanmar and make ASEAN a success and if Korea and Japan can get more involved in ASEAN, that will be another boost for all parties and nations involved. There is a section of people in Bangladesh, who think that it is possible to be in the Chinese camp and counter this multi-level threat from the large neighbor state of India (who we have border with on all 3 sides if you look at our map) which is not just another neutral neighbor for us. I am not one of these people. I believe in more increased economic relations with both India (even giving them transit, if they agree to deal with us fairly on water management and other issues) as well as China, once land routes via Myanmar is a reality. But for the foreseeable future, I personally cannot see Bangladesh in any kind of Union or community of nations with India. I think most Bangladeshi's would rather become a part of expanded ASEAN for mutual security and development to protect against the threats from neighboring large states, which in our case is India, but for most ASEAN states as well as Japan and Korea, happens to be China.

 

[oceanx]

... There is a section of people in Bangladesh, who think that it is possible to be in the Chinese camp and counter this multi-level threat from the large neighbor state of India (who we have border with on all 3 sides if you look at our map) which is not just another neutral neighbor for us. I am not one of these people. I believe in more increased economic relations with both India (even giving them transit, if they agree to deal with us fairly on water management and other issues) as well as China, once land routes via Myanmar is a reality. But for the foreseeable future, I personally cannot see Bangladesh in any kind of Union or community of nations with India. I think most Bangladeshi's would rather become a part of expanded ASEAN for mutual security and development to protect against the threats from neighboring large states, which in our case is India, but for most ASEAN states as well as Japan and Korea, happens to be China.

Very thoughtful post, young man, very thoughtful.

The same Mao who purportedly wanted to offer Nixon 10 million Chinese women for ... would not hesitate I believe to trade 1000 HongWus for one of you, for the old butcher did know talent when he saw it, even if he treated "talent" rather shabbily after useful service to him expired.

US of A is still better for you, me and a few, where at least one can count on 40 acres and a mule ...

In all seriousness, I must say that I agree with the spirit of your post 120%.

Life is not fair, but the Lord is just. And thankfully He is merciful.

The way forward is definitely for small states to band together. I am all for a stronger ASEAN to counter PRC hegemony in South China Sea. This is not to say that China does not have valid "beef" with a country like Vietnam that has worn jack boots two sizes too big for itself and tends to unsettle its own neighbors such as Thailand and Cambodia. But ASEAN countries would be crazy not to try to speak with a single voice, or better yet, fight with a single fist for their own legitimate space.

For some of us the "red line" would be any attempted Anschluss with Taiwan under armed might. I would rue that day because it would be an act that divides the house against itself like no other, and pit "Han" against "Han" (I am not talking about those in Taiwan) - just as Saddam's march on Kuwait divided Arabs against Arabs. As you surely know - when the Almighty brings down the haughty, whether nations or individuals, He first lets them heap hubris upon their inequities.

The same with "Hindutva". It will only survive on its merit, or falter on the contrary.

Even in purely "evolutionary" terms, fitness has zero correlation with size.

 

[oceanx]

Now back to your OP ... I am afraid it would less "childish" had you not affixed dates. And it would be better had you not offered too much detail.

A Huntingtonian/Spenglerian world order or any of its variations has been proposed in one flavour or another even on this veritable forum time and time again. Its eventual permutations are beyond the wisdom of men. Don't try to be a "secular prophet" as this is my friendly advice.

Personally I am dead against an Ultimate World Government. There would then be no escape from tyranny, unless, of course space travel becomes a real option. Even then one would just be "escaping to a colony" ...

Now some form of world governance, if not "government" is clearly already upon us.

What can I do about it? Resistance in a "secular", worldly sense is clearly futile, and one might even say "counter-productive". But it's impossible to desist ...

 

[Bhairava]

India forming an union with the rest of the countries in south asia is fine as long as BD and Pak are NOT included in that.

We are better off without them.

 

[kalu_miah]

Very thoughtful post, young man, very thoughtful.

The same Mao who purportedly wanted to offer Nixon 10 million Chinese women for ... would not hesitate I believe to trade 1000 HongWus for one of you, for the old butcher did know talent when he saw it, even if he treated "talent" rather shabbily after useful service to him expired.

US of A is still better for you, me and a few, where at least one can count on 40 acres and a mule ...

In all seriousness, I must say that I agree with the spirit of your post 120%.

Life is not fair, but the Lord is just. And thankfully He is merciful.

The way forward is definitely for small states to band together. I am all for a stronger ASEAN to counter PRC hegemony in South China Sea. This is not to say that China does not have valid "beef" with a country like Vietnam that has worn jack boots two sizes too big for itself and tends to unsettle its own neighbors such as Thailand and Cambodia. But ASEAN countries would be crazy not to try to speak with a single voice, or better yet, fight with a single fist for their own legitimate space.

For some of us the "red line" would be any attempted Anschluss with Taiwan under armed might. I would rue that day because it would be an act that divides the house against itself like no other, and pit "Han" against "Han" (I am not talking about those in Taiwan) - just as Saddam's march on Kuwait divided Arabs against Arabs. As you surely know - when the Almighty brings down the haughty, whether nations or individuals, He first lets them heap hubris upon their inequities.

The same with "Hindutva". It will only survive on its merit, or falter on the contrary.

Even in purely "evolutionary" terms, fitness has zero correlation with size.

Glad you agree with my sentiments and thanks for the kind words. If you note my OP, I do support a union between China and Taiwan, which I believe will become like Hong Kong, over time, one country but two systems. But China would have to change quite a bit before that happens.

Han nationalism, Hindutva, Islam, Buddhism - all meme's are powerful and need skillful management, in wrong hands they can be dangerous, but in skilled hand, they can be positive for humanity.