Slashdot Mirror
How Technology Promotes World Peace
Hugh Pickens writes "Ayesha & Parag Khanna write in the Atlantic that there are many important differences between the U.S.-China relationship of today and the U.S.-Soviet relationship before the outbreak of the Cold War. One is that the U.S. and China are deeply intertwined through geo-economic interdependence, and the rapid and global diffusion of technology is accelerating these changes. 'As the global economy has become more integrated, states have greater interest in cooperating and less interest in conflict, which can lead to a kind of mutually assured economic destruction,' write the Khanna. 'If military power is inherently competitive — the stronger your army and the weaker your neighbor's, the more powerful you become — then economic power is more cooperative. After all, much of America's power today is economic, but that power would decrease if China's economy collapses.' This economic inter-dependence, the theory goes, promotes peace, but technological power is also cooperative in this way, perhaps even more so. For example, medical research crosses borders, as do the pharmaceuticals or treatments that research can produce. China can increase its power by developing better solar panels — perhaps in part by building on foreign technologies — then turn around and sell them to other high-energy-consuming states, making us all better off. Like economics, technology doesn't just increase cooperation, it is the cooperation. 'The increasingly integrated global system is shaping the states within it, much as individual powers shape the system. The question is thus not who controls technology, but the way in which we develop, guide, and control it collectively.'"
I am not a luddite, but I still gotta say this ...
The technologies that we have today have given us a lot of good things
It has made our lives "better", in the sense that a lot of diseases that previously can kill us, nowadays are not that lethal anymore
But, the consequence is that the world human population has exploded
20 years ago, there were less than 5 Billion people
Now, 7 Billion people, and, as we speak, the figure keeps going up and up
Our planet simply can't support it
Either we human completely depleted the planet and we die off - and in the process a lot of other plants and animals wiped off as well,
Or ...
There will be another full scale global war, that ends up cutting down the human population to more manageable size
In other words, the "world peace" that we have today is but only an illusion - our technologies are delaying the what will have to come, ultimately
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I remember reading speculation from dawn of the 20th century, that claimed the expanding global economy made wars between major powers unlikely (sorry, no citation). It was wrong then, and it is probably wrong now. Nucular bombs have done far more to promote world peace than economic inter-dependence.
We have lived almost an entire century where resources were so abundant that major powers simply didn't need to fight each other. We will see what happens once these resources (oil, water, etc) start to dry up.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
The same type of arguments circulated before WWI. Surely, in a modern, globalized world where German and English bankers could both own shares in Argentinian railroads, and where British citizens bought German paints and medicines, and Germans bought licences for British patented manufacturing, war could never break out.
Comments, A_Lee
The primary difference between the US-Soviet pre-cold war relationship and the US-China is that in the first instance, we were forced together (fighting germany in WWII) and never really developed a trading relationship, where the current US-China relationship formed from common economic forces. If you look at the US-China relationship post WWII, and pre-Nixon, it might remind you a bit of the US-Soviet relationship. Or maybe even worse (supporting the KMT/taiwan/south-korea/south-vietnam) didn't really put us into China's good graces back then...
The turning point with china? Basically Mao's death in 1976 and US agreeing that taiwan was part of china in 1979. These have nothing to do with technology. The change in leadership and economic orientation made the economies more compatible (perhaps best summarized by the quote "I don't care if it's a black cat or a white cat, as long as it catches mice").
The turning point with Russia? Collapse of the Soviet Union and Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin started things along, but of course Mr Putin's influence basically rendered their economy (apparently some wikileaked documents called it a virtual mafia state) incompatible with ours.
I think we technophiles hate to admit it, but events (even in the world of technology) often revolves more around people (e.g., rms, linus torvalds, bill gates, steve jobs, in the tech world etc) than any underlying technology.
Sorry, doesn't work like that anymore.
US is waging war with states they don't care about, economically: Afghanistan, Iraq. They would happily go after North Korea and most North African states are free game too. They're not getting anything vital out of there.
China is another matter. Imagine the US waging war against China: that would lead to total destruction. First all consumers would complain that they would not be able to buy clothes, DVD players, and many other manufactured goods, as the supply from China would stop and the US doesn't have their own manufacturing anymore. Soon after the US military would come to a grinding halt due to the lack of supply of spare parts for their weapons systems, parts that are also more and more made in China.
The US is at least as dependent on Chinese manufacturers as the Chinese manufacturers are dependent on US buyers. They can't survive without one another. China may even have the best chance of survival in such a war scenario, because at least they can produce the goods they need themselves...
I'm sorry but the wall fell in 1980. While Reagan was yelling for Mr. Gorbachev to tear down his wall, American business was ripping down ours so they could take their collective shows on the road and exploit all that cheap labor, resource and markets in the developing world. Over the next 30 years the American Corporations became truly global, no longer owing allegiance or even interest to the well being of the U.S. and as such have since been sucking off the overflow as the American economy implodes in a global economic free fall.
There has perhaps been some recent back peddling trying to reestablish some barrier to preserve what little is left, but its too little too late, and at this point its probably just as well the American worker is now economically on a par with those in the third world. It means soon work will be coming back to the United States (in fact its already begun.) So the walled garden of which you speak only exists in a couple specific technologies, and pretty much the rest of it is a distant historical condition enjoyed by Americans who are long retired or dead.
Economic IS peaceful, but only when the 2 economies are interdependent. Chinese leaders work hard to block Western goods, but make the west dependent on them, while building up their own economy AND military. Since China's economy has grown massively and CHina has amassed a load of dollars (us and australian) and europes, they should see their money rise relative to these money. But that is NOT the case. Likewise, in a normal economic relationship, there would be regular 2-way trade. There is not. Resources account for the vast majority of what the west trades to CHina. When something like an auto is exported there, if it is selling well, then China will put a tariff on importing that specific companies cars, until they move manufacturing there. Once it is there, they will subsidize the energy there, and then encourage the company to sell it on the global market. Just recently China put a massive tax on ALL GM cars. That is, until GM turned over the patent rights for electric cars to CHINESE GOV. IOW, GM was going to be killed from manufacturing or importing cars there, unless they allowed 100% of Chinese made cars to have free and clear access to their entire patent DB related to electric cars.
This is NOT about economic trade. This is a cold war. Sadly these 2 idiots are like the rest of the ppl that ignore facts.
Now to wait for the Chinese lobbyists that will post here as ACs claiming that I am lying.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.