Jump to content
270soft Forum

The Next 100 Years


Actinguy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've mentioned before that this is my favorite book -- an attempt to game out the next 100 years of geopolitics, science, wars, demographic changes, etc (written in 2009).  It's amazing how much he's already gotten right...and of course some things still seem way off, but we still have another 79 years before we can really judge.  ;c)

Anyhow, just discovered the book is available online, for free!

http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/pdf/715.2.pdf

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

I've mentioned before that this is my favorite book -- an attempt to game out the next 100 years of geopolitics, science, wars, demographic changes, etc (written in 2009).  It's amazing how much he's already gotten right...and of course some things still seem way off, but we still have another 79 years before we can really judge.  ;c)

Anyhow, just discovered the book is available online, for free!

http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/pdf/715.2.pdf

The next century is probably going to be bleak socially, politically, economically, and militarily, and very few nations will likely be spared "the reaping of the whirlwind." Russia, China, India, and the United States probably won't be able to hold together as single nations, and will be greatly weakened. The folly of modern economic practices will likely come to bite everyone in the ass. I'll have a look at this book, but I have my own vision of how things may very well turn out. And, as everyone here knows, I'm a big promoter of bringing up "inconvenient truths," that lead to future nastiness.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Patine said:

The next century is probably going to be bleak socially, politically, economically, and militarily, and very few nations will likely be spared "the reaping of the whirlwind." Russia, China, India, and the United States probably won't be able to hold together as single nations, and will be greatly weakened. The folly of modern economic practices will likely come to bite everyone in the ass. I'll have a look at this book, but I have my own vision of how things may very well turn out. And, as everyone here knows, I'm a big promoter of bringing up "inconvenient truths," that lead to future nastiness.

I'm glad that you'll take a look at the book.  Even if you disagree with his forecast, I think his basis is sound:  That from the perspective of 1900, the events of 1920 sound crazy.  From the perspective of 1920, 1940 sounds crazy.  From the perspective of 1940, 1960 sounds crazy.  From the perspective of 1960, 1980 sounds crazy.  From the perspective of 1980, 2000 sounds crazy.  And from the perspective of 2001, 2002 sounds crazy.

And yes, while reading this book with it's 2009 perspective, 2020 will feel crazy.

But the book is about the long term -- and how fleeting things like the Spanish-American war are:  things that feel like a very big deal in the moment, but are barely remembered in the history books.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Patine said:

The next century is probably going to be bleak socially, politically, economically, and militarily, and very few nations will likely be spared "the reaping of the whirlwind." Russia, China, India, and the United States probably won't be able to hold together as single nations, and will be greatly weakened. The folly of modern economic practices will likely come to bite everyone in the ass. I'll have a look at this book, but I have my own vision of how things may very well turn out. And, as everyone here knows, I'm a big promoter of bringing up "inconvenient truths," that lead to future nastiness.

 

28 minutes ago, Wiw said:

I believe it, given how far down the can we've gone since the day this book was published.

"There is a deep- seated belief in America that the United States is approaching the eve of its destruction. Read letters to the editor, peruse the Web, and listen to public discourse. Disastrous wars, uncontrolled deficits, high gasoline prices, shootings at universities, corruption in business and government, and an endless litany of other shortcomings—all of them quite real—create a sense that the American dream has been shattered and that America is past its prime. If that doesn’t convince you, listen to Europeans. They will assure you that America’s best day is behind it.

The odd thing is that all of this foreboding was present during the presidency of Richard Nixon, together with many of the same issues. There is a continual fear that American power and prosperity are illusory, and that disaster is just around the corner. The sense transcends ideology. Environmentalists and Christian conservatives are both delivering the same message. Unless we repent of our ways, we will pay the price—and it may be too late already."

The first two paragraphs of the first chapter.

It then goes on to talk about how people have ALWAYS thought this about America, and they have always been wrong.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

I've mentioned before that this is my favorite book -- an attempt to game out the next 100 years of geopolitics, science, wars, demographic changes, etc (written in 2009).  It's amazing how much he's already gotten right...and of course some things still seem way off, but we still have another 79 years before we can really judge.  ;c)

Anyhow, just discovered the book is available online, for free!

http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/pdf/715.2.pdf

I think you brought this book up a year ago or so. I might have mentioned that I had an interview with Friedman's (the author) company Stratfor in Austin, TX. It was probably the best I ever did on an interview -- if overperforming is a good thing. I was applying for a writing position. While I had worked at the Huffington Post, and was well-read in geopolitics, I had no experience working for a company that dealt with analytics and much of the writing is based off understanding how analytics work and etc. 

Most of my interview involved me talking about various geopolitics books I had read and then me deducing that the person that was interviewing me was distantly related to me. His first name was Maverick. I asked if his first name came from a family name. He said it did. I asked if he knew if that family name came from Massachusetts. He said it did. I asked if he knew if he was descended from Samuel Maverick or Moses Maverick. He said, Samuel. I told him we were probably something like 9th to 10th cousins. I'm from his brother Moses. Then I went back to talking about Zbigniew Brezinszki's Grand Chess Board, Philip Bobbitt's Shield of Achilles, and etc. I even told him I had read Friedman's book, which I did in one sitting at the Strand bookstore in NYC. 

I went home sure that I got the job. I never felt more confident. A week later, I got an email basically saying that I was overqualified. I argued that while I had some basic experience I was completely inexperienced in most of what they said they wanted in the application. I told them the money didn't matter because the job seemed like a perfect fit for me personally and for how my mind works. He told me that he scheduled a 2nd interview for me with one of the VPs/editor-in-chief. 

When that interview occurred, the VP/Editor-in-Chief took me out to a thai restaurant. We talked about Philip Bobbitt, Istanbul, and Turkey. He spent a lot of time trying to convince me not to want the entry level job. He said he had an upper level job that he thought I'd be good for but that a position was not yet available. I was jobless, so I couldn't really wait, but I accepted that. He gave me a free subscription to their online site and told me to keep up to date about that and get used to how the website works, and etc. He then told me to check in with Maverick from time-to-time to see if an upper-level position was available. 

I ended up getting hired to teach at a Community College in Austin before a position opened (18 months later I moved to Philadelphia to teach at a university here). Nevertheless, Friedman sold the company, the VP/Editor-in-Chief started his own similar company, but I think that Maverick guy is now the VP/Editor-in-Chief. 

In regards to the book, I found it interesting but so specific in its speculation that I thought it was almost to the point of ridiculous at times. I remember suggesting to someone at the Strand Bookstore, that this book be moved from Political Science and moved either to Fiction or the Occult. I didn't say this in the interview, but I did say I had read the book. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I think you brought this book up a year ago or so. I might have mentioned that I had an interview with Friedman's (the author) company Stratfor in Austin, TX. It was probably the best I ever did on an interview -- if overperforming is a good thing. I was applying for a writing position. While I had worked at the Huffington Post, and was well-read in geopolitics, I had no experience working for a company that dealt with analytics and much of the writing is based off understanding how analytics work and etc. 

Most of my interview involved me talking about various geopolitics books I had read and then me deducing that the person that was interviewing me was distantly related to me. His first name was Maverick. I asked if his first name came from a family name. He said it did. I asked if he knew if that family name came from Massachusetts. He said it did. I asked if he knew if he was descended from Samuel Maverick or Moses Maverick. He said, Samuel. I told him we were probably something like 9th to 10th cousins. I'm from his brother Moses. Then I went back to talking about Zbigniew Brezinszki's Grand Chess Board, Philip Bobbitt's Shield of Achilles, and etc. I even told him I had read Friedman's book, which I did in one sitting at the Strand bookstore in NYC. 

I went home sure that I got the job. I never felt more confident. A week later, I got an email basically saying that I was overqualified. I argued that while I had some basic experience I was completely inexperienced in most of what they said they wanted in the application. I told them the money didn't matter because the job seemed like a perfect fit for me personally and for how my mind works. He told me that he scheduled a 2nd interview for me with one of the VPs/editor-in-chief. 

When that interview occurred, the VP/Editor-in-Chief took me out to a thai restaurant. We talked about Philip Bobbitt, Istanbul, and Turkey. He spent a lot of time trying to convince me not to want the entry level job. He said he had an upper level job that he thought I'd be good for but that a position was not yet available. I was jobless, so I couldn't really wait, but I accepted that. He gave me a free subscription to their online site and told me to keep up to date about that and get used to how the website works, and etc. He then told me to check in with Maverick from time-to-time to see if an upper-level position was available. 

I ended up getting hired to teach at a Community College in Austin before a position opened (18 months later I moved to Philadelphia to teach at a university here). Nevertheless, Friedman sold the company, the VP/Editor-in-Chief started his own similar company, but I think that Maverick guy is now the VP/Editor-in-Chief. 

In regards to the book, I found it interesting but so specific in its speculation that I thought it was almost to the point of ridiculous at times. I remember suggesting to someone at the Strand Bookstore, that this book be moved from Political Science and moved either to Fiction or the Occult. I didn't say this in the interview, but I did say I had read the book. 

Samuel and Moses Maverick sound like two brothers who are characters in a Western. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Patine said:

Samuel and Moses Maverick sound like two brothers who are characters in a Western. :P

Some of them were. Samuel Maverick was among one of the first people in Boston -- before John Winthrop even. Moses Maverick came later with their father, Rev. John Maverick. However, Rev. Maverick died after a few years. While Samuel Maverick lived in Boston originally, he later sold his land and went to Western Mass. Moses Maverick went on to help found Marblehead, MA, which has Maverick Square. There are Mavericks in Texas and in the West that were descended from the Maverick, probably mostly Samuel Maverick. Rev. John Maverick was one of the minister for Dorchester, which is now part of Boston. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vcczar said:

I think you brought this book up a year ago or so. I might have mentioned that I had an interview with Friedman's (the author) company Stratfor in Austin, TX. It was probably the best I ever did on an interview -- if overperforming is a good thing. I was applying for a writing position. While I had worked at the Huffington Post, and was well-read in geopolitics, I had no experience working for a company that dealt with analytics and much of the writing is based off understanding how analytics work and etc. 

Most of my interview involved me talking about various geopolitics books I had read and then me deducing that the person that was interviewing me was distantly related to me. His first name was Maverick. I asked if his first name came from a family name. He said it did. I asked if he knew if that family name came from Massachusetts. He said it did. I asked if he knew if he was descended from Samuel Maverick or Moses Maverick. He said, Samuel. I told him we were probably something like 9th to 10th cousins. I'm from his brother Moses. Then I went back to talking about Zbigniew Brezinszki's Grand Chess Board, Philip Bobbitt's Shield of Achilles, and etc. I even told him I had read Friedman's book, which I did in one sitting at the Strand bookstore in NYC. 

I went home sure that I got the job. I never felt more confident. A week later, I got an email basically saying that I was overqualified. I argued that while I had some basic experience I was completely inexperienced in most of what they said they wanted in the application. I told them the money didn't matter because the job seemed like a perfect fit for me personally and for how my mind works. He told me that he scheduled a 2nd interview for me with one of the VPs/editor-in-chief. 

When that interview occurred, the VP/Editor-in-Chief took me out to a thai restaurant. We talked about Philip Bobbitt, Istanbul, and Turkey. He spent a lot of time trying to convince me not to want the entry level job. He said he had an upper level job that he thought I'd be good for but that a position was not yet available. I was jobless, so I couldn't really wait, but I accepted that. He gave me a free subscription to their online site and told me to keep up to date about that and get used to how the website works, and etc. He then told me to check in with Maverick from time-to-time to see if an upper-level position was available. 

I ended up getting hired to teach at a Community College in Austin before a position opened (18 months later I moved to Philadelphia to teach at a university here). Nevertheless, Friedman sold the company, the VP/Editor-in-Chief started his own similar company, but I think that Maverick guy is now the VP/Editor-in-Chief. 

In regards to the book, I found it interesting but so specific in its speculation that I thought it was almost to the point of ridiculous at times. I remember suggesting to someone at the Strand Bookstore, that this book be moved from Political Science and moved either to Fiction or the Occult. I didn't say this in the interview, but I did say I had read the book. 

Ha!  No, I don't recall you mentioning that before.  I would love to work for him in that line of work, but I have no real qualifications other than I write for a living and find the topics interesting -- but I have no background or training in that kind of analysis.

As for the book, fair enough.  I'd point back to the intro, where he says the book is less about the specific predictions and more about the broad movements.  He specifically says he doesn't expect to be taken seriously on the specific movements of his World War III, for example, but that this is a prediction regarding how war will be conducted in the future.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Ha!  No, I don't recall you mentioning that before.  I would love to work for him in that line of work, but I have no real qualifications other than I write for a living and find the topics interesting -- but I have no background or training in that kind of analysis.

As for the book, fair enough.  I'd point back to the intro, where he says the book is less about the specific predictions and more about the broad movements.  He specifically says he doesn't expect to be taken seriously on the specific movements of his World War III, for example, but that this is a prediction regarding how war will be conducted in the future.  

It seemed like they wanted their entry-level writers to not really have that much of a background in analysis or that much knowledge of geopolitics for some reason. The latter seems to be the primary reason I came off as overqualified. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It seemed like they wanted their entry-level writers to not really have that much of a background in analysis or that much knowledge of geopolitics for some reason. The latter seems to be the primary reason I came off as overqualified. 

Interesting.  I've ruled out overqualified applicants in my line of work before, but it's usually because they have exclusively management experience in the recent decade and I need a worker bee who will roll up their sleeves and personally get the work done rather than telling others what to do.  That doesn't sound like the problem in your situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Interesting.  I've ruled out overqualified applicants in my line of work before, but it's usually because they have exclusively management experience in the recent decade and I need a worker bee who will roll up their sleeves and personally get the work done rather than telling others what to do.  That doesn't sound like the problem in your situation.

Yeah, there must be other reasons. I was a manager of a video game store from age 18 to 21, but that was over a decade removed from when I applied to that job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...