Straddling The Precipice: Stagnation or Collapse?
Globalization might be ending, but that doesn't mean modernity will.
There is a distinct difference between a prophecy and a forecast. At first glance, it would appear these two are rather similar. However, close inspection reveals otherwise.
A prophecy, at its core, is a blanket proclamation of what will happen. Either the prophecy is right or it is wrong. It is a depiction of the future which comes solely from the mind of the prophet. That is not to say prophecy is never right, but the difficulty is that prophecy fails to provide mechanisms for predicting additional future events. You just have to trust the veracity of the prophet.
A forecast, on the other hand, deals with probabilities. It's not just a matter of if the forecast is accurate, it must also provide a confidence interval to determine the likelihood of alternative outcomes. The forecaster is subsequently driven to provide methods which may be tested and challenged. If a forecaster possesses sound methods, then the forecast should likewise be sound.
Last week, I republished an article written some five years prior when I was a graduate student at the University of Chicago. While the most visible change is my writing style, I find the change in my approach to forecasting even more striking.
At the time, I possessed strong doubts that the Euro would last another five years. This conclusion was drawn by an analyzing the failure of the Eurozone to address its structural weaknesses. Yet, here we are in 2023, and the Eurozone remains both united and arguably stronger than its been in quite some time. So, what did I miss?
The mistake I made back in 2018 is a common one. It is all too frequent an error as analysts often become overly fixated either on the relative strength or weakness of a particular system. It is rare an analyst is able to observe both. While my theory asserting Germany’s preference for the status quo seems to prove out, I sorely underestimated the stability and resiliency of the other Eurozone countries.
This is important. A geopolitical analyst must be capable of openly acknowledging one’s failures openly and explain why the mistake was made. In fact, while I still believe that the Eurozone is structurally unstable, collapse isn’t necessarily imminent. While the Euro may no longer be the guarantor of perpetual prosperity that it once was, the alternative – economic free fall and financial ruin – is a far worse outcome. Consequently, the Eurozone nations will go to great lengths to prevent the currency zone’s demise. After all, it is extremely difficult to collapse a system. Instead, stagnation is the most likely scenario.
So too is it with globalization.
Much has been written about how and why globalization is failing, yet little has been written about what comes next. This is likely because we are all still in shock and even mourning the passing of the age. Such a sentiment is normal, even necessary, but part of being human means acknowledging that life goes on after we’re gone. There will be a life beyond globalization’s end.
But what?
The transition between globalization and regionalization is bound to be rocky, and the path humanity takes is unclear. One of the ironies of history is it’s often difficult to tell the difference between stagnation and collapse until it’s too late. You can’t reach collapse without first passing through stagnation. So, will the equilibrium of the new system be found within stagnation or collapse?
Before attempting to answer this question, we must first define stagnation and collapse. In the same way that a prophecy and a forecast differ, so too does stagnation and collapse differ. These two terms describe radically different end states for when complex systems break down.
The best corollary to stagnation is the period from roughly 1920 to 1950 as the world transitioned from the pre-World War I Order to the Cold War Order. Although these 30 years were a time of unfathomable misery and devastation, civilization itself did not collapse. Collapse at the level of global systems equals civilizational collapse. It means de-industrialization. It means that the technological progress of humanity begins to move backwards.
Such a calamity isn't as rare as one might think. History is rife with examples of civilizational collapse. In his book 1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed, Eric H. Klein notes how the complex Bronze Age civilizations of the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean all simultaneously collapsed due to the perfect storm of mass migration, climate change, and political turmoil. Furthermore, it is speculated the early Indus River Valley civilization experienced a collapse for similar reasons.
Some 1,500 years later, Western Civilization underwent its most famous case of civilizational decline: the sacking of Rome in 476 A.D. and the ultimate demise of the Western Roman Empire. The mechanisms which triggered the end of the Roman Empire, as well as the end of the Mayan and Chacoan Civilizations, are outlined in detail by Joseph A Tainter in his book The Collapse of Complex Societies.
In short, these historical case studies reveal the necessary conditions required for civilizational collapse. A civilizational system must be highly complex, highly concentrated, highly interconnected, and highly interdependent while also being overly optimize for efficiency. This description should sound familiar. It’s how globalization is structured. However, unlike previous civilizational collapses which were regional in nature, we are discussing the possibility a global collapse encompassing all of humanity.
Although there are the structural similarities shared by globalization and the failed civilizational orders of history, this by no means destines modernity to a similar fate. Again, humanity must first pass through stagnation on its way to collapse and it has one advantage in the present era which it lacked in the times of old: the nation-state.
The nation-state is the most meaningful and sophisticated form of organization and geopolitics. As previously noted, we live in a world of nation-states. This, combined with modern technological advances, gives humanity greater resources to react to the threat of civilizational collapse. States seeing their national interests so threatened will mobilize the nation and all of its resources to prevent de-industrialization. Staring in the face of oblivion, many policies which were once seen as untenable may now offer salvation.
Another overlooked factor is the fact that humanity has now fully discovered planet Earth. In times prior to deepwater navigation and the circumvention of the globe, it was possible for civilizational threats such as hordes of invading barbarians to show up at your doorstep with little to no warning. We simply didn't understand how changing weather patterns could cause droughts which would spark mass migrations of populations which would then lead to conflict with existing civilizations as is noted by the Sea Peoples and the end of the Bronze Age civilizations. These gaps, caused by both a lack of communication and knowledge, hindered the ability of our ancestors to effectively and speedily respond to civilizational threats.
Modernity won't go gently into the night.
While the structure of globalization might lack resiliency and be extremely vulnerable to disruption, modernity is a different story. Modernity, as defined by technological sophistication and advanced living standards, is dispersed in some way, shape, and form across all nations. From agriculture to medicine to communications, humanity's way of life has been permanently changed. Indeed, while many villages in Sub-Saharan Africa lack proper sewage, they often still have access to cellular networks. There may be concentrated notes of commerce and education, but the primary components of modernity are still widely dispersed.
The best way to compare the structure of globalization to that of modernity is through the application of network theory. Whereas globalization utilizes a hub and spoke model where a single power our group of powers anchors the system modernity is more can to a spiderweb. A spiderweb undoubtedly contains several anchoring threads, yet the destruction of a single thread doesn't destroy the entirety of the web. It can still function, albeit less optimally. Contrastingly, the destruction of a single spoke on a wheel renders it inoperable. This is the difference between stagnation and collapse.
This idea of stagnation isn't all that popular though. More sensationalist narratives about future collapse and deindustrialization are simply more captivating. It’s why disaster movies and post-apocalyptic shows capture the imagination. There's something about oblivion which intrigues us even though we all pray we will never experience it firsthand.
It's also why prophets tend to be more popular than analysts.
Prophets have a good story. Analysts not so much. Whereas prophets are certain about their predictions, analysts will often answer "well, it depends." But charting the future course of globalization requires analysts utilizing prudent forecasting methods, not sensationalist prophets chasing after public notoriety. If anything, these prophets may inadvertently influence policymakers into making their doomsday prophecies self-fulfilling for we humans are not merely subjects to the forces of history we are also the agents of history. What we believe is possible will shape our future actions.
I strive to be an analyst. While I possess strong beliefs on how globalization and modernity arrived at this present moment and have opinions on how humanities core systems may evolve, the truth is no one knows for sure. We are all actively trying to understand how we got here and where we are going. Neither the prophet nor the analyst is capable of discerning with 100% accuracy each whether the future will be dominated by stagnation or collapse. Each of our answers and responses to what the future holds will subtly differ. It is ultimately the aggregate of these answers and responses which determines the course of history.
Sub-Saharan Africa having cellular but lacking sewer isn't about "modernity" - it's about the AU/UK/US/EU suppressing industrialization but promoting technofascism in the Global South because Imperialists can financialize and commodify human data capital.
https://wrenchinthegears.com/2019/06/19/big-brother-blockchain-babies-coded-religion-and-good-behavior/
Interesting insight: “…It's also why prophets tend to be more popular than analysts. Prophets have a good story. Analysts not so much. Whereas prophets are certain about their predictions, analysts will often answer "well, it depends.” Keep sharing your insights and analyses. 😊