Where is the world heading?

A very interesting op-ed piece by Jared Diamond in the New York Times, titled The Ends of the World as We Know It . He asks "where will we stand 10 years from now, or even next year?

You might have to sign up to read it - but it is free.
He talks about why some societies collapsed and why other survived, and mentions the Maya, Easter Islanders, and many other societies.

The final two paragraphs:

Do we have cause for hope? Many of my friends are pessimistic when they contemplate the world's growing population and human demands colliding with shrinking resources. But I draw hope from the knowledge that humanity's biggest problems today are ones entirely of our own making. Asteroids hurtling at us beyond our control don't figure high on our list of imminent dangers. To save ourselves, we don't need new technology: we just need the political will to face up to our problems of population and the environment.

I also draw hope from a unique advantage that we enjoy. Unlike any previous society in history, our global society today is the first with the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of societies remote from us in space and in time. When the Maya and Mangarevans were cutting down their trees, there were no historians or archaeologists, no newspapers or television, to warn them of the consequences of their actions. We, on the other hand, have a detailed chronicle of human successes and failures at our disposal. Will we choose to use it?


I like the way this man thinks.

Bush's Feeble Response to the Tsunami Crisis

Bush not only fails to provide moral leadership - at a time when the supposed wisdom is that he was re-elected on "moral" issues - but he lies about the US Government's response as well. The US government's initial response was stingy, and everyone knows it. The government of the richest, most powerful nation on earth will spend $40m on the president's inauguration ceremony, and initially offers $35m for aid!

This article, from the Nation (a liberal magazine in the US), explains.

I have no doubt about the generosity of individual americans, but the US is being shamed into doing better.

Since this news broke, Bush has raised the amount to $350m. A lot, lot more will be needed, and I'm sure a lot more will be provided - but only after they conduct their "assessment", a way of saving face. But in the end, as long as they get on with it, that will be the most important thing.

The initial response amounted to 12 cents per person. The new response amountes to around $1.20 per person. By comparison, Australia has offered $60m to date - about $3.00 per person. Sweden pledged $75m, amounting to $8.40 per person.

Surely Bush must realise that the effort they put into this kind of thing will do more to counter terrorism in the future than anything else his militaristic mind can think of.


Update: Japan has now upped their support from an initial $40m to $500m. I expect they have a certain sympathy with the consequences of a tsunami.