| [Discussion] WARGAME:What happens to oil exporting nations, and thus the stability of the world, when newer tech replaces oil.Many of these countries (in fact, almost all) are already basket cases i.e. Russia, Middle East, Venezuela, Sudan... When oil loses its importance for energy production, will this cause chaos or lead to order? In the short/long run. View 1: This leads to the collapse of already troubled states and helps in the radicalization of already disenfranchised populations, as radical groups take advantage of the situation by scapegoating advanced countries as the enemy. With this new cacophany of radicals joining the extremist fold, Terrorism rises exponentially just as technological advancement is beginning to do the same. Put simply, the equation now becomes: exponential growth in crazies + exp growth in tech = more bad s&%# than we can imagine. This leads to the public outrage and dissilusionment with advanced tech, and thus to goverments restricting or rather centralizing control over all new technological advancements and uses. This slows down technological progress, while at the same time allowing rogue states and crazies the opportunity to advance beyond us or rival us , as government has stifled our innovation. We are then surpassed or equaled in some ways by those with nefarious intent. Conclusion of this view: hell on earth. Of course there are many points in there where things can veer off into other directions. For instance; how do the developed countries respond and help the disenfranchised in the former oil exporters? View 2: Since almost all of the oil exporters are basket cases, their downfall will be a blessing to the world. It will mean the devastation of the clout of dictators and so, the increased power of the more liberal (not speaking politicaly necesarily, just in terms of freedom for the people) countries. The balance of power will have then permanently shifted to the freedom-loving nations of the world and to individual liberty. The advanced countries will help the destitute populations of the former oil exporters. These populations will become more influenced by and eventually embrace the ideals of their benefactors over those of their former dictators and strongmen and corrupt governments. They will embrace personal liberty, governments' power from the people, and human rights. As a result of the downfall of the a##holes the world becomes a more stable place with less and less people feeling disenfranchised and so less and less people trying to hurt others. Terrorism diminishes, instability diminishes. All, just as tech advancement hits the knee of the exp growth curve, at which point hunger and disease and poverty become things of the past. We all sing "Kumbaya my Lord" and live happily ever after. Of course view 2 also has many possible ways to veer off course. For instance, will the sh#%y oil exporting dictators give up power without a fight? Unlikely. It seems then, that a common thread exists between views 1 and 2. The road between future A (view 1) and fut B (view 2) diverges at the point where oil becomes irrelevant, according to how our govt's react and what they do about these populations. If we help the populations out with kindness and efficacy then view 2 becomes reality. If we don't step up to the plate. The world goes ape-s#@*. It seems then that when 2 roads will diverge in that yellow wood, we'd better take the right one even if it's at great expense to ourselves in the short run. Please don't give me crap about grammar or structure. I don't care lol. I view this as a quick blurb expressing a quick summary of my opinion and view on the matter at hand. Please be advised, if this or the unorganized, rambling and rantish nature of this annoys you; here is the consideration I will afford your complaint lol.RAMBLERAMBLERAMBLERAMBLERANTRANTRANT . 4 votes by methos on 2009-05-06 |
|
|
