The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century
Book Review from Hello and Lullaby
Throughout the 21st
century the United States will continue to be the leading global power. This is
the basis of an analysis of the 21st century given by George
Friedman in his book “The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century” (which
is primarily concerned with issues that affect the foreign policies of
countries around the world over the next 100 years). In an increasingly
globalized world, the U.S. Navy is more powerful than every other navy in the
world combined. The U.S. military is also leaps and bounds ahead of every other
military with over 800 bases around the world. Less attention is paid in the
book to the economy and culture of the United States which are both further
integrated with the world’s through multinational corporations like Apple and
Microsoft, as well as institutions such as Hollywood.
While both the hard power and soft
power of the United States make it seem as though it cannot be challenged by another
nation state, I wouldn’t be so quick to assume the correlation of hard power
with soft power. In looking at hard power there are 3 storms on the horizon,
according to Friedman, which will change the dynamics of life in the United
States in the 21st century. The demography challenge, the energy
challenge, and the innovation challenge. These challenges are similar to what
many countries around the world will be facing. An aging population, the need
for energy, and the need for business and technology to continue to develop. Challenges
in soft power are not addressed.
I am a fan of the segmentation of
ideas into their constituent elements such as Friedman has done with the
challenges of our near future. Friedman also looks at major geopolitical trends
and forces to provide an interesting and thought-provoking picture of the 21st
century from above, using the metaphor of tectonic plates with 5 areas of fault
lines of tension that may turn into war. This type of macro analysis forecasting
is extremely difficult, and though many of Friedman’s ideas of what may happen
may not actually come true, the book is a good exercise in thinking about the
future in general and the segmentation of ideas in particular. It provides a strong
example of what forecasting is that may be of value to other authors, and
hopefully more of this type of work starts to be published from diverse
sources. That said, I’m not sure I would take the same Machiavellian
perspective as Friedman with regards to U.S. foreign policy, and thus find
fault in the fundamental idea of his picture of the 21st century.
I think there is a tendency by those such as
Friedman to focus more on the more tangible hard power of military and economic
strengths and less on the soft power of culture. The revolution brought on by
companies such as Apple and Microsoft is a soft power revolution that I believe
has the potential to transform foreign relations in addition to the lives of
individuals. The 20th century might see continued U.S. dominance in
the arena of hard power, but it appears shifts in soft power are very likely as
less developed countries modernize and produce more of their own media content.
It is very difficult from within my cultural bubble to get a true sense of how
this is already happening, but I can still tell this is where things are
heading.
Inside the United States there is a
process, first of diffusing of the power of what used to be the only 3
television stations to a large number of stations and more individuals with
media access, then of Hollywood to independent film makers and of the media to
citizen journalists and essayists on YouTube and other platforms. This real
historical process is like a metaphor for what will happen to the United States
in the 21st century. The original institutions are still very
influential, but they are declining in relative power and more constrained in
their actions by a coalition of outside forces which do not need to control the
infrastructure to benefit from it. The democratization of the world doesn’t
necessarily just mean democracies in every country, but a world where smaller
countries also have a say in where we are headed as a human species (to be
determined by quality of content).
