What is Reddit's opinion of The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

It's a touch dated since it insisted upon the breakup of Russia and the democratisation of China, but it's a fun little (read.)[https://www.amazon.ca/Next-100-Years-Forecast-Century/dp/0767923057/ref=sr\_1\_1?crid=22MDVOUT9QKBM&keywords=the+next+100+years&qid=1657656991&sprefix=the+next+100%2Caps%2C80&sr=8-1\]

The book I read The Next 100 Years was based off data analysis, and I feel has been spot on in the few predictions it had that have been revealed in the decade since it's release.

It agreed with you - showing Mexico has slowly but steadily been gaining economic momentum over the last 100 years. Economic prosperity and interest should eventually overcome the violence.

The only thing that gives me pause is the good point above about climate change/migration giving them trouble.

I'll concede there, he does need them gone, but it is possible to limp along with the status quo, especially as oil is rebounding. If it reaches likely around 70$ per barrel, Putin would thumb his nose at sanctions before making changes... if he could get them removed, he would consider it.

Have you seen a book called The Next 100 years by Friedman? It had some pretty awesome insights into Russia and whats going on with it on a grander scale; I believe even predicting some of what they did (I think it was written post Chechyna, but pre-Crimea/Ukraine).

Retroactively we can see the flaws present in the system that led to the inevitable crises and wars of the noughties, but at the time these issues were largely ignored in the west, and pax Americana was presumed to last for another century at least.

The end of the cold war was seen by many to be the end of war itself: "not just ... the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."

Looks like someone read The next 100 years.

Funny you should ask. Here are the three books I've read that formed the basis of my opinion:

https://www.amazon.com/Next-100-Years-Forecast-Century/dp/0767923057

https://www.amazon.com/Unrivaled-America-Superpower-Cornell-Security/dp/1501724789

And the most balanced I've read, which postulates that China could go either way, was China's Future. And in the six years since its publication, Xi has made bad decision after bad decision.

https://www.amazon.com/Chinas-Future-David-Shambaugh/dp/1509507140

In George Friedman's The Next 100 Years, he predicts that the US will have a sort of perpetually orbiting 'Battle Stars' space to ground strike platform by mid century.

https://www.amazon.com/Next-100-Years-Forecast-Century/dp/0767923057

One of the major factors in the war, Friedman says, is going to be space-based surveillance and weapons. He foresees larger and more complex spy satellites developed by the US. Of course, our rivals will want to be able to disable these assets, so Friedman describes a strange sort of arms race in satellites that culminates in huge, crewed space stations that act as the hub for the US command and control network. Sort of like orbiting combinations of air traffic control towers and spy satellites. He cites the vulnerability of a ground-based control center, and the seconds of delay time between the acquisition of an image in space and its receipt at a ground-based control center on the surface of the other side of the earth. These “battle stars” would be armed and armored so that they are nearly impervious to attack by enemies. He also describes a fleet of smaller satellites controlled by the battlestars which can “stop and loiter for extended periods of time” over targets of interest.
If that sounds like science fiction, just wait until you hear about his description of how the Japanese will eventually take the Battle Stars out in a 21st century Pearl Harbor style attack. Friedman describes a covert Japanese base on the far side of the moon, which uses rocket-propelled moon rocks, sent into unusual orbits so that they look like ordinary asteroids. Then, when they are within striking distance of the Battle Stars, their rockets fire at the last minute, destroy the Battle Stars and blind the US for the start of the war.
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/1438/1

kaynağı buldum deep web falan değil şu kitaptan alınmış. ayrıca fotonun tam hali bu. aşağıda sphere of influence yani etki alanı yazıyor. yani toprakların hepsi türkiyenin değil, belki de yazar şu an somalideki etkimiz gibi bi etkiden bahsediyordur bilemiyorum.

I see.

https://www.amazon.com/Next-100-Years-Forecast-Century/dp/0767923057

You might be interested in this book if you haven't read it already.

Look at George Friedman's <em>The Next 100 Years.</em>

This is a good starting point on how one should be predicting which countries might become great powers and which will decline. His actual predictions don't really matter here, however; the takeaway is that long-term analysis of geopolitics relies a holistic and multidisciplinary approach and situational awareness of world events rather than simple linear extrapolations. Projections of population and GDP and other metrics are not going to give you anything close to the complete picture, even though they deceptively lead you to believe they do.

Anyway, predictions:

• India is not going to be a leading power for quite some time. I have been there - there are so many social and environmental issues that I don't even know where to begin. It is extremely overcrowded and polluted, whatever infrastructure it has is under immense strain from overuse, and its technological base is impressive but thinly spread out over a large country with over 1.3 billion people. It has a lot of talent, resources, and potential, but even in the best case scenario, most of that is going to be focused inward on solving those problems rather than projecting power and influence outward.
• China is already one, but it has many of the same issues that India has, and whether it is going to overtake the US as the leading hegemon is a question that is completely up in the air. The US' current stance is one of containment - control of the island chains surrounding its major trade lines is a central component of that. Provided that internal economic and demographic issues do not catch up, China will largely be focused on dislodging the US from its littoral either through diplomatic or military means.
• Russia is a power in terminal decline.
• Japan is in managed decline.
• Korea has potential, should it be unified.
• Southeast Asia will be contested ground between Pacific powers.
• Europe is in slow decline, and strictly speaking is not a proper power in its own right. The main power centers of Europe are Germany and France. In the absence of any significant shifts in foreign policy, their international stature is not likely to change significantly but perhaps decline over time. Poland is interestingly resurgent and will likely become a bigger player as time goes on.
• The Middle East is the region most likely to change over the next thirty years. The only countries truly capable of becoming major power centers there are Turkey and Iran, but only one of them, and the former is currently dealt the better hand. Saudi Arabia is an honorable mention.
• Sub-Saharan Africa will continue to see Chinese investment but remain largely peripheral to world affairs. However, countries there will become much more capable of confronting internal and regional issues.
• Australia will assert an increasingly independent foreign policy.
• The US will still be powerful but is likely to remain in (relative) decline. Internal political/economic issues will probably start mounting as the boomers die off. Mexico will be in much better shape on the other hand. This combined with the large Mexican-American population may become a genuine source of tension at some point - perhaps much sooner than Friedman expected, if Trump's presidential campaign was any indication.
• Brazil will remain, as always, the country of the future.

Huh, didn't know that. Anyone read this? Is it junk?

oh im not saying its still even remotely possible, these are long term strategic plans hence stratfor most of these were concerns prior to the first gulf war when the meddling started. the last 10-20 years have been the actions they have taken to avoid that possibility

source wise (the next 100 years by George Friedman aka one of the main guys at stratfor) http://www.amazon.ca/The-Next-100-Years-Forecast/dp/0767923057
and a pdf version if you care http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/pdf/715.2.pdf

the major foreign policy there has been to sew discord and keep them fighting each other so they won't work together. the US makes a lot of money off all the arms they have flooded the region with. Israel backs the plan because it prevents them from ganging up and chasing out the zionists

Oh no, Trump is not a dumb ass. Look, just one sentence, and the Asians are already fighting each other. Notice how he framed this sentences for maximum effect.

Whatever happens in Korea, it is the Koreans in both north and south and the bears its primary consequences, and people in China and Japan bear it secondary consequences. People in America, despite the ICBM hype, people here for the most part would just sit back and enjoy the show. (while it is impressive that NK was able to reverse engineer the R-29, something still used by the Russians but the NK version,it does not have the numbers or MIRV capability to actually threaten the United States). And perhaps, in the best case, the much fabled Asian Century would end before it even began, and the 5 centuries of dominance by European Civilizations will continue for another century.

Relevant book, this is one of his predictions. Also a fun read.