ON A PATH TO WAR Top US historian warns of potential collapse of globalisation after Brexit and Trum - It's happening

HUMANKIND could be sleeping walking its way towards World War Three and Armageddon, a top historian warns.

Donald Trump’s election and Brexit suggest faith in globalisation is collapsing – and this could spark a huge global conflict, Harold James of Princeton University fears.

Prof James warning comes as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg revealed fears the tide is turning against globalisation.

And former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair today announced his “mission” to get Britons to “rise up” against Brexit.

In an interview with Sky News, Prof James believes a shift towards wanting to protect industries and reduce mass migration mirrors the climate leading to both previous world wars.

He said: “I think [a world war] is absolutely a serious threat.

“In that sense I think the aftermath of 1907 is as interesting as the 1930s.
Prof James also warned the banking crisis 2008 and the resulting cuts to services and pay had the potential for a sharp swing in public opinion away from open markets, borders and trade and towards protectionism – as happened in the 1930s.

He said Trump’s election is a case in point because he has pledged to raise tariffs on imported goods and fight a trade war against countries with an endless supply of cheap labour like China.

He said: “We’re swinging back again from an era when everyone thought globalisation was inevitable, to a period when people think there’s really a big problem with globalisation.

“More and more governments, but also political movements, commentators, people on the street are thinking that globalisation just isn’t working.

“I think the movement at the moment is particularly aimed against migration.”

Europhile Tony Blair today kicked off his campaign to change people’s minds on Brexit which he said was being driven by mass immigration to the UK - which is currently running at the country’s highest ever rate.

Meanwhile in an interview with the BBC Facebook founder Mark Zuckberg said he feared for globalisation that helped his social media business takeover the world.

He said: “"There are people around the world that feel left behind by globalisation and the rapid changes that have happened, and there are movements as a result to withdraw from some of that global connection."

But tech billionaire Elon Musk yesterday claimed artificial intelligence was the biggest threat to mankind.

He believes mankind are set to become usurped by robots.

Humanity will then have to grapple with 15 per cent of the global work force being without a job.

The warnings come just weeks after the world’s most eminent scientists moved the infamous Doomsday Clock - which symbolises how close we are to the end of the world - moved the closest to midnight since 1953 - the most dangerous year of the Cold War.

In a statement, the scientists behind the clock said: “Tensions between the United States and Russia that remain at levels reminiscent of the Cold War, the danger posed by climate change, and nuclear proliferation concerns – including the recent North Korean nuclear test – are the main factors influencing the decision about any adjustment that may be made to the Doomsday Clock.”

Billionaires across the world are already building doomsday bunkers in case World War Three happen with work underway on a massive complex in Texas.

Trump last night said the world faces a “nuclear holocaust like no other” if the US cannot maintain a good relationship with Russia.

In a dramatic conference at the White House this evening the scandal-hit president told reporters: “Don’t forget, we’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are they – there’s no upside.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/28869...collapse-globalisation-brexit-trump-election/
 
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: Gym Leader Elesa
I'm personally convinced that at the very least, we're heading towards a Cold War with China, and after that gets underway, Russia will join in. Russia is still pissed off at the collapse of the economy along with communism, and they have a lot of very disenfranchised youth with no jobs or education, whose only occupation is to sit around and take krokodile all day. Russia controls a massive amount of Europe's petroleum reserves, so all they have to do is shut down the pipelines and Europe is fucked. And on the opposite boarder is a shit awful country full of Muslims who live in dirt hovels, produce an obscene amount of narcotics, and still manage to be convinced that they're God's chosen people, put on the earth to purge the degenerate infidels. Then there's China, who have been steadily taking over huge parts of the China Sea.

All in all, simple economics would make life very difficult, but so long as various countries are only claiming the natural resources within their borders it's unlikely that there will be anything more than boarder clashes with the neighbours. What is a problem is who controls what; and between Russia's petroleum deposits and China taking over the deposits in the China Sea, bickering over the price of grain is suddenly far less important than getting the oil needed to produce and transport that grain.

If nothing else, both China and Russia are playing a waiting game, quietly watching for globalisation to effectively collapse. Then we'll all be fucked as they initialise whatever it is they've been working on for the past ten or fifteen years.
See, attributing intelligence and unusual cunning in one's opponents is an all too common mistake. Look at the how the citizenry sees the governments of the West. The USA is run by idiots. England is on the verge of populist rebellion. Sweden has cucked itself gay. The mouthbreathers in France will elect lady Hitler.

All of them, completely and utterly fucked up, thus unable to pull off long term planning to screw over Russia and China.

But Russia and China are at the very least just as fucked up as the governments in the West. They might be worse off for the sheer stoogery that goes on in their governments. In geopolitics, there is no long con masterstroke. It is now and has always been getting out of the way of the things that work and finding a right time, right place situation.
 
See, attributing intelligence and unusual cunning in one's opponents is an all too common mistake. Look at the how the citizenry sees the governments of the West. The USA is run by idiots. England is on the verge of populist rebellion. Sweden has cucked itself gay. The mouthbreathers in France will elect lady Hitler.

All of them, completely and utterly fucked up, thus unable to pull off long term planning to screw over Russia and China.

But Russia and China are at the very least just as fucked up as the governments in the West. They might be worse off for the sheer stoogery that goes on in their governments. In geopolitics, there is no long con masterstroke. It is now and has always been getting out of the way of the things that work and finding a right time, right place situation.

Unfortunately , this doesn't take into account socialism and communism. With a democratic government, 95% of policy is aimed at no further ahead than five years or so, covering the term of the average prime minister/president/whatever. China, and to a lesser extent, Russia, have a political system where it's highly difficult to turn over enough leadership to change policy. The end result is the long game. The policy makers, the war mongers, know that barring assassination, they will indeed be there to see long term goals come to fruition.

There's another incentive for China, and a lesser extent Russia: MILLIONS of disenfranchised men between the ages of twelve and thirty five. They know they will never marry, something considered unspeakable in Chinese culture, because of the one child policy. They know that their lives are awful and that very soon their major occupation will be taking care of billions of old people, and they're only going to get more and more pissed off as life gets even worse for them. And even though the Russian males have a hell of a lot better chances of getting married, there's still no jobs, no sense of purpose, only the lingering remains of their parent's political system, and what an ugly system it is too. And again, across the Russian boarder there's both an unrestricted flow of heroin, and a deeply sick country hellbent on blaming anyone in the world for their sickness except themselves.

So, you've a government full of officials who know bloody well that if they don't do something to both unite the country and murder tens of millions of people sharpish, will end up with a massive revolution on their hands. And given that said officials effectively have a lifetime role in the government (although at times that lifetime would be very short indeed if subordinates are overly ambitious and can pay for the odd assassination here and there) they are in an excellent position to work towards any type of long term goal. And that long term goal is keeping themselves in power, by any means necessary.
 
We've been on a road to another potential World War since the end of the second. 'The Long Peace' will end eventually, but I doubt we'll be able to trace the cause of it down to a single event.
It's true that hind-sight is 20/20. But I see it this way: in the trenches of World War 1, soldiers learned to stop flinching after every time they heard enemy fire. Why? Because the bullet out there that has your name on it, you won't hear coming.

War could erupt any time. We won't expect it, we won't see it coming, and that's how it goes.
 
I feel it's already starting to happen. Not a huge global collapse as many are predicting but America as a global super power and empire is in decline. This started well before Trump took office, it started before Obama took office. The high water mark of America's power throughout the world was circa 2000 prior to Dubya's Iraq invasion that greatly destabilized The Middle East. Not that America was on too solid of a foundation at that point as it's manufacturing base had largely eroded away by that point and many of the economic regulations that limited the powers of major banks had been rolled back by the Clinton administration.
We were already losing our economic dominance since the 1973 oil crisis and when we lost Iran. It's bullshit to claim Bush destabilized the Middle East. It was Iran, and losing control of the puppet states which we set up to counteract the onion-heads was the knife twisting. Reagan controlled it to an extent, until Clinton dug us even deeper as we lost further dominance from the rise and fall of Southeast Asia, and of course China. Maybe Trump will help alleviate the damage from Obama, and obviously has some less orthodox ways of approaching it. So, it's no surprise the idea of nation states is making a comeback.

Also, understand globalization has been around since the Roman Empire and fucking Silk Road. Offshoring is merely one economic consequence in modern times. Competition still has a greater effect towards employment.
 
I feel it's already starting to happen. Not a huge global collapse as many are predicting but America as a global super power and empire is in decline. This started well before Trump took office, it started before Obama took office. The high water mark of America's power throughout the world was circa 2000 prior to Dubya's Iraq invasion that greatly destabilized The Middle East. Not that America was on too solid of a foundation at that point as it's manufacturing base had largely eroded away by that point and many of the economic regulations that limited the powers of major banks had been rolled back by the Clinton administration.
Yep, and Iraq invasion led to the eventual spread of ISIS (Al-Baghdadi was detained by US forces in Iraq and befriended future ISIS leaders there, on top of the power vacuum created by Bush/Cheney's wars), which took advantage of the Arab Spring to invade Syria during its eventual civil war, which then lead to the migrant crisis and proxy war between Russia and the United states.
Every empire declines. I kinda have hope for 'Murica though
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: glass_houses
Back