2016: A Damnable Year

I'm still waiting on the rest of the American countries to finally reach an agreement on what to do with Venezuela.

Considering you're taking about one of the most economically powerful nations in the world, it's more when people in the 30s thought a blowhard like Adolf Hitler could never win in election. (he didn't, but that's beside the point)

edited 25th Jul '16 2:44:16 PM by CaptainCapsase

Nothing to worry about until that antibiotic resistant pandemic hits. Otherwise the world is merely returning to its normal state after several decades.

Trump's relevance pales compared to Syrias. Only should he actually win that MIGHT change.

You know, you might be right. The post war peace is about to end.

Could be. I can see it changing to be far more alliance focused than in the past, with geostrategic blocs appearing (Visegrad 4, Nordics etc.) rather than the old East/West dichotomy.

I may be going against the spirit of the thread, but this guy made a list of good things that happened this year.

I recall there being a thread for good things that have happened so far in 2016, but that didn't get opened from the looks of things.

@Terminus: The thing is, our technological capacity for destruction is far, far greater than it was in any previous time in our history.

Cold War tensions are not something that are sustainable over the long term; there were dozens of close calls and false alarms and simple paranoia, and if we return to that sort of environment, it's only a matter of time before things go wrong.

edited 30th Jul '16 10:27:25 AM by CaptainCapsase

Saying our destructive capability is the most dangerous it has ever been is saying we're older than we have ever been. And tomorrow we shall be older still. I have the same issue with that statement as I do with the one saying the US is the most powerful nation in history. Well sure, I'm positive a modern assault rifle IS better than the swords and spears of the Roman Empire. The world around it has become more powerful too, and so relatively speaking, things are not much different now, its just by virtue of circumstance, the US was the sole remaining superpower for about a decade. Was. Now we are returning to a norm that existed pre-WWI, of multipolarism and several great powers.

Back to the subject of capability, such capability does not exist in a vacuum. Control systems are better than they have ever been, awareness as well, thanks to the internet. Can something catastrophic happen? Sure, but no less or no more than before.

The only reason I think this year is damnable is for the reason I laid out in the OP: We're at the end of an age, and with that comes growing pains. That might mean another world war. It might not.

I would beg to differ, at least in terms of it not being fundamentally different than previous eras; the capacity to destroy human civilization is a very recent phenomena, and over the course of the 21st century the number of potential anthropogenic disasters will likely increase dramatically, and an unstable world makes it much more likely that one or more of those eventualities will come to pass.

As with anything else, the longer something has been around, the closer it is to its eventual destruction.

The ability to save the world has also increased at about the same rate. Seeing as I started the thread, I'm certainly not saying we aren't heading in a bad direction, at least for awhile. But there is trying to understand recent trends and seeing what they mean and then doomsaying to such a broad degree that it devolves to pessimism for its own sake.

Is it that much of an achievement if the only ways where we are increased our aptitude to save our world are regarding problems that were created by us in the first place?

And not even all of them; currently, our capacity to stop ongoing harm to the environment in a truly effective global way without harming our economies is at all times low, as it is our capacity to decrease overpopulation in the most populated and empoverished areas of the world. And those are problems that will bite us all in the ass sooner or later.

edited 31st Jul '16 12:28:21 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

We will never be problem free. But that doesn't mean we're utter gnats either where all we can do is destroy ourselves.

I didn't start this thread to deal in generalities and effects so long term you simply cannot accurately predict when, how, or even if they will happen.

that doesn't mean we're utter gnats either

Actually, yes, the overwhelming majority of us human beings are, in the big scheme of things, utter gnats with no real saying on the course of history. Those whose individual decisions do matter at all are a frighteningly tiny minority.

I didn't start this thread to

Well, that's unfortunate, but ultimately any given thread is dictated more by the majority of those taking part on it rather than any thread starter's wishes.

edited 31st Jul '16 1:45:47 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

There's a difference between doom-saying and acknowledging the reality that it's not impossible for us to self destruct, and that global geopolitical instability would drastically increase that risk.

This is On Topic Conversations for a reason. That means no, it isn't okay to hijack a thread to make conversations about vague generalities and how humanity is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. You want that thread, start it yourself.

This is about this year. And its effects. Specifics. Not how we are generally doomed.

I don't think I was necessarily off topic; a major theme of this year has been destabilization of the current political order, and in the long term, that's a trend that could be very dangerous, among other current trends that have alarming long term potential consequences.

edited 31st Jul '16 2:20:14 PM by CaptainCapsase

But we aren't talking about the long term. You go so far out into the long term, it becomes generalities.

Exactly. Being a realist is one thing, but to have such a pessimistic and dismal outlook on not only the near future but instead on everything that is to come really just amounts to doomsaying and maybe even fear mongering, even if unintentional. And to be honest, I think we could all do with a bit less doom and gloom around here.

edited 31st Jul '16 3:28:45 PM by kkhohoho

I'd actually say that we're into the World War 3 period (or build-up period), given the amount of countries being sucked into (directly or indirectly) the situation with ISIS and Syria.

It makes me think of WW 1 where governments and top military were so stuck in the past definition of how wars are fought that they couldn't update their comprehension and tactics fast enough for the way things had changed.

The popular perception of a 'World War 3' scenario in fiction has been something more digital or technological of a doomsday scale, but in real life, many of us still think in terms of how WW 1 and WW 2 unfolded for how a third one might unfold, but, really, what we're in now is something akin to tribal conflict - it's guerrilla warfare on a scale that is dragging multiple countries into the conflict, be it directly (military or money directly targeting the flashpoints) or indirectly (supporting countries who are directly involved, or dealing with home-grown off-shoots, advocates or copy-cats within their own borders). That's how WW 1 and WW 2 were defined as 'world' wars. It wasn't simply an issue of the amount of countries involved in actual fighting, but the sheer amount of collateral countries right around the world that were either providing resources to the fighting countries, or simply offering political support if they couldn't do more.

What's happening with ISIS is sucking in more and more countries - directly or indirectly - but it's not the style of war that was fought in WW 1 or WW 2. I'd say it's a new definition of war, but it's really an old one - on a new scale.

edited 31st Jul '16 3:38:44 PM by Wyldchyld

Now there is a thought....

Inclined to agree, though I also think unrelated conflicts might start breaking out elsewhere, the south caucasus for example, that would then merge with existing crises.

Well, that could indeed be the case. It's happened in past conflicts, too.

I'm looking at this idea of a WW3 build-up (or being in it already) from a perspective of how the future might look back at these conflicts with hindsight. Look at WW 2. People in Europe think it started in 1939. Some Americans think it started in 1941. Then you have the Chinese, who were at war with Japan in 1937. The Second Sino-Japanese War is now regarded as part of WW 2, China was an ally of the US even back then, and yet we still say WW 2 began in 1939.

edited 31st Jul '16 4:58:24 PM by Wyldchyld

Something silly in the China seas, perhaps?

And to be honest, I think we could all do with a bit less doom and gloom around here.

If the OP wanted an optimistic outlook with no overwhelming doom and gloom, perhaps he shouldn't have titled the thread 'A Damnable Year'.