One World

Monday, May 7, 2018

One World: Cyber Kids and the End of History (1)

One World: Cyber Kids and the End of History (1)



Chapter 1. Our World...

Chapter 2. At what stage of this transformation is the world in? What crises is humankind confronting today?...

Chapter 3. Innovations in science, technology, art, sport and recreation are the creative force of human life, advancing productivity and making further positive change possible...

Chapter 4. Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace-the Law of Evolution discovering...

Chapter 5. Politics of Democracy...

Chapter 6. Economics: Capitalism the Industrial Revolution and the Digital revolution...

Chapter 7. Cyber Kids Generation...

Chapter 8. Environmental issue...

Chapter 9. The world over population issue...

Chapter 10. Global Security...

Chapter 11. Globalisation...

Chapter 12. Who wants to be a superpower?...

Chapter 13. The United States of America...

Chapter 14. The European Union...

Chapter 15. Emerging economies...BRICS, MINT, other developing nations...

Chapter 16. G7, OECD, NATO and G20...

Chapter 17. UN, WTO, IMF, WB, ADB, and AIIA...

Chapter 18. Religion Evolution...

Chapter 19. What is One World ?...

Chapter 20. Conclusion...



Writing One World: Cyber Kids and the End of history has been long and complicated matter. It was born from my Google blog of the similar name published in July 2009. Ever since, after reading, listening, researching, investigating and, most of all, consulting the public, a new One World is born. The author strongly believes this is the more complete version. It has more information and substance than the original writing. And it is years long overdue.

This writing aims to present first the history of human evolution with its logic, principles and law. It reflects and judges how far and how long humanity can keep evolving on its journey and survive. It identifies what is humanity’s positive and negative developments - what we have created and what we should create. It pinpoints what stage we have reached and what positive and negative points all human races have and share; what is the most important, decisive, key and important thing humankind has achieved? What does reaching this crucial juncture mean and what is the key to making One World come true? What is next?

In writing I will try not to ignore the mistakes, weakness and all the negative things humankind has done since the genesis of human existence.

Even today, our consciousness, thoughts and visions are backward, lagging behind many of the things we have actually already achieved. At the same time human achievement based on sophisticated scientific evolution of knowledge in all aspects has gone very far indeed. Thus, the knowledge and experience we have accumulated are crucial to pin pointing what we are and who we are, what direction we should take and what is the best for our long endless evolving future.

Progress is still uneven and lagging when it comes to security (against extinction) or scientific innovation and technological advancement, social, cultural, human relations, economics, environmental awareness, population planning and establishing a global governing system. Be warned, this imbalance at such a critical time of massive and rapid change and humankind’s under greatest adaptation is dangerous. It is a time when we must make a greater ever quantitative and qualitative adjustment. It poses a gigantic challenge to us all - one that we, humankind, have never encountered before.

In short, according to the Law of Evolution humankind has reached its greatest, most fundamental transition through space and time.  Yet we still have inadequate knowledge and experience. We still seem to be unable to digest it well.  We lack strength and willpower to confront wiser adaption and to make the important positive step of beginning the development of One World.

This writing aims to show the important evidence that humankind has reached a critical stage of development. It sets the stage for a wider scale of discussion, analysis and debate to settle the direction of world development and good governance so we can, finally, take action, action taken wisely and effectively. It is to show how critical the challenge is to us all, how by positive and negative forces, humans interact with each other and with all other beings. Formation of One World is a way to manage and solve the world’s massive problems and obstacles by getting an overwhelmingly positive outcome - a healthier way for humans development and, most of all, humankind survival.

The writer has encountered many difficulties, while searching how to effectively write a book that reflects the utmost reality, and adheres to expert knowledge and experience, ideas and practice, without becoming too long. The issue is so huge, so complex and involves so many disciplines of knowledge and strategic thought. The way this book concludes will be quite different from any other. It aims to show all expert conclusions, ideas and works in their original form.

What humankind has witnessed and experienced especially in the past 100 years has multiplied, making the future much more complex and absolutely important. The invention of the combustion engine, the aeroplane, radio, television and most of all the Internet and the Digital Revolution; mobile communication and transportation have all combined to revolutionise human living, our way of life, our thoughts, perceptions and consciousness, thereby changing Planet Earth forever in all aspects. Most importantly all world governance, structures, bodies and systems must adapt to survive. These are largely the direct result of over 300 years of human industrialisation driven by revolution, globalisations and more than half a century of the digitalised world.

All progress would have been impossible without the innovative nature of the human species, our experience and knowledge, evolving through hard and intelligent working people applying science and technology. The advancement of reality has confirmed more and more that all scientific disciplines of knowledge are, one way or another, making direct and indirect influence and impact on each other. We can prove and explain this far better today than at any time from the past.

In other words at this point in time, all such progress has provided the tools, knowledge, experience and conditions for us to make a quantitative and qualitative shift to a new advanced level of world humanity.       

We have made fascinating advances. Today, Humankind’s adaptation based on the ‘Cyber Kids’ new generation wisdom and mandate. This gives us a tangible promise that all humans on Earth could have a basic safety net at least to live and survive together in peace. By that is meant, at least, all people in the world could have adequate food, shelter, medicine, clothing, education and basic public transportation service. The majority, 90s % of the world’s population, could be able to enjoy a developed world standard of living so long as One World is achieved, while the top 1% and top 10% will still live a happy and secure life even if there is a ceiling on their ‘privilege’ and entitlements, and the middle class number could be multiply increase and keep their livelihood secure. Citizens of developing nations’ will gain a safety net. Their living condition improvement will depend of what they want and when they want it and have the opportunity to work for it. They will have free will and choice. They will have to work for it, but with world-scale cooperation, assurance and assistance of a working system and idea. With current humankind’s experience, knowledge and capability, we humans can fulfil it, only lack of will and imbue in old politics has prevent this to start and make it happen. About the author:

The author has knowledge, experience and long training in political science, geopolitics, international relations, government and military strategy. Has closely followed world innovations, science and technological development, has formal basic training as an electrician, mechanic, writer and over five years as northern provincials freedom fighter leader in the jungle of Thailand. In Australia was graduated with a BA in social science from the University of Technology Sydney Australia, has since undertaken formal training as a computer and internet, and a trade union organiser as well as working many years as a financial project investment consultant, co-operation with an Australian company involved East and South-East Asia nations.

The writing will not be finished without my best friend and adviser Abraham David. And the following is his personal profile,

Abraham David, after 1970s, worked for 20 years as a consultant to Engineering Workersorganising within the trade union movement in Australia.

Authored of book with Professor Ted Wheelwright on Asian Economy development and Australia. Worked as business consultant understand Asian Development models, travelling widely throughout Asia and the world.

Author is grateful and would like to thanking Australia given my secure life an excellence learning ground and growing up.

A part from all of those named of all kind, all fields, discipline’s innovator in the past, present world and in record in this writing, we must not forget about countless anonymous persons in humans history, past and present, who were and are and will be among the world pioneers, inventors, scientists, technologists, thinkers, artists, sport persons, activists in all fields, in all disciplines and activities, to be admired, remembered and gratefully appreciated for their contributions to humankind.

To all known and anonymous innovators, knowledge provider who teach me priceless humanity value, experience, courage that enable me to write this book.

To my mother and father, who taught me about love, living, hardworking and instilled in me of good will, determination and sincerity. Especially my mother, my family members who endure physical and mental hardship, virtually was losing a child, husband, father into another world hardly seeing each other again.

This book is dedicated to an abundance, fair, just and peaceful new world.

Chapter 1. Our world

Imagine if this world fails to solve the critical problems that threaten human survival. What will happen?

Our world needs real social, political and economic ‘real’ democracy across the board, on a global scale. It needs a just institutional and administrative structure and system devoted to reducing the huge gap between developed and developing nations, rich and poor, by providing a basic safety-net standard of living including food, shelter, medicine, clothing, education and basic public transportation. A huge number of people live with food and water shortages. Millions die of hunger or simply succumb to disease. There is unrestrained population growth, illegal economic migration and environmental deterioration.  Ongoing threats to international and national security include the risk of nuclear war, the ruinous arms race, cyber warfare, weapons of mass destruction and the international terrorist threat.

So, one perception is that we are living on a minefield. We are on the brink of a catastrophe – a time bomb that can explode and destroy us all. Can anyone – any world power – guarantee that all of the above problems will not one day lead to the severe damage or total destruction of humankind?

Commonly, many people see things as too complicated, boring, out of reach or taboo. They do not believe we can find any real answer to the above problems. Many just give up searching for a solution. Others do not want to know what our world currently faces and think it will be solved by some unknown force or a stroke of luck.

However, many strongly believe we can solve these problems and crises through our accumulated wisdom and experience and our instinctive evolutionary will to survive. They believe humankind is at the edge of transformation, and collectively has more than enough knowledge, experience and intellect to overcome the crises we face. But we will have to be brave and persistent to make difficult choices and exercise appropriate judgement and actions. Yes, we can survive – but only if we shake off bad habits and adopt new and better ways to solve problems and build a secure and better world in tune with the realities and demands of the 21st century.

History shows that very often step by step, humans have created obstacles, gone on to solve them and created new, more complex problems. It shows humankind while creating problems can solve them through new and better discoveries. This is called progress or positive adaptation.

The discipline of natural science that Newton helped found in the second half of the 17th century has extended humanity’s horizons to a degree he could scarcely have imagination. Newton lived in a world that thought itself 6,000 years old. His world knew nothing of chemical elements or disease-causing microbes. His generation believed living creatures could spring spontaneously from mud, hay or dirty bed-linen. They had only just stopped acknowledged that the sun (and everything else in the universe) revolved around the Earth.

The second half of 17th Century natural science that Sir Isaac Newton helped found has increased humanity future vision. Where, Newton lived in the world that thought 6,000 years old, knew nothing about chemical elements or disease causing sickness. They believed living creatures born out from mud, hay or dirty bed-linin, and just stopped to assuming that the sun and all thing in the universe revolving around the earth (1).

History shows we have been leaping one knowledge gap then another countless times. We call this evolutionary path progress all because one discovery endlessly opens the gate to another discovery.

Chapter 2. At what stage of transformation is the world in? What crises is humankind confronting today?

Humankind has evolved and travelled through space and time (the synthesis of reality and distance) from an ape-like being, through the Stone Age and various forms of social organisation – slavery, monarchy, early capitalist, orthodox capitalist, industrialised capitalist, socialist, including post- modernist capitalist and social democracy.

During the past 100 years, we have invented and developed products, experience, knowledge and information that surpass the collective products of all previous eras.

So can we stop the world from plunging into catastrophe, including war? Are we living at the twilight zone of survival or the dawn of a new era?  If we on the verge of destruction in the next 5, 10, 20 or 100 years, who if anyone among us can ensure our survival?

Today, we are in the midst of a Digital Revolution and our future rests with digital age people who were born in, or grew up, after the ‘communication and information age’ – the Cyber- Kids Generation (CKG). They have lived with Internet and social media as an integral and natural part of their lives and it is up to the CKG to create a global community and one new world. This will come through new knowledge, experience: science and technological change, and human evolution through adaptation.

Chapter 3. Innovations in science, technology, art, sport and recreation are the creative force of human life, advancing productivity and making further positive change possible

A) Innovation in science and technology

These three things are much related and reinforce each other - especially, science and technology. In practical terms without science to initiate or without technology to carry out a process of investigation, we cannot build, test and explain a presumption and reach a conclusion…result. So, generally, when we mention science and technology in fact we cannot separate one from the other.

Formally, the definition of, “science is the concerted human effort to understand, or to understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding 1. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural processes under controlled conditions. (There are, of course, more definitions of science).”

“-making observations in order to find patterns in natural phenomena.

-making and recording observations of nature, or of simulations of nature, in order to learn more about how nature, in the broadest sense, works.

-collecting information to test new ideas or to disprove old ones.” (2)

“Science is value-free. It is a way of attempting to understand the world in which we live from a rational point of view, based on observation, experiment and tested theory.

Irritatingly, especially for governments, science does not operate by consensus and it is often best progressed by mavericks. The alternative to a scientific approach is one based on superstition, phobia, religion or politics.”

So wrote Professor Carter in an article titled Science is not Consensus, published by the Institute of Public Affairs in December 2003 (3).

Technology, on the other hand, is defined as ‘a body of knowledge devoted to creating tools, processing actions and extracting of materials.’ The term ‘Technology’ is wide and everyone has their own way of understanding its meaning. We use technology to accomplish various tasks in our daily lives, in brief; we can describe technology as products, processes or organisations. We use technology to extend our abilities, and that makes people the most important part of any technological system. Technology is also an application of science to solve a problem (4).

On other perception, all innovation and invention we humankind has been carried out, since ancient time to today can all be classified more or less as scientific performing activities: randomly with no exact rule, principle, standard to carry out.

“Science works for two reasons. First, its results are based on experiments: extracting Mother Nature’s secrets by asking her directly, rather than by armchair philosophising. And a culture of openness and replication means that scientists are policed by their peers. Scientific papers include sections on methods so that others can repeat the experiments and check that they reach the same conclusions.” (5)

Although science is always treated as one thing and technology as another, this might not be true in the practical sense. Science starts with an idea, or many ideas or assumptions. There are many obstacles, problems, issues, conflicts, questions or talking points we desire to get to the bottom of. This results in us seeking to find a solution with the aim of solving and create a new better thing or way out in short to understanding and fulfilling our objectives. So, practically, science needs knowledge and experience and this leads us to invent the method, tool, skills and mechanisms to find either a simple or sophisticated process and technical experiment and experience. Artificial intelligence, proving and/or solving the puzzle - all of these are forming or a part of technology.

The aim is to prove, to understand, to get a new result, a new idea or a new thing. From this point, science cannot live alone without technology. And it needs scientific desire. Science relies largely on technology to get the result we need. It is also another way around which technology propels scientific activity, more ideas, problems and desire endlessly. As such, science and technology seem to have a twin bond. They are one entity and cannot be separated. Therefore, from this principle and logic, this entire writing when mentioning science must or should also mean technology. Even if only one is mentioned alone. The exception is if specifically separating one from the other when specifying details.

Since all living things have a direct or indirect influence on each other and interact with each other in various ways, the process is simultaneous through space and time and circumstance in both positive and negative ways. In regard to humankind to advance development and move towards a better chance of survival, it creates a situation whereby we need to make a positive balancing force and strive for a balanced condition. We have to cope with the negative forces that push against positive forces to achieve the right outcome in different stages of synthesis or interaction in broader fields.

How can this balance and new balance be achieved and keep up with us? That is what humankind’s eternal task is after all.

The following remarks perhaps could enhance our determination:

“At least 40,800 years later, we can use our knowledge of nuclear physics to move backwards in time to piece together her story. Science is a time machine, and it goes both ways. We are able to predict our future with increasing certainty. Our ability to act in response to these predictions will ultimately determine our fate. Science and reason make the darkness visible. I worry that lack of investment in science and a retreat from reason may prevent us from seeing further, or delay our reaction to what we see, making a meaningful response impossible. There are no simple fixes. Our civilisation is complex, our global political system is inadequate, our internal differences of opinion are deep-seated.” (6)

Countless human innovations are the changing force that have transformed ‘animal’ pre-historic humans into different stages of human evolution, setting us far apart from animal world:

“We are the only organisms that mentally deconstruct our surroundings and our internal experiences into a vocabulary of abstract symbols that we juggle in our minds to produce new versions of reality so we can envisage what might be as well as describe what is.” (7)

From time to time, countless inventions combine to become core of systematic human knowledge, transforming into so-called modern science. The following is the results of such development:



Logic, Mathematics, Mathematical logic, Mathematical statistics, Theoretical computer science.


Acid-base, Analytical, Environmental, Inorganic, Nuclear, Organic, Physical, Solid-state,
Supramolecular, Sustainable (‘green’), Theoretical, Astrochemistry, Biochemistry, Crystallography, Food chemistry, Geochemistry, Materials science, Molecular physics, Photochemistry, Radiochemistry, Stereochemistry, Surface science.


Classical, Modern, Applied, Experimental, Theoretical, Computational, Atomic, Condensed matter, Mechanics, (classical, continuum, fluid, solid), Molecular, Nuclear, Particle, Plasma, Quantum field theory, Quantum mechanics (introduction), Special relativity, General relativity, Rheology, String theory, Thermodynamics.

Earth Sciences

Climatology, Ecology, Edaphology, Environmental science, Geodesy, Geography (physical), Geology, Geomorphology, Geophysics, Glaciology, Hydrology, Limnology, Meteorology, Oceanography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology, Palynology, Pedology, Volcanology.

Space science

Astronomy, Astrophysics, Cosmology, Galactic astronomy, Planetary geology, Planetary science, Stellar astronomy.


Anatomy, Anthropology, Astrobiology, Biochemistry, Biogeography, Biological engineering, Biophysics, Behavioral neuroscience, Biotechnology, Botany, Cell biology,  Conservation biology, Cryobiology, Developmental biology, Ecology, Ethnobiology, Ethology, Evolutionary biology (introduction), Genetics (introduction), Gerontology, Immunology, Limnology, Marine biology, Microbiology, Molecular biology, Neuroscience, Paleontology, Parasitology, Physiology, Radiobiology, Soil biology, Sociobiology, Systematics, Toxicology, Zoology.


Anthropology, Archaeology, Criminology, Demography, Economics, Geography (human),
History, International relations, Law, Linguistics, Pedagogy, Political science, Psychology, Science education, Sociology.

Applied Engineering

Aerospace, Agricultural, Biological, Biomedical, Chemical, Civil, Computer science / engineering, Electrical, Fire protection, Genetic, Industrial, Mechanical, Military, Mining, Nuclear, Operations research, Robotics, Software, Web engineering.


Medicine, Veterinary, Dentistry, Midwifery, Epidemiology, Pharmacy, Nursing.


Applied physics, Artificial intelligence, Bioethics, Bioinformatics, Biomedical engineering,   Biostatistics, Cognitive science, Complex systems, Computational linguistics,  Cultural studies,
Cybernetics, Environmental science, Environmental social science, Environmental studies, Ethnic studies, Evolutionary psychology, Forestry, Library science, Mathematical / theoretical biology, Mathematical physics, Military science, Network science, Neural engineering, Neuroscience, Science studies, Scientific modelling, Semiotics, Sociobiology, Statistics, Systems science, Urban planning, Web science.


Basic research, Citizen science, Fringe science, Protoscience, Pseudoscience, Freedom, Policy, Funding, Method –Technoscience (8).

And (From Philosophy of Science Journal, the University of Chicago Press).

(Together, 250 discipline and field, and through space and time;  will endlessly extend and discovering new area, branch and discipline).

Ultimately, humans are the creators and accumulator of innovation, science, arts, technology, and the human relationship binding knowledge and experience. On the other hand, scientific, artistic, technological and human interaction which accumulates knowledge and experience is also the builder and shaping of humankind as well.

“The scientific method is based on verifiable evidence, and is thus not a belief system, despite frequent claims to the contrary.” (9)

So, on the positive side, science also results in an open mind, honesty, fascination, and wonder. It informs, demonstrates, reveals, exposes, adapts and changes. It is the miracles, wonders creator, and teaches us about the power of ideas and experience. It provides useful knowledge of what is positive or negative.

Science belongs to all humankind. Science and technology have no nationality. They are the key and central to all our wisdom: “Science is one of the most trustworthy human activities” (10).

At present, this advancement of science and technology has transcended from the simplest and most limited to the widest and more sophisticated level of discovery.

Since the prehistoric ages, humankind has from one era to another era discovered and invented countless simple and increasing more sophisticated ideas and things - many of which (all of this) are today the foundation of our knowledge.

Invention and discoveries of all kinds of knowledge, wisdom, ideas, methods and tools, both past and present are essential to progress that which has supported human advancement and survival to this day. No doubt, science has a profound effect on creating and shaping today’s living. Scientific knowledge guides our thoughts, consciousness, systems and structure of living. It is the lifeline of civilisation from the simplest tools like the stone ax, knife, arrow or lance to the wheel, horse and cart, paper, printing, compass, gun powder, fossil fuel. The evolution of knowledge from electricity, steam engine, combustion engine, car, locomotive, rail and aeroplane, washing machines and household appliances, television, computer, internet, digital appliances, laptop, tablet, DVD, CD, mobile and smart phone, skype, the contraceptive pill and condom to the atomic bomb and nuclear energy, DNA, modern medicine, vaccination, solar energy and space exploration. All these things can balance the equation or dramatically affect human well being, our way of life and our survival. They can have a positive or negative cause and effect on our evolution.

Although all invention play significant role and useful in changing humanity and the world in its own right, but two of the most outstanding inventions of the 20th century – contraception and the washing machine -  have revolutionised humanity.

Professor Ha Joon Chang, the Cambridge University economist believes the effect the washing machine has had on human life is more profound and powerful than any other invention. Both the washing machine and contraception have changed the world, especially for women. Both inventions have helped both sexes’ education, family concept and equal rights beyond description. The gap between the sexes has narrowed more than any time in human history (11).

Science and technology has reduced the cost, effort, time and transformation faster than ever.

“More recently Bank of America Merrill Lynch predicted that by 2025 the ‘annual creative disruption impact’ from Artificial Intelligence (AL) could amount to between $14 trillion-$33 trillion, including a nine trillion dollar reduction in employment costs thanks to AI-enabled automation of knowledge and work. Cost reductions of $8 trillion could be created in manufacturing and health care; with $2 trillion in efficiency gains from the deployment of self-driving cars and drones. The McKinsey Global Institute, a think-tank, says AI is contributing to a transformation of society ‘happening 10 times faster and at 300 times the scale, or roughly 3,000 times the impact’ of the Industrial Revolution.” (12)

Moreover, in this day, there is no new vision, systems, ideology or future administrative systems, which have not taken science, technology and knowledge into serious account. Like it or not without science and our beautiful, wonderful own imagination all would be impracticable, incomplete, partial or absolutely unworkable. Without technology it would be unreal, simplistic and out of date. In fact it is not our decision alone. Any consideration and decision making complies with human knowledge, experience and our urge for human survival, which complies by Natural Law and mandatory abide by Law of Evolution.

B) Arts, music, dance and sport and hobbies are another important human invention

Apart from human activities like working and producing for survival, arts, music, sports and hobbies have also been among the most important activities since human existence. The human desires for leisure, entertainment, relaxation and the joys of life and a healthy mind are all part of human development. Economic development, trade, travel, expanding contacts between the human races, the progress of science and technology interact and complement social exchanges.

They become part of the entire human culture and civilisation. Arts, music, dance, sport and entertainment are among the variety of activities in our spare time that have spread to people throughout the world. From the playground of the advanced and underdeveloped nations; from wealthy and powerful elitists, to the mass population, these activities are becoming cheaper and available to all. It also provides variety and euphoria, deeply touching the human mind and emotions. Light, colours, sound, dance and artistic display all reflect human wisdom and beauty. They strengthen optimism and hope. They provide variety and imagination, softening and enhancing the friendship of mind and soul of all races. It is the culture and part of civilisation. It is a domain where all humans can share enjoyment and grow better relationships that enhance peace.

All the above developments have also made advancements in modern film making, music production and dance, arts, sports, travel and cultural advancement to a higher development than ever.

Indeed, the role of human innovation, science, technological knowledge, experience and the advancement of arts, music, dance, sports and hobbies that humans achieve is incredible –a miracle gigantic in scale and complexity. It extends far and wide, with countless layers of complexity. All of these are contributions forming today humans’ world.

For this reason we should mention some of the outstanding examples to learn from and inspire us. We should show gratitude for those who enhanced our world. We should show pride and respect for their achievements and contribution.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), the Italian physicist, astronomer and philosopher, regarded as the father of modern science, played a major role in the Scientific Revolution.

Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727), the English scientist discovered the law of motion.

Adam Smith (1723-1790), the Scottish economist is regarded as the father of modern capitalistic economics.

Wolfgang Mozart (1756-1791), the Austrian conductor, classical and opera composer was a multi-instrumentalist and a very important figure who heavily influenced the music world.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913), the English naturalists, evolutionary biologists, bio-geographers, zoologists and writers through their discoveries revealed that all known species of life have evolved overtime, from a common ancestor.  (Darwin’s on the ‘Origin of Species’ shows the process called Natural Selection and Evolution).

Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898), the German head of state and the world’s first leader who introduced state welfare for woman with young children, later labour laws, state disability welfare and pensions in Europe.

Karl Marx (1818-1883), the German philosopher, sociologist, political and economic theorist, whose ideas and philosophy have had a great influence on social, political and economic world thought. Marx has inspired humankind to build a just, civilised new social-political and economic system.

Jagadish Chandra Bose (1858-1937), the Indian physicist, biophysicist, biologist and botanic archaeologist. He discovered Millimetre Wavelength, Horn Antennas Dielectric Lenses, semiconductors at frequencies as high as 60 GHz.

Marie Sklodowska Curie (1867-1934) and Pierre Curie (1895-1906), the Polish French scientist couple, who co- discovered a new element called Radium or Polonium (when radium decays).

Orville Wright (1871-1948) and Wilbur Wright (1867-1912), the American brothers who invented and tested the world’s first successful aero-plane.

Albert Einstein (1879-1955), the German-American theoretical physicist who discovered the law of General and Special Relativity and unlocked the complicated mysteries of the universe.

Sergei Pavlovich (1907-1966), a citizen of the former Union of Soviet Socialist of Russia (USSR), who laid the foundations for rocket science and USSR’s space program.

Jacques Yves Cousteau (1910-1997), the French naval officer, explorer, scientist, ecologist, inventor, author, researcher, film maker and photographer, who was such a strong defender of the environment.

Hsue-Shen Tsien (1911-2009), the Chinese rocket scientist, who was a major figure in the missile and space programs in the United States. He later became China’s head of rocket and space programs.

Dr Werner von Braun (1912-1977), the German-American rocket scientist and an eminent rocket engineer who became a major figure in the United States of America space program. And key figure that propel the US to develop better rocket that reach the moon and universe.

Dr Christian Barnard (1922-2001), a South African heart specialist who succeeded in bringing about the world’s first heart transplant in 1967.

Professor Masatoshi Koshiba (1926), the Japanese astrophysicist who discovered three types of cosmic neutrinos from the sun.

Sir David Attenborough (1926) the English natural scientist, social anthropologist, wildlife specialist and BBC film producer, who pioneered and revolutionised the way we see the natural world of plants, insects, all animal life and nature around us. He has changed human perception and understanding of the relationship between humans and nature – how we evolve and interact.

Julie Andrews (1935), the English actress, singer and dancer who succeeded in creating many highly memorable films in the entertainment world.

Professor Satoshi Omura (1935), is widely recognized as a global expert world in the field of Bioorganic Chemistry, particularly for the discovery, development, biosynthesis and manipulation of useful chemicals derived from naturally-occurring microorganisms.

Professor David Takayoshi Suzuki (1936), the Canadian geneticist and zoologist, a renowned genetic researcher and a major international figure, who pioneered the environmental activist movement.

Edson Arantes de Nascimento, “Pele” (1940) from Brazil, who has become the world’s most talented and famous footballer.

Professor Muhammad Yunus (1940), the Bangladeshi economist, who invented the Grameen Bank System in 1983. He developed the concept of micro-credit which enables the world’s poorest people unable to obtain traditional bank loans, credit for small investments.  He has helped hundreds of millions of investors escape poverty. This ideal concept is now practiced in more than 100 countries worldwide.

Hernando De Soto (1941), the Peruvian economist, who developed a theory and policy about property rights and as an investment asset in the developing countries.

Professor Stephen Hawking (1942), the English physicist, who introduced the Theory of Everything.  He is a specialist in theoretical physics, cosmology and quantum gravity.

Professor Joseph Stiglitz (1943), the American economist, who disagrees with Adam Smith invisible hand concept. He calls those who run the current market system “free market fundamentalists.”

Professor Ha Joon Chang (1963), a South Korean-born Cambridge University, economics lecturer, whose ‘line’ school of economic thought has provided better understanding of modern economics, especially for the relationship between developed and developing nations.

Sir Tim Berners-Lee (1955), the English engineer and computer scientist who in partnership with Robert Cailliau (1947), a Belgian informatics engineer and computer scientist, developed HTML (graphical interface) and invented the World Wide Web.

James Watson (1928), an American molecular biologist, geneticist and zoologist.

Francis H.C Crick (1916-2004) - an English molecular biologist, biophysicist, and neuroscientist, who co-discovered a structure of Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid (DNA) in 1953 known as the double-helix model. The discovery of DNA made our knowledge of evolution more complete as it revealed the secret building blocks of life date back to beginning of human.

Bill Gates (1955), Steve Jobs (1955) Steve Wozniak (1950), the three American, inventors, computer engineers and IT entrepreneurs. They are the pioneers and creators of our early computer software now in commercial application worldwide.

Michael Jackson (1958 -2009), the American singer, composer, dancer in the genre of Pop, R&B, rock and soul style. He is also a pioneer in musical video production, who created a new singing and dancing style and was given the name King of Pop.

Michael Fred Phelps (1985) - the American world swimming champion. He won 39 world records (29 individual, 10 relay). Phelps also won more Olympics gold medals than any swimmer in history.

Usain Bolt (1986) - the Jamaican athlete sprinter who was the first to break the world record in three events in the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

All of the above and must not forget about entire past anonymous persons in humans history past, present and in the future, who were and are and will be among the countless world pioneers, inventors, scientists, technologists, artists, sport persons in all disciplines and activities, to be admired, remembered and gratefully appreciated for their contributions to humankind.

Kofi Annan the former UN’s Secretary General once said, knowledge is power. Information is liberating. Education is the premise of progress, in every society, in every family (13).

Actually, knowledge could also be regarded as a public and personal asset.

It offers the most valuable answers to the ancient and contemporary frequently asked questions.

In the past 100 years there has been significant events that have brought great developments and drastically changed our lives in both positive and negative ways.

It is interesting to learn and know that the use of fire for cooking, the invention of the wheel, paper, printing, gunpowder, the motor car, aeroplane, the jet engine and the sputnik satellites, the nuclear bomb, modern medicine, the invention of the x-ray, the contraceptive pill, the discovery of DNA, space travel, digital technology, Internet, mobile and smart phones, the high speed train networks, particle smashing at the speed close to light speed, population fast increase in the many developing nations, food and water shortages, renewable energy, were and are all important in driving the world change in either positive or negative ways.

Like the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, the French Revolution, Charles Darwin’s Law of Evolution, the American Revolution, the Great Depression of 1930, the end of colonialism, China’s Cultural Revolution, Globalisation I and II, the Vietnam War, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) invasion of Afghanistan, the birth of Internet, smart phone and the Digital Revolution extend to the entire world of: digital webs and networks, China’s modernisation, the collapse of the USSR, the end of the Cold War, the end of apartheid in South Africa, rapid economic growth in some developing nations now called emerging economies, economies of scale, the US led 2008 Sub-Prime Mortgage and World’s Economic Crisis, Barak Obama becoming the first African-American US president, world debt, Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS), establishment of the global New Development Bank (NDB), Julian Assange of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden revelations of US top secret information, they have changed the world.

Or we should be take a quick look to The Worldwatch Institute classified past and future world’s innovation, science and technology achievement from 1785 as a reflection and comparison as, First Wave 1785, iron, water power, mechanisation, textiles and commerce, Second Wave 1845, steam power, rail road, steel and cotton, Third Wave 1900, electricity, chemical and internal combustion engine, Fourth Wave 1950, petrochemicals, electronics, aviation and space, Fifth Wave 1990, digital networks, biotechnology, software and information technology, Sixth Wave 2020, sustainability, radical resource productivity, whole system design; biomimicry, green chemistry, industrial ecology, renewable energy and green nanotechnology (14).

Chapter 4. Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace – the Law of Evolution and scientific discovering

Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace’s scientific discovery of the Law of Evolution is one of the world’s most controversial. It is still being fiercely debated today. It is also one of the world’s most influential discoveries as it explains that all beings have evolved and are evolving driven by surviving instinct, through adaptation and on humans’ accumulated experience and positive consciousness.

Applying this to knowledge has relevance. Ideas too are evolve, link, interact and influence each other. Thoughts evolve and form into families or groups, which we need to explore and analyse so as to better explain and help us understand our own evolution and future development.

Ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus (535-475 BC) who proposed the “Unity of the Opposites was among the world’s greatest thinkers. He shows existing entities as being characterised by pairs of contrary properties. He sees the paths up and down as one and the same, resulting in forces that create change. Heraclitus’s theory leads to what we understand today as natural law. This law confirms the positive and negative forces and effects - the innovation and adaptation of competition; the push and pull nature of things that balances and imbalances situations, creating change all the time. Such change is both small and large; visible and invisible; fast and slow. Heraclitus confirms. There is nothing permanent except change” (15).

Tracing history back to fourth century BC, the Chinese interpreted positive and negative forces as opposite contradictions – actions and reactions of opposing pairs - poles apart.

The concept of Yin and Yang emerged from Taoism: hot and cold, women and men, light and darkness, black and white, sun and moon. It advocated unity by balancing, and creating an ‘equilibrium’ of two opposing forces that are in permanent conflict with each other or ‘unity of opposites’. Taoism also emphasises harmony or union with nature. The Nei Ching [Ancient Chinese text] states that ‘The entire universe is an oscillation of the forces Yin and Yang.’ And ‘The relativity of Yin and Yang and the dynamic tension of their interaction are the basis of thought and expression in Taoism. Maintaining a balance between Yin and Yang results in perfect health of body, mind and soul.’ (16)

Centuries later Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727) explained the law of physics that ‘for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.’ This means that any force exerted on an object has a counter force that is exerted in the opposite direction back onto the first object. It the action of push and pull that explains how universal natural force works (17).

William Gilbert (1544-1603), an English physician, physicist and natural philosopher, first made the connection between the attraction of opposite charged objects and magnetism (of positive and negative charges).

His ‘De Magnete’ was published in 1600 and was quickly accepted as the standard work on electrical and magnetic phenomena throughout Europe. In it, Gilbert distinguished between magnetism and static (known as the amber effect). He also compared the magnet's polarity to the polarity of the Earth, and developed an entire magnetic philosophy on this analogy.”

This involved positive and negative charges of electrical energy. The energy produced was called an electric current. When it is run through what is known today as a conductor or semiconductor, transistor or IT circuit; it operates a light bulb, radio, computer and other more complex electronic devices and machines.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), the German historian, political philosopher has among his greatest discoveries the dialectic. ‘…his [modern notion dialectic] dialectic involves the reconciliation of ostensible paradoxes to arrive at absolute truth. The general formulation of Hegel's dialectic is a three-step process comprising the movement from thesis to antithesis to synthesis. One begins with a static, clearly delineated concept (or thesis), then moves to its opposite (or antithesis), which represents any contradictions derived from a consideration of the rigidly defined thesis. The thesis and antithesis are yoked and resolved to form the embracing resolution, or synthesis. Succinctly put, the dialectic actualises itself by alienating itself, and restores its self-unity by recognising this alienation as nothing other than its own free expression or manifestation’ (Bottomore 122). This formula is infinitely renewable; Hegel contended it would only terminate upon the world's end. Each time synthesis is achieved it ‘generate[s] new internal contradictions, and then a further resolution’ (Macey 96). It is also teleological because ‘each later stage of dialectic contains all the earlier stages, as it were in solution; none of them is wholly superseded, but is given its proper place as a moment in the whole’ (Russell 731). The infinite character of the dialectic reflects Hegel's notion of holistic truth and his optimistic belief in progress (18).

Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace were leaders in the field of natural and biological science. Their knowledge of evolution is also based on a similar understanding of the principle of action-reaction principle; Adaptation Law. For example the positive effect of a hot climate on humanity is people need very little clothing. With rain, food and vegetation are in abundance and fast growing. But a negative effect is that communities are prone to a variety of diseases, flash floods and bush fires. They must improve or change their surroundings as much as they can to survive. Most importantly they must adapt to their nature surroundings. Cold climates on other hand, make people more active as they struggle harder hunting, gathering and inventing tools for survival to protect themselves and adapt to the climate. On the negative side they need to work harder to provide food and have a relative lower or slower rate of reproduction.

Apart from biology and natural science fields, new scientific discovering fields, disciplines and knowledge are further expanding and supporting the evolution knowledge. At this point, it is time to explore what Darwin’s Law of Evolution is all about. How could it explain, guide or decide the future of humankind and the plight of organisms and all beings on earth- universe? How should humankind interact with nature and discover more of the secrets of life so as to have a better chance of surviving?.

The following documentary films first one about how Earth’s natural system work and dictate all beings existence, and second one about how humanity ancient and current one accumulate, building up and acquire experience, knowledge and building seen and unseen of countless webs and networks for humans’ daily activities. Become global scale of gigantic webs and net-workings systems. The system and systems are highly become interacted, interrelated, interconnected, intertwined, Interwoven, interdependence, integrated, and actually, humanity cannot survival without them.

“Earth from Space takes you on an epic quest to discover the invisible forces and processes that sustain life on our planet and, for the first time, see them in action in their natural environment in vivid detail. These truly unique images will explore the deepest mysteries of its existence, raising profound questions and challenging the old assumptions of how Earth's system works.” (19)

“Only by taking a satellite eye's view of the Earth can scientists studying the geology and climate of the planet gain a sense of just how interconnected the sea, land and air of the planet are, said Waleed Abdalati, the director of the Earth Science and Observation Center run through the University of Colorado at Boulder and a participant in the two-hour documentary.”

Earth from Space are taken decades and ongoing, by using NASA over 120 satellites equipped with high power cameras watching every part of earth year round 24/7. And with the help of various fields and discipline of knowledge and scientific-technology and tools. The film has make the first time humans can closely see how visible and invisible natural earth working clearly before our eyes. This led to the much invaluable knowledge and secrete that we all must know (as a basic knowledge). And how the natural forces that surrounding us work, together to create an engine powerful enough to nourish and guide life, lead to diversity (20).

“Advanced satellites provide a wealth of data about these continually developing networks and help gaze into the future like never before. MANKIND FROM SPACE provides an unprecedented view from beyond the earth’s atmosphere, peeling back the networks layer by layer to reveal the globally connected society that many take for granted in their daily lives.

Earth’s astounding interconnectivity has been at least 12,000 years in the making. Innovations in agriculture, commerce, power, transportation, communication, and technology have forever changed the course of civilisation. These human advances led to the creation of the modern wonders of the world and the development of an intricate web of networks that span the globe, linking humanity together and providing for near limitless potential. However, this immense success has also triggered a vast population explosion, straining worldwide networks. Civilisation faces new challenges that will require the long tradition of human ingenuity to pursue bold new innovations to ensure a sustainable future.” (21)

It tells us that all things around us, all situations and conditions humans face, and engage with are evolving. Natural forces, thoughts and ideas, push and pull, influencing each other in certain ways without end - from the smallest and simplest, to the largest and most complicated matter. Whether it is the atom, a particle or the atmosphere, plants and animals, humanity, the economy, ecology, culture and politics, whether within a community or globally, act as one entity. The consequence depends on the proximity, size, quality, density, circumstance, condition, location, resources, character, entity, natural environment, human decision and all other made up factors.

Mankind from Space is using and sharing the same technology tools. It is depiction and compress to show how ancient world developing into modern one. The film offers priceless picture, graphic, statistic table in colourful digital form. The film show how world’s science and technology, social, economic and civilisation progression. Film emphasis on showing Digital Revolution of sea, air, land communication,  transportation, trade and economic engagement hundreds and thousands of route and line in running graphic and picture, invisible webs and networks. This is obviously become a so called World Digital Web and Net-workings (WDWN) structure and system that wrapping up the entire world we live. (22)

Professor Fritjof Capra, an an Austrian-born American physicist and Professor Pier Luigi Luis, an Italian Chemistry argued that many of the most important problems we face today - from financial instability to climate change and ecological degradation - reflect our collective inability to appreciate just how the world operates as a holistic, networked system in which every part depends on every other (23).

So, what today is evolution all about?

For humankind, animals, plants, insects (organisms) and all beings on earth, Darwinian’s Law of Evolution is based on the principle of positive and negative action-reaction, unified interaction or holistic adaptation. In short the Law of Evolution is the law of adaptation. It applies to all beings but in this writing will emphasis on examine it’s affected on human beings. Overall this could include all science and technology, biology, natural science, social science, new politics, environment, economics and culture,

(1) Innovation (progression, advancement)

[In order to better survive and advance humans use lifelong adaption knowledge and experience to synthesis and evolve.] This enables inherit genes to slowly develop (not genes alone) either for better or worse depending on individual, group or community. Their encounters of nature force, culture, learning, acquired knowledge and experience, influence what decisions they make (24).

This new finding means genes are still the main cause and effect but other factor also play a role.

The universal practice of using knowledge and experience to interact with nature and all other beings to better invent supportive mediums, methods, tools as a way to eliminate limitation or circumvent obstacles prevails. It is also a way to increase security and provide a better chance of survival. In resisting or adapting to natural limitations, we cooperateinteract or compete with other humans as well.

The very notion is an offensive adaptation posture. Making things better, overcoming barriers and reconciling is about being elastic, resilient, balanced adaptation is based on large or small scale, massive or collective positive changes. The goal is to have a larger positive element so as to advance - to be in command and to step forward so as to better adapt and survive better. The outcome could be a new, better or at most a revolutionary working system.

(2) Conservatism (status quo, backwardness, reactionary)

Defensive entities or beings, in order to survive, comply with the more effective, powerful, an offensive adaptation.

Humans are compelled first to adapt; learn and search for the medium, method and tools of development. In so doing we increase our chances of survival. Survival mainly depends on defensive adaptation. If competition becomes extreme it endangers survival. This human race faces failure, destruction or even extinction. Defensive adaptation is the only way to secure, solve, defuse or thwart the problem in order to continue to evolving and survive.

Survival mainly Involves adapting, learning, copying, adjusting, cooperating, collaborating, compromising and assimilating. The goal is to overcome something that is difficult to handle or have little control over. It is usually action taken from a position of weakness, ignorance, unwillingness or dislike out of necessity just in order to survive in a circumstance, as a community, a nation, an entity and working system.

Usually, if the positive element is getting smaller, the negative one will equally increase, and there will be stagnation.

When adaptation is more negative than positive it could induce conflict, serious conflict, war and total destruction. Or it could lead to decline, stagnation and collapse.

Both offensive and defensive adaptation are contained in a set or an entity. They have both positive and negative qualities. By nature they both have no static position and on constant changing. Humans every choice is adaptation in action, only it is a positive or negative one that will dictate the outcome.

Usually, the aim is to improve the situation by employing a selective and strategic act to reduce the negative force and induce progressive change. It is synthetic dialectic, interacting through space and time. Through this process, positive can turn to negative via compelling action via certain competition and changing circumstance.

From this point, it is necessary to elaborate what space and time is in the Evolutionary Law dimension.

Space means an object; all organisms of actual beings - a unit, an entity. It could be a thing, a phenomenon, an event, a mental condition, a thought, a matter, a feeling, an intention and consciousness, as small as an atom, a particle or as large as all other social, political, economic entities or ecological components that make up the world and universe.

Time is the length, duration, proximate, parameter, gap or distance that humans and all beings, or things require to engage or interact in synthetic-dialectic action and process that will provide a certain outcome.

The Law of Evolution can be defined as,

A) Law - Adaptation.

B) Principle - Synthesis- the dialectic of interaction between positive and negative forces.

C) Rule: the positive element must always be larger than the negative in order to further operate or to survive.

Evolution is happening through the interplay of positive and negative forces that dictate the development of all organisms.

Human beings are different from animals, evolving through innovating and adapting. Our ability and instinct to know what is positive and what is negative helps us reach a balance.  While too much negative could be destructive, overwhelming positive could create (or constructive destruction) - a new, a revolution, a much better thing or entity.

All organisms (including humans) on Earth are governed by the Law of Evolution – adaptation. All species, creature must adapt (or change) all the time, beginning from birth until our last breathe. This is done through synthesis - a never ending inter-reaction of positive and negative (contradictions).

Evolution provides a scientific principle and rule that dictates the interplay of positive and negative forces.

In science and technology it is innovation, in chemistry it is achieved by synthesis, in biology it is the synthesis of living cells. In social and politics terms it is the dichotomy, of left and right, the dialectic of progressive, conservative and reactionary forces. In economics it is marked by growth and stagnation.

In all cases a positive leaning, or at least an equilibrium must be reached in order to survive and flourish in different circumstances and environments. An overwhelming positive force could bring dramatic change, new structures, systems or entities. If equilibrium is lost and the negative prevails, decline and decay set in. When the negative quantity is overwhelming high level we reach a breaking point and plunge into chaos, partial or total collapse…destruction.

This brings us to the meaning of yet another evolutionary dimension - evolution is also a history; it can provide a record and evidence of the actual sequence of events sudden or gradual; orderly or chaotic; peaceful or violent - through space and time, age by age, era by era.

Adaptation - learning, copying, improving, experimenting and changing are the mandatory aspects in human evolution. Whether to invent a simple tool or live in a permanent shelter instead of a tree or cave or raise domestic animals instead of hunting and gathering; civilisation has evolved by unifying tribal communities into kingdoms and government…either by violent force or peaceful means.

Indeed learning, inventing, copying and adapting have elevated humankind into a new condition on a new level. This has meant change to a better and higher level of life form. Knowledge, experience and consciousness have advanced through the Ages. Or, in some cases, it has meant the opposite. This process is never ending.

So, in short, for humans and all other species, evolution is a means of reproduction, and survival. For humankind it not only means reproduction and survival alone, but innovation and living a longer, better life and having a better future.

Success is largely driven by creating more positive outcomes. The only thing that humankind can do that other species cannot or very little is to innovate, use logic and wisdom, while following or guiding our consciousness and instinct for survival. A better new environment means a better, more positive quality of humanity.

The danger lies, however, that all too often what we perceive as positive can also turn into something negative. But negative things can also turn into positive outcomes. A positive force could also produce revolution - fast, sudden and absolute change into something entirely new (qualitative change).

There are some and many complex subsets that can create positive or negative outcomes such as in physic of an atom, proton-electron-(neutron). On earth we have the North and South poles magnetic pulse. In biology we find that cells growing or dying all depend on an equilibrium in one individual human living system. The interplay of positive and negative forces are part of natural human evolution, dictating our very survival as human beings, all beings and the universe.

Civilisations gradually evolve from one age to another or overlapping. For example, at the beginning of the feudalist system, the positive factors outweighed the negative when slavery was abandoned and the peasantry gained small freedoms by becoming serfs, if largely submissive to a landlord or ruler. This more or less liberated the productive forces and induced innovation.

When feudalism further led to capitalism and industrialisation; the evolution of capitalism was for the better. It created an overwhelmingly more positive outcome than the feudalist system could do, by revolutionising the means of production, embracing modern science, and introducing the mass mechanical Industrial Revolution. This massively freed up the labour force and increased productivity. It made possible a miraculous with abundant production and explosive-endless scale innovation which led to today’s modern living. Its progressive force damaged the feudalist system, and at least stopped the growing number of monarchist around the world. Many of them were to opt out and become constitutional monarchies, an adaptation to fit with today’s world.

Everything is relative and influences each other in a direct or indirect way from a tiny cell to the largest planet. In nature all beings and humans interact. The outcome should be judged on its positive and negative qualities according to whether all beings are successful and better at balancing and surviving or whether they are worse off or fail to survive.

After such a long evolutionary journey, today, as humans; we should have enough knowledge and experience, to be able to clearly define what is positive and what is negative in the practical realm with regards to Darwinian’s Law of Evolutionary.

The advance of new found knowledge such as digital technology, modern medicine, space technology must taking up as a pivotal part for serving the developed and developing nation, as a priority and develop further. This new universal necessity could be a bridge, a tool and mechanic to fast tract to narrowing the gap between the developed and developing nations. And at the same time could fulfil the need for achieving a more practical and advance balancing, where Darwinism’s effective equilibrium of positive and negative interaction (adaptation) could allowing.
Today, prior to endless further developing, evolution knowledge is not just an evolution theory any more. It is a law and one which we must strictly comply with. It is central to surviving and guides our future. As such,

Anything that enhances the progress of a positive science and technology in the world, and makes for healthier, better living conditions is positive.

Any scientific moral, ethical, humanistic ideal is positive.

Anything that supports a living environment and the better survival of all beings is positive.

Any social, political and economic system that provides sustainable, healthy living conditions in our world and beyond for all beings is positive.

Any consolidated action that helps prevent war, especially nuclear war, must be taken immediately to ensure our survival.

Any cause of advancing humanity is positive.

To summing up,

Adaptation is the Law of Evolution. Adaptation is equal to Sir Isaac Newton of Earth Gravity law: action-reaction. This mean all entire human activities are governed by action and reaction of adaptation Law. This can interpret further into positive creative, negative destructive. Against nature and other and human beings as offensive and defensive activity.

21st Century Darwinism has further developed more branches of science supporting and enhancing the role of the Law of Evolutionary, principle and rule. Further evolving Darwinism is strictly based on logic, reason and evidence. Today, the area of natural science, anthropologist, history, modern medicine, archaeologist and others, will not getting the right answer without Darwinism knowledge. And hence, all beings should have equal respect to survive together on the same entity - earth, according to Darwinism.

However, we should reject some Darwin’s proven shortcomings of over 135 years ago. Only focus examination of later and recent positive advances and discoveries can give us the answer to how to better the human condition.

The clue of the species, survival of the fittest, is not just about the individual, it also about the group, for it is safer and more productive, that we help each other to overcome challenges, drive towards the group to help human thrive across the planet, and build an entire civilisation. However on the negative side it could turn into genocide, ethnic cleansing and other inhumane acts (25).

Thereby we can reach a conclusion that any act that enhances human progress - an act that makes humanity more just, fair, humane, higher moral and adhere towards equality and gives people more rights and responsibility - should be accepted as positive. If it enhances humankind and recognises that all the human race is one species, we can understand the world is one.

Today, one of humankind’s most important questions is: Darwin or not to Darwin?

Today, evolution knowledge and process have evolved into a very sophisticated and complex realm. We can trace human early ancestors and find out how they lived and survived; acquire historic evidence to explain and find cures for illness. We know much about how the eco system works. We understand and acknowledge the fact that transgender is a natural phenomenon and well proven without a doubt by modern medicine. We have the capacity to produce more than what we need, and thereby the ability could distribute resources in just, fair and equitability. If we can cooperate on a new, ‘grand’ world scale basis.             

In general, the speed of evolution is speeding up. For example a five year old child has basic knowledge equal to an adult and the adult intelligence is much higher, compared to 1,000 ago. Humans are able to travel everywhere on Earth and outer space with the many times speed of sound, It takes only 90 minute travelling around the world in outer space. Globalization has spread to cover the world fast and in all aspects, wider and never stop.

Moreover, Digital Revolution has accelerated globalisation with digital speed: shrinking the distance, much shorten developing nation enter industrialisation driven, reduce the length of process and distance of space and processing. And we are gearing up towards One World.

At the same time the human ‘endeavour’ has reached a critical time. It seems we must decide on whether to ‘Darwin or not to Darwin’.

We must consider how Darwin’s scientific Law of Evolution is of absolute importance to human development and survival. We must decide whether Darwin’s idea is right or wrong and a force to be reckoned with. And where is right and where is wrong? Useful or useless and how?

“Evolution itself is also asserted to be a racist belief. However, the truth is that in stark contrast to the existing views on race at that time, Darwin showed that:

People cannot be classified as different species
All races are related and have a common ancestry
All people come from ‘savage’ origins
The different races have much more in common than was widely believed
The mental capabilities of all races are virtually the same and there is greater variation within races than between races
Different races of people can interbreed and there is no concern for ill effects
Culture, not biology, accounted for the greatest differences between the races
Races are not distinct, but rather they blend together” (26)

Darwin was possibly one of the few people in the world at the time who really understood and ‘proposed that all human beings were the same species’. However while Darwin saw racial difference as revealing different levels of development, he did not invented racism. The following quote could answer Darwin’s opinion on the scientific discovery of the Law of Evolution, principle, rule and race issue.

Either way racism is still not a good enough reason to dispel or distrust Darwin. We can give him the benefit of doubt.

A panel discussion was participated by distinguished evolutionary biologist professor Morris Goodman of Wayne State University, historian Drs Damon Salesa of the University of Michigan, and biology professor Jerry Bergman of Northwest State College in Ohio, on Darwin, scientific racism, and eugenics at the Charles Wright in Detroit. There was a serious, thoughtful and civil. Salesa and Goodman were a credit to the Darwin side of the debate, and they both made thoughtful points throughout. Their main arguments seemed to be (1) there were a lot of other racists before and after Darwin, (2) Darwin himself was an opponent of slavery (and less racist than many of his era), (3) every idea can be misused, and (4) science has moved beyond scientific racism and eugenics (27).

This has confirmed by Professor Richard Dawkins, Scientific and technological progress are value-neutral. If you want to do selfish, greedy, intolerant and violent things, or if you want to do good; to solve the world’s problems, to progress in the best value-laden sense, scientific-technology way can provided the best mean to the end of what you want (28).

Unfortunately, Darwin died 135 years ago. Should he be alive today, we should accept his mistaken remarks and racial prejudice if indeed he was guilty of them. However, as a man of courage, reason, objectivity and belief in science – a man with high moral and ethical standards, he took a strong antislavery stand and showed a compassionate spirit. So there is very little reason to believe that he would not regret his mistakes and make a sincere apology if he made any wrong remarks that he could be accused of racial prejudice for.

Let’s read his letter written in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, 1887:

“Fitz-Roy’s temper was almost unfortunate one. It was usually worst in the morning, and with his eagle eye he could generally detect something amiss about the ship, and was then unsparing in his blame. He was very kind to me, but was the man very difficult to live with on the intimate terms, which necessarily followed from our messing by ourselves in the same cabin. We had several quarrels; for instance, early in the voyage at Bahia, in Brazil, he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he had just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wish to be free, and all answered ‘No.’ I then ask him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answer of the slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything?. This made him excessively angry, and he said that as I doubted his word we could not live any longer together. I thought that I should have been compelled to leave the ship; but as soon as the news spread, which it did quickly, as the captain sent for the first lieutenant to assuage his anger by abusing me, I was deeply gratified to be receiving an invitation from all the gun-room officers to mess with them. But after a few hours FitzRoy showed his usual magnanimity by sending an officer to me with an apology and a request that I would continue to live with him.” (29)

Speaking on human ethical and moral standards; natural law is ruthless. Nature is cruel and uncompromising. Some big fish eat small fish; some strong and fearsome animals take smaller animals for their meals. The Evolutionary Law, rule, knowledge and experience of human development through past till present time show humankind has clearly developed to a very higher level of quality today. We have advanced beyond a state that many commonly labelled as unethical, savage and barbaric or inhumane. So should we blame natural law or Darwin’s discovery?

It would be bizarre behaviour and inconceivable to do so. In contemporary times we are applying Darwin scientific knowledge more and more and in most areas and fields of knowledge in our daily lives, never before in humankind seeking to progress history. But many of us still reject his scientific discovering as heartless, instead of seeing him in the context of his time and place in history.

Indeed, it seems unwise and unrealistic to wish everyone could seek to understand how 13.8 billion years ago a Big Bang occurred and created today’s universe. Or how two and half million years ago apes started walking on two legs. We will not be very successful at trying to convince everyone to learn something so very far removed from their daily lives. On the other hand that, the new generation at least can absorb massive and various forms of ‘instant’ ‘compressed’ knowledge and experience. They are better informed and understand the world’s vast knowledge more than any previous generations. Their knowledge is unprecedented in the history of humankind. It might be a similar situation to when the early commercial computer was introduced to the public. How many people at the time knew how it worked and how to operate it? Compare this to the knowledge of computer technology we have evolved today. Out there among the next generation is where we will discover what is to become of us all. It is among the younger generation who are ‘waiting to fill’ the future to come.

We will seriously need to know and understand what the basis for survival and surviving is for the next generation. It is not out of this world at all. Is that not a concern for and of relevance to all of us?

So can we now turn and concentrate on Darwin’s positive side of discoveries and make use of them for the majority of us and all beings, and the universe?

How evolution happened and what it means to our modern world?

Darwin’s scientific discovery might have been inadequate to dispel many of the sceptics in his lifetime – a time where advances in scientific knowledge were very small, simple and much shallower than they are today.

“Until now, the oldest fossil skeleton of a human ancestor was the 3.2-million-year-old partial skeleton of Lucy, discovered in the Afar depression of Ethiopia, near Hadar, in 1974 and named Au. afarensis.

In 1992, however, while surveying a site elsewhere in the Afar, near the village of Aramis, 140 miles northeast of Addis Ababa, Middle Awash Project scientist Gen Suwa discovered a tooth from a more primitive creature more than 1 million years older than Lucy. After more fossils of the creature were found in the area from some 17 individuals, Suwa, White and project co-leader Berhane Asfaw published the discovery in the journal Nature in 1994.” (30)

There are so many other early apes and human skulls, skeletons and bones from all parts of the world. Fossil remains of other species and plants that show the trace of evolving or extinction. Biochemical and chemical findings and chemical compounds of surrounding environment indicate conditions could generate living creatures. Biological discoveries of the gene show all animals, including humans have shared more or less the same genetic makeup. Billions of human genes are the building bloc of life. Our closest relative the chimpanzee shares 98% of human like genes. Further discovery of genes which hold the information to build and maintain an organism’s cells and pass on genetic traits to offspring, are likely to provide further evidence of evolution. The complex molecules of genetic structure called DNA is a code and the building cell block of all life.

Genetics scientist Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) revealed how genes behave and develop effecting the quality of human makeup related to inheritance and mutational nature. His discoveries have given great support to Darwin knowledge of natural selection evolutionary biology (31).

This knowledge is very useful in identifying humans lost relatives or the science prohibiting close relatives inbreeding and creating weaker offspring.

The discovery of DNA led us to put together human evolution and historical records going back millions of years. It makes possible to trace back all human races and own ancestors.  We can now put together our ancient evolutionary history. DNA helps to put back the jigsaw puzzle of our historical road map. It shows how early humans evolved and developed, spreading out to other continents, starting from Out of Africa around 70,000 years ago (32).

In modern medicine DNA makes it possible to investigate bacterium, virus, fungus that work and live among us, causing both human and animal infectious disease and illness – sometimes on a small scale; other times on a catastrophic and worldwide scale. It has also led to many healing discoveries. Such as to successfully eradicate or combatting diseases: malaria, TB, small pox, polio among others.
(Escalating arms race, and having win over with super-bugs and viruses, germ, fungus and bacteria, but for how long? If medical revolution of today is not found).

Physics gives us knowledge of the earth’s positive and negative force like matter - molecules, particles, positive charge protons and negative charge electrons. Cosmology has discovered how Earth, the solar system and the universe are all related to each other. Geologist Charles Lyell book ‘Principles of Geology’ 1830 stated: ‘…geological processes have occurred throughout the Earth’s history and are still occurring today.’ (33)

We now understand the development of Earth, the relationship of human beings and all other beings. The discovery of carbon and radiometric dating to uncover the Earth’s age has further revolutionised the advances of Earth sciences in the theory of plate tectonics - sea floor spreading and continent drift knowledge. Modern environmental ecologists and other nature scientists have made great leaps forward with the help of climate and space science.  Other scientific fields also prove how all beings, including human beings, are unstoppable in contributing to the positive and negative effects of changing the environment. Science provides great evidence and powerful knowledge of how all living things have evolved, under what circumstance and conditions and how we as living things could live and survive better.

Human daily activities since ancient time have evolved by practice.  People’s daily activities are a process of ‘try this’, ‘change that’, ‘build this’. This is an endlessly ‘try’ experiment.  Take this very simple example - to adjust a glass window panel’s angle, as a way of controlling room temperature/heat. We find we can let cool or warm air into a room to our liking. It is an act of a simple, unintentional experimentation. This form of experimenting has created an endless number of models, structures and systems- large and small, simple and complicated again and again using whatever materials and circumstances are available to assist. But materials and circumstance can also prove to be obstacles or limitations.

“In the 19th century, inventors were heroes. The likes of Stephenson, Morse and Goodyear were the shock troops of the Industrial Revolution. Their ideas helped drag humanity from agrarian poverty to the manufacturing of plenty. These days, though, inventor-superstars, while not absent, are fewer and farther between.” (34)

The advances of science and technology and Darwinism, with all the knowledge and experience humankind has accumulated, have made it more possible for humans to either struggle or learn and adapt to living with their surroundings better. This is possibly an effective navigator for future evolving.

As Sir David Attenborough remarked “Darwin’s great insight has revolutionised what we see in the world.” (35)

To sum up, “Darwin presented compelling evidence for evolution in his ‘On the Origin of Species’. Since his time, the case has become overwhelming. Countless fossil discoveries allow us to trace the evolution of today’s organisms from earlier forms. DNA sequencing has confirmed beyond any doubt that all living creatures share a common origin. Innumerable examples of evolution in action can be seen all around us, from the pollution-matching peppered moth to fast-changing viruses such as HIV and H5N1 bird flu. Evolution is as firmly established a scientific fact as the roundness of the Earth.” (36)

In a general sense, evolution knowledge also is the ‘explanation’ or interpreter of the natural law, which tells the history of humankind and all other beings. Through using knowledge of identifying actual cause and effects of anything, we can guide and drive its progression.

How people learn, understand, apply and use all such knowledge and experience is the key to human advancing and survival. All this comes from our knowledge of evolution.

Before going further, it is necessary to make clear for all to see the human ‘interaction’ with evolution and natural selection. We should view this in the same light both for humankind and for the nature of all beings.

In the real world, not all things are black and white. Some times and in some circumstances, it could be more complex or hybrid - a mixture with multi dimensions.

Although humans have evolved this far, we need to make adjustments and changes to nature and our surroundings. However, humanity must still tread carefully. In fact we definitely still need to adapt to our surroundings. People continue to learn, invent, adapt and change.  By no means do we know everything. Many things that we know and discover, very often open up and draw more questions about what we still need to discover. We still do not understand countless things. This is natural and should not be surprising to us at all.

Now let us put some evolution into action. Let’s experience and uncover evidence to prove it.

By nature, we are learning both from success and failure. The collapse of the USSR is one example. This means, in some circumstances, humans are learning from their mistakes so they can make something better and more successful.

Nevertheless, it can be a painful tragedy to endure, but at the time a precious and sad lesson which to draw from.

During the age of industrialisation England set the model to allow other nations to later industrialise by learning and copying its example. Western European nations, the US, European, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and others all followed in its footsteps. Today most of world’s developing nations are set to also follow - all in competition, innovating, adapting so as to achieve a new, better, higher developed world.

People have learned and copied from each other since we were exist just to survive better. The beauty of this and its key is that humans also modify, invent, reinvent, adapt and change, so that invention is never ending. The Egyptians invented a system of government more than 3000 years ago that other kingdoms and tribes have developed further until it has become today’s nation state government administration.

Otto von Bismarck was the father of today’s welfare state. The USSR tried, but failed to create an absolute state welfare system, with full equality and no sexism – a free society. It turned out to be Sweden and Finland, Russia’s closest neighbours that reverse engineered the USSR example by constructing a society that is the greatest social, political and economically most equal society in the world.

Sweden had attempted to eliminate prostitution from their society since 1999, founded on gender equality and to stop human trafficking, by introducing a strict law where a client could get jail term for purchasing sexual services (37).

The idea has spread to neighbouring countries such as, Norway and Finland. Even Canada and France are following suit. Sweden and others largely succeed because of reverse engineering - by learning, copying, modifying and adjusting according to the makeup of their own society.

During China’s Cultural Revolution (1966 to 1976), the politicians in the top leadership wanted to eliminate feudalism. They perceived it as a backward out dated system that was dragging nation backward. Due to a combination of intense power struggle inside the ruling circle they supported and encouraged the ‘red guard’ Chinese youth to rebel against all things perceived as feudal or representing old ideas, culture and customs. They strove for equality between the sexes and other values.

In the mid-1960s, the US hippy movement, which was represented among Western youth as a new sub culture movement, led to youth rebelling against old cultures, traditions, values and inequality between sexes. It was also anti-war.

The Cultural Revolution could be more or less an inspiration.  But by reverse engineering Chinese youth failed and it was instead a tragedy.

“January 14, 1967: The first ‘Human Be-In’ (aka ‘A Gathering of the Tribes) is held in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco. The event is a prelude to the San Francisco ‘Summer of Love’, which made the Haight-Ashbury district a household word as the center of an American counterculture and introduced the word ‘psychedelic’ to Suburbia.” (38)

This movement is commonly called Hippie Movement.

“Hippies advocated nonviolence and love, a popular phrase being ‘Make love, not war,’ for which they were sometimes called ‘flower children.’ They promoted openness and tolerance as alternatives to the restrictions and regimentation they saw in middle-class society. Hippies often practiced open sexual relationships and lived in various types of family groups.”

“Hippies commonly took up communal or cooperative living arrangements, and they often adopted vegetarian diets based on unprocessed foods and practiced holistic medicine.” ‘Both folk and rock music were an integral part of hippie culture.’ “By the mid-1970s the movement had waned, and by the 1980s hippies had given way to a new generation of young people who were intent on making careers for themselves in business and who came to be known as yuppies (young urban Professionals). Nonetheless, hippies continued to have an influence on the wider culture, seen, for example, in more relaxed attitudes toward sex, in the new concern for the environment,  and in a widespread lessening of formality.” (39)

It has also influenced today many ‘Cyber Kids’ and the digital-Internet generation.

In today’s Silicon Valley many great innovators like Steve Jobs, were clearly influenced by this movement. This generation has established a new way of living, working and thinking for many. Indeed, they have created a much brighter innovations and creative ideas, to drive us forward and change the world to the point of no return.

All human past and present activities, either intentional, incidental or accidental, simple or complex, chaotic or systematic have gone through failure and or succuss. Many created a model that could be easily emulated, for better living and surviving. Sometimes this process is gradual; sometimes it is fast.  All are the natural paths of human evolution.

Who opposes Charles Darwin’s Law of Evolution?

Darwin’s scientific discovering of natural selection of the Law of Evolution has faced enormous opposition and much controversy, if to a lesser extent in today’s world.

Religions reject Darwin because his Law of Evolution goes against the teachings of most core Holy Books that humans cannot share ancestry with animals.

The British Royal Society in the early 20th century also debated and rejected that the human race is capable of equality or oneness. It also rejected Darwin’s scientific discovery that human’s evolve on the basis of racial superiority. In 1883, Sir Francis Galton, an English sociologist said: “Eugenists claimed that particular racial or social groups-usually wealthy Anglo-Saxons were ‘naturally’ superior to other groups.” (40)

As at the time no any nation on earth was more advanced and successful and achievement more than the British and this lead to a prevalence of racism and strong self-belief.

Today, many developed nations’ and citizens reject this because more of the world’s nations have turned to democracy. Some developed nations proposals have been voted down even though they are logical and useful to all. Records show this is true as it involves world institutions like the United Nations (UN), the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and to a lesser extent other institutions. But the world already has the right and suitable methods and systems to circumvent such shortcomings. The spirit of the European Union is one example.

Certain politicians and ethically strong-minded people are also opposed to Darwin’s scientific discovery of evolution because under ‘Social Darwinism’, the smartest and strongest will dominate all others and this is ‘unethical’ and ‘inhumane’. But they simply ignore the most important principle about the scientific evidence of adaptation, change and survival. As Darwin remarked ‘it is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives, it is the one that is the most adaptable to change.’ Or ‘In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment (from On the Origin of Species).’ (41)

At this point survival of the fittest should be clarified in the context of the Law of Evolution as those who adapt through science and technology, critical thinking, modern scientific moral standard, copying, cooperation and collaboration among other strategies.

All human behaviour, development is adaptation in action, and all strictly comply with Darwin’s Evolution Law.

This law and guiding principle should be taken into serious account, as it is proven by the history of species evolution, especially humans.

Greg Graffin author, college lecturer, singer, songwriter asked,

“What does it mean to be the greatest country on Earth? Many Americans equate that title with winning wars. They say that the USA deserves its advantages because of its military prowess. But does destroying enemies really make us superior?”.

He argues against the attitude of some Americans who uphold the believe in, ‘survival of the fittest’ (a term coined by English philosopher Herbert Spencer), is often extended to justify American exceptionalism.’  But recent discoveries are putting a hole in this logic. In our own bodies, microbial cells outnumber human cells ten to one; those organisms help us digest food, develop our immune system and much more. More, nearly 10% of the human genomes may be viral DNA. We are not simply individuals who have won some evolutionary competition; we are systems of cooperating species (42).

This evolutionary logic certainly can apply to all things in the universe. Positive and negative synthesis creates an equilibrium that allows humankind to survive and move forward. This rule must be respected.

In order to prove and to convince more people to make serious judgements about our present and future we should develop and show some examples about the history of evolution.

On moral and ethical grounds, in ancient times, very often, the severely injured, disabled, weak, very ill, or very old tribal or clan members are left to die or even be killed. Tribal warfare was common and in many wars soldiers took no prisoners. There were no rules. It was a brutal evolutionary standard and act of survival at the time. In ancient times people lived much shorter lives than we do, generally not living over 35-40 years of age. Today, our average life expectation  is largely over 75 years average of age as in developed nations.

There are three main reasons this is the case. Firstly today people have accumulated much more scientific advances providing us the knowledge, tools and experience to improve how to survive better. Secondly, we produce enough surplus labour and material to keep our community members alive and live well. Thirdly, we have gained a higher civilisation (qualitative) with more equal rights and respect.

Although it is a common belief that moral and ethical codes and conduct come from God, religious teachings and the sacred spiritual life, compassion and aspiration have evolved as the world changed as well. However, other sources of moral ethics have developed that are more based on science, human rights and respect. As Darwin explain,

“The moral faculties are generally esteemed, and with justice, as of higher value than the intellectual powers. But we should always bear in mind that the activity of the mind in vividly recalling past impressions is one of the fundamental through secondary bases of conscience. This fact affords the strongest argument for educating and stimulating in all possible ways the intellectual faculties of every human being. No doubt a man with a torpid mind, if his social affections and sympathies are well developed, will be led to good actions, and may have a fairly sensitive conscience.” (43)

Today science is much more advanced than any time in shaping ethical and moral standards. For instance, in modern medical practice, doctors and nurses must first learn scientific knowledge. Then they must accept the scientific humane moral and ethical standards and conduct such as, equal treatment of all patients regardless of their race, colour of their skin, their nationality or whether they are friend or foe; rich or poor. Medical professionals must treat raging, emotional unstable, abusive, even violent patients with care and respect. They must prevent the foreseeing danger, cure the illness and make human life safe to the utmost of their ability, wherever possible as a duty in all circumstances.

This universal humane ethical standard has also extended and become part of today’s human rights. World institutions like the United Nations (UN) designate human rights and these have been written into its charter and into the constitutions of nations.

Human history is the record of evolution. It tells us that Law of Evolutionary, rule and principle is never ceasing or change. We must evolve further and further. The outcome depends on the circumstances, the actors involved and the effort and effect and force for change. All factors have a ‘push and pull’ influencing each other to adapt and change into something new – a new value, standard and environment. So, evolution is also a key part of the law of nature. At times it is static, other times it is nonstop, evolving, changing and adapting. It has more dimensions and complexity, influencing and effecting one and the other. Indeed, humankind has been evolving dignified, equal rights never before seen on the long journey of human evolution. Hopefully, this could convince more people to pay higher regard to human evolution now and in the future.

Does the Law of Evolution have any answers for today and the future?

Transparent Future article declares: “ ‘the invention of writing signalled the end of prehistory; the printing press sent waves of change through all the major institutions of society-digital technology could have a greater impact than anything that has come before.’

Can be summing into a word; Transparency.

Today, we can see further, faster, cheaper and easier than before, and everybody can equally access with no discrimination.

The impact on organisations and institutions is profound; governments, armies, churches, Universities, banks and companies ‘quickly find out that they can no longer rely on old methods; they must respond to the new transparency or become extinct.’

‘Old habits must be rewired, or else the organization will fail.’

‘With transparent public polls increasingly available, news organizations and political analysts that politicize selectively grounded stories are going to face an increasingly difficult existence.’

Joel Brenner, former senior counsel at the [US’s National Security Agency] NSA said,

‘Very few things will be secret anymore, and those things which are kept secret won’t stay secret very long.…The real goal in security now is to retard the degradation of the half-lives of secrets. Secrets are like isotopes.’

Commercial companies are most exposed to the effects of public opinion because customers can easily turn to alternatives. If left untended, a consumer brand built over decades can unravel in months.

The mightiest churches and sports leagues must adapt or perish. For better or for worse, however, we are on an evolutionary course to rein in our superhuman organisations by holding them accountable to individual human standards. This self-regulating dynamic, enabled by accelerating human-machine communicative capabilities, is as unique to our species as human own language itself” (44).

The article has given us many insights and foresees what future ‘developments’ will evolve.

The new transparency will ultimately lead to the creation of new types of organisations. Natural selection will favour the quickest and the most flexible among them (those keen to innovative, adapt and change). Precisely, this same rule and order will apply to all humankind and to developed and developing nations equally, the only difference will be in scale and condition.

So Darwin’s Law of Evolution is a value contribution to human development. It is priceless and key to our survival.

Darwin’s knowledge of evolution enables us to know ourselves and our surroundings.  It enables us to know who we are better. ‘Where we come from? What is our destiny?  How can we use evolution to guide humankind’s very survival into a farer future? Our future looks better than at any time in human history.’

As far as nature is concerned, the world is part of the solar system. The world ecological system we live in is dictated by nature law. That we cannot control. We can only largely adjust, modify, adapt and comply with nature. That position never changes and cannot be changed unless the whole system collapses. There will no such perfect world as one with only positive forces. Humans have endless encounters and conflicts with other humans and, in response, all beings struggle for positive outcomes. We are endlessly evolving into today’s sophisticated and most complex ever society. We are adapting through developing a systematic, scientific, technological, social, political and economic system.  Humans will keep adapting and developing in this way forever.

We cannot prove or answer for all things and question now and in the future, but many of yesterday’s questions have been met with answers today and possibly tomorrow.

The accumulation of human knowledge and experience is increasing so fast, it is enough to achieve better living standards each era. We make history by measuring space and time.

Charles Darwin said, “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.” (45)

We live in a known and unknown world undergoing a positive and negative evolutionary process. In more dimension, many evolution development is not all require a process taking thousands or millions of years as we use to think and known. We are witnessing many dimension of evolution are getting fast, faster than at any time past. Just count from beginning of Industrialisation Revolution to today’s Digital Revolution speed. From automation, global digital networking the smart phone, space technology breaking the speed of sound, come to known and approaching the speed of light. Today, a few year old baby could have a capability to perform and thinking far better than 100 year ago baby same age. It is a stride of evolution bigger than many past revolutions combined.

Evolution is our history and our future guidance. It is a shared asset and the foundation of where our future world is heading.

Humankind adapts to nature (and interact to other beings). We innovate hunt and be hunted; become slave masters or slaves; submit to imperial rule or serfdom; are masters of colonisation or its subjects; the dominant master or the subordinate follower. We cooperate, coordinate and create interdependence - all with the aim of advancing our development and surviving as better humans.

Charles Darwin’s ’Origin of Species’ has been voted the most influential academic book ever written.

It is hailed as’ ’he supreme demonstration of why academic books matter’ – ‘a book which has changed the way we think about everything’ (46).

The biology bombshell edged out competitors such as ‘The Complete Works of William

‘On the Vindication of the Rights of Women,’ by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley; ‘The Wealth of Nations,’ by Adam Smith; and even physics classics such as the theory of general relativity by Albert Einstein and ‘A Brief History of Time,’ by Stephen Hawking. (47)

Chapter 5. Politics of democracy


By conventional interpretation, modern democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Democracy has been developing throughout human history over thousands of years. It can apply to just a tiny proportion of a society - a few human in the population working together, who have equal shares and interests. It can also extend to larger communities or countries which have rejected strict hierarchal systems. So democracy can exist among people as small as tribe or as, large as a country within the expanse of space and time.

Since ancient times, one form of democracy was about open dialogue or allowing people the freedom to argue and debate. This discourse may be limited to groups as small as a household, to communities or an entire nation, where all have equal rights to express their opinions, cast their votes or make decisions on whether to agree or not agree on how to go forward with a proposal. In another sense, when everyone shares the duty and work of production, either hunting- gathering, farming, construction or domestic work, then they gain the right to share the fruits of the labour within their community. They share and distribute their wealth according to individual duty on productive value – according to their profession, position, privilege, rights and status. This was all part of the origin of democracy in a different realm, time and era.

Greek and Roman democracy seems impressive. However, there is inadequate evidence and historical record to back a few important questions. How did the rulers and various classes reach an agreement to grant and share ‘authorisation’ and political power?

Rights and privilege? Who did the emperor, king or ruler yield to and was it by force or by kindness? What role then of religion, spiritual belief; god or goddess, ghost or any kind of beliefs at play? (It was the most important factor).  Usually in ancient time religion plays a decisive role in making the critical decisions? What if there was a crisis before or after the so called democracy accord come to be implemented? These questions will leave for the historians.

English history

During the later era democracy, like Magna Carta in England, 1215, the aristocracy and landlord classes gained more wealth and power and had enough supporters to want to increase their authority, instead of letting an overlord king have absolute dictatorship. After a long struggle they made gains and sustained the more power. This led to the Glorious Revolution of 1688-89, marking a further advance toward the orderly growth of parliamentary democracy, with the deposition of King James II and the declaration of rights enacting a new Magna Carta.

The first modern democracy was taking roots. At the same time, came the birth of the early capitalist class. They played an important role in England’s Industrialisation Revolution. Representing them were democratic political parties and a parliamentarian system. Their new powerful class based itself on early advances of science and technology, freeing up labour to make multi- industrial expansion and production possible. This resulted in abundance production, goods and market and explosion of wealth. This development also led to expansion of colonisation. It’s gave birth to American democracy where today, the principle of Magna Carta has gained greater prestige in the United States than in the United Kingdom (48).

The French revolution from 1789-1799 saw French society undergo a transformation. Feudal, aristocratic and religious privileges and institutions were dismantled and the old ideas, order and traditions of feudalist’s hierarchy terminated. Globally, the Revolution accelerated the rise of republics and democracies, the spread of liberalism, nationalism, capitalism, socialism and secularism and the development of modern political ideologies, like the Declaration of the Rights of Man.

“In the provinces, the Great Fear of July led the peasants to rise against their lords. The nobles and the bourgeois now took fright. The National Constituent Assembly could see only one way to check the peasants; on the night of August fourth, 1789, it decreed the abolition of the feudal regime and of the tithe. Then on August 26 it introduced the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, proclaiming liberty, equality, the inviolability of property, and the right to resist oppression.” (49)

Since the industrial revolution, the capitalist class has reigned supreme. Freedom and democracy further developed.  Free labour became a spearhead contesting and confronting the capitalist master demanding a better political, social and economics and freedoms.

Trade unions in the developed democratic nations have been actively engaged with employers for centuries, struggling for better income, social rights and fair treatment. The International Labour Trade Union Organisations has long engaged in seeking and making a just, equitable income distribution. It is the vanguard of the truer democracy entity. This has become the basic foundation of today world’s economic social, political and economic system in most of the developed nations. However, because the globalisations process is so powerful in past decades, it has also led to decline of union membership and influence as manufacturing and other work go offshore in search of cheaper labour.  Still the trade union’s industrial relations laws have been implemented and become part of foundation of developed nations. It has already been emulated by most governments in the world. Labour law has turned out to be today international industrial relations, implement through institutions, such as the parliament and the courts. It has become strong standard bearer of most nations worldwide. This is included almost every either strong grow or weak and very poor developing nation. By implemented through party policy; such as, equal, just and fairer income distribution and redistribution, the minimum wage, taxation, social welfare and safety nets. It has significantly contributed to achieve the goal of social, economic and political democracy.

What should democracy mean today?

Today, modern democracy should mean all people to have equal rights (and responsibilities) and opportunities. It also should mean one person one vote to elect a government, majority rule and minority rights. All constitutions should lay out a political system based on the separation of power into the three branches of an administrative function; the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary. The system is secularist by separation of the church from state affairs. It defines and sets up all classes to pursue individual aims and share national common goals.

The actual system should provide a legitimate acknowledgement of rights and effective government administration to mediate, monitor, provide society and the economy functioning, setting the state in order and through international relations keeping world order, while moving forward.

Democracy as a governance tool, however, is not easy to be successfully implement. As a world’s famous politician remarked,

“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except all those others that have been tried” (50)

It is obvious our current democracy has its short comings. It is seriously challenged by globalisation and the fast spread of science and technology. Such development should not be a surprise if we understand evolution. Science, technology and globalisation is relatively positive, it provides us the ability to share our interests and it makes us more equal than ever.

By looking into the records, however, today’s democracy turns out to be more biased towards political rights rather than economic and social rights. Most of all, it has less demands on responsibility. Again, democracy is just a tool to reach an objective, a governance system to exercise and process state affairs and unify a healthy nation. In evolutionary terms, it is the synthesis of positive and negative forces to develop civilisation and ensure our survival.

We witness many complications and differences in a society or a country. Largely, they still have their own form and structure, methods and beliefs which differ from one and another, due to their history, geography, natural resources, religion, culture and racial makeup.

By looking into the historic and current struggles and experiences in implementing democracy worldwide we better understand the future challenges,

Today, many advanced democratic nations are facing obstacles and showing stress. This is due to the process of representational voting, The system encourages a ‘spoilt child scenario’ where voters have the ‘privilege’ of  making demands but no obligation or little responsibility. Under such conditions, in order to win election, politicians exercise sweet talking, make empty promises, say what voters want to hear, tell lies and produce popular policies often spending beyond the nation's means. This provides quick results, but less useful or effective policies. Usually, politicians ignore the medium and long term social – political and economic, environment because doing otherwise does not attract many votes.  Instead of focusing on a balanced budget, education and training or building and repairing infrastructure, they introduce short-sighted populist policy (51),

The political situation is similar to the corporate- capitalism system. Shareholders want the largest profit and as fast as possible. The corporation must perform, the CEO must deliver, no matter what.

The same applies to democracy. Voters want government to deliver what they want, now. Politicians must deliver populist, short term, ineffective or useless policy, in order to satisfy voters and stakeholders.

There is a common grievance among many in democratic nations or feel the system is broken and nothing will change. All politicians are the same. Why vote? It’s a popular refrain, particularly among the young. People feel cut off from the political process and unrepresented by the political elite. Just 16% of Britons say they trust politicians-that’s even worse than bankers. ‘We’re living through a crisis of mainstream politics,’ says Carl Miller at London-based think tank Demos (52).

Since 1950, political parties had lost their member in millions related to trust and continue. We should see democracy as an evolution over time, says Jonas Kekkonen of Open Ministry, a government backed organisation in Helsinki, Finland, which promotes a more participatory democracy.

For hundreds of thousands of people around the world the simple answer is-use the Internet. New online tools are revitalising old democratic practices, bypassing the political middlemen and even offering the prospect of world without politicians at all.

It is obvious, low turnout breed further discontent, It is impossible to construct an electoral system that is perfectly fair (1 May 2010, p 28), when the minority government, or the tiny factions can tipping the balance of power, it breeding sense of unfairness (53).

Why Young Americans are Turned Off to Politics, a book analyzing the political ambitions of more than 4,000 high-school and university students. The book written by Jennifer Lawless and Richard Fox two political scientists. The result is clear, only about one in nine young people in their study could seriously imagine running for public office. About 25% of students who have no opinions about politics. They fret about the roughly 60% who have negative views of it, and so try to avoid the subject. Those who tune out politics are the most likely to think politicians are all awful (people in politics are ‘squirrelly’, a Texan student told them, flatly) (54).

The US political process is not quite a real democracy. It is a two party system where both party members can cross the floor to vote for the opposition party at will. Bipartisan politics is strong, except in the certain times and circumstances. Horse trading, secret agreements out of public knowledge are common practice.

Normally, well established democracy nations tend to have higher turnouts. But not in the US, voter turnout in the US is much lower than most established democracies… Voter turnout in the United States fluctuates in national elections. In recent elections, about 60% of the voting eligible population votes during presidential election years, and about 40% votes during midterm elections (55).

The belief in fair, just, democratic and equal rights is in doubt and weak, if either party wins the election, if people feel it will not making much difference to them. Furthermore once a government is elected it cannot override special interest group or corporate power. This situation more or less holds in many democrat nations around the world.

A study by political scientists Professor. Martin Gilens, of Princeton, and Professor. Benjamin Page, of Northwestern found:

A research and testing against claims that America is a democracy society, by Professor Martin Gilens and Professor Benjamin I. Page, the result is a seriously in doubt,

One is the nearly total failure of ‘median voter’ and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organised interest groups are controlled, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy. The failure of theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy is all the more striking because it goes against the likely effects of the limitations of our data. The preferences of ordinary citizens were measured more directly than our other independent variables, yet they are estimated to have the least effect p 12). The study concluded that the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organisations and a small number of affluent Americans (56),

In the US Congress, 50 states are all assigned an equal number of two congressional person each. This does not take into account the population size, the wealth they gain from natural resources or the level of access to quality education among other factors. As such it does not reflect genuine democratic value and practice.

Other nations like Japan, Malaysia and Singapore have almost a single political party getting elected for over half a century. This seems not so democratic either.

In order to gain real democracy, function well and survive, all corrupt practice must be addressed. This includes lobbying by vested interests (mainly the corporate sector) out of control derivative and hedge fund activity, tax evasion and tax avoidance, fix price/monopolies, corporates dictating government policy and cronyism. Instead we should introduce a fairer and progressive redistribution of income, a social safety net and a more balanced relationship between government and corporate power.

However, as such, the US political system and other democratic systems, compel politicians to do what they have to do to stay elected, so it is not all their fault after all.

Modern democracy and the capitalism system cannot be regarded separately. On the one hand, citizens are offered the rights of their desire while on other hand, their rights are curtailed by a small privileged, elite group.

A truer democracy

Commonly, people call social political freedom democracy. However if we neglect economic democracy we forego equality. In practice, some countries such as the US certainly are intent on leaving economics out of the process of democracy.  Emphasis is to given to the rights and opportunities of the privileged first and foremost. In contrast, by human intervention, many countries in the EU demonstrated the distribution of wealth through redistribution of income via taxes and transfers of welfare was the most effective way to reduce the level of economic inequality. Many European nations like Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark and others are doing not much better than the US in terms of GINI (the measure of statistical dispersion representing income or wealth distribution), after the tax and redistribution of wealth through welfare, the EU nations show much more economic equality than the US.

Before taxes and transfers the OECD scores a GINI at 0.48, the US GINI is 0.46. After taxes and transfers the OECD GINI is 0.31 and the US scores 0.38 (as reported by the OECD).

Sweden and Finland have the world’s most balanced and successful GINI in social-political and economic terms. They have made advances towards an egalitarian realm of polity. Sweden is world best in achieving both social and economic democracy, with a GINI coefficient of 24.9 (2012) (57).

From the Human Development Index (HDI) of 0.916 (2013), Finland has also done well. Its GINI coefficient ranking stands at 25.9 (2012) and its HDI at 0.892 (2013). It also holds the title of achieving world ‘egalitarian’ best in education. The World Economic Forum ranks Finland’s tertiary education best in the world. Their private and public, city and country school are achieving the similar standard, one of the world highest equality out come and standard. The school system is 100% state funded. All teachers in Finland must have a master’s degree, which is fully subsidized (58).

Both nations provide free education up to high school, and living expenses, to a large extent, are financed by government. Furthermore, women rights and equality reach a very high standard where women graduates, women in the workplace and leadership roles are among the highest in the world.

Both Finland and Sweden also have world’s best healthcare systems. Both nations are highly innovative, transparent and declare political neutrality. This is what’s world best democracy has achieved today (59).

Let us make things clear about what a welfare state and social democratic stand for. In practice all welfare state nations in the world also practice a social democratic system. Then why does the US government systematically prevent or abandon most social and public welfare functions and let private entities takeover?  The US even cedes control of the National Health Care system to corporates. However, the reality are:

1) Any social welfare system either government or private run defines a welfare state.

2) All forms of welfare states are social democracies in substance and it does not matter what they are to be called or call themselves.

3) They are all belong to democratic developed nations but are also ’partially emulated’ by a few high growth developing nations.

4) These welfare states are difference only the scale, scope, who is in full or partial in control of the system.

5) Western nations won the Cold War against USSR largely because of their welfare state system compared to the USSR absolute central command welfare regime.

Former US president Dwight D. Eisenhower once said: “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labour laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” (60)

The US has the world largest ‘private’ group of non-government organisations providing welfare support in the world. On this account the US is a welfare state either conducted by government or private entity. The US’s system also is a form of social democratic nation of its own right and character.

But some welfare states have wrongly implemented welfare systems against the original ideal. The original purpose of the state welfare is to help the people that cannot help themselves against extreme competitive and an unfair system. Not for the ones who are well off, the middle class and wealthy people. There is public outrage about the misuse of tax payers’ money and unfair treatment of the disadvantaged and the marginalised.

In Australia there are about 260,000 households that have a net worth of more than $3 million yet enjoy welfare payments of about $800 million a year. The National Centre of Social and Economic Modelling (NATSEM) Canberra, shows these wealthy families received more than $6 billion a year of benefits in kind, such as taxpayer funded healthcare and education services. Wealthy aged pensioners can receive about $3,700 a year in cash payments, NATSEM found, compared with $2,800 for those in poverty. If someone has around $1.1 million money or superannuation in the bank, they can qualify for a part pension. But if you have a $1.1 million house and less savings, you can get a full pension. Working age families with total taxable incomes over $150,000 can get benefits for childcare costing the taxpayer over $4.3 billion per annum. This equates to a total of $38 billion on non-cash benefits mainly on healthcare and public education per annum (61).

So, democracy to day is a product of the capitalistic system, closely associated with money…wealth, more money, more voice, more freedom, more rights, and more ‘privilege’ more power.

Yet the welfare state or social democracy is the only proven and workable, political and economic system the world has ever had. Unfortunately, and in the non-capitalist or under developing nations governments can still not afford to introduce part or full welfare systems.

As such, the absolute term of freedom and liberty with no balance with responsibility is equal to chaos or anarchy. Adequate law enforcement, modern education and, most of all, a safety net ensuring adequate food, shelter, medicine, clothing, education and basic transportation, is necessary for a healthy and functioning social democratic nation.

Any democratic or developed nation that fails to provide economic democracy will become imbalanced and fail to advance.

A comparison of the world leading democratic nations

The Washington Consensus is the US economic ideology, but in fact it is politically driven and the end consequence is affecting national development. It is an extreme method opposite to the old USSR ‘absolute welfare’ ideology. Both are extreme, poles apart and have difference negative consequences.

The old USSR absolute welfare regime was extreme. Its positive ideals turned out to be negative and it failed. Many developed nations are striving to achieve an appropriate balanced welfare state system and are succeeding. However due to the 10 policies of the Washington Consensus, many nations may not.

“The Washington Consensus of 1989, which largely failed, set out economic policy prescriptions as a standard ‘reform package’ for debt-ridden developing countries. According to the principal author, the notion of making equity a policy objective was regarded, at that time, with ‘contempt.’ (62)

The US ‘absolute’ none state welfare, intervention ideology was perceived as positive but as turned out otherwise with ‘much more loss than gain’. It is chaotic, expensive and cannot serve most people fairly. By creating an unbalance between ‘political social and economic democracy’; its created and unstoppable slide into ‘negative territory’ by increasing inequality. The loose government control over corporates, and limited authority did not just increase inequality, it was also largely responsible for economic malfunction – most latest one the US subprime mortgage crisis in 2008.

Let’s make a comparison. The normal human body temperature is around 37.2 Celsius. If any cause and effect makes the temperature higher or lower one will get uncomfortable or ill and unable to function well. Unless treated this could lead to seriously illness or death. The same goes for the US political, social and economic condition. The question is how long can the body politic function if it becomes overheated or cold?

After soul searching by the Republican Party by its active politicians, a small light seems to appear at the end of the tunnel. Marco Rubio, a presidential candidate a well-known senator of Florida is young, energetic and realistic. He has actively trying to find a way to rescue his party from overly narrow view of what government ought to do. He has advocated a social welfare safety net for Americans. This is at odds with his party where Republican orthodoxy suggests saving poor people from welfare dependency by ‘merciful’ reducing the amount of money they receive. He said, ‘I do not take my children to the circus very often, but when I do I have notice that acrobats tend to be much more daring when they have a safety net beneath them. Such support is essential for the success of the free enterprise system.’ (63)

This is also involving the ethical high moral ground. It is no longer just a political football.

Remember, all things in the world have positive and negative characteristics. If one asks for perfection try Hollywood.

The US’s democratic system has been crossing the red line into negative territory for a long time. It will create more and more negative consequences especially in the 21St century. It is an orthodox capitalism ideal. Can the US take the right steps to cross the line again, this time opposite direction?

Modern democracy still has a way to go before it is a real democracy – social, political and economic democracy - that incorporates rights and responsibilities.

Let’s look into and compare what democratic nations produce better outcomes and achievements,

“The first map (below) charts the percentages of economic output countries devote to R&D investment. The US ranks sixth. Israel is in first place, followed by Sweden, Finland, Japan, and Switzerland, which make up the top five. South Korea, Germany, Denmark, and France round out the top 10…”

“The second map charts scientific and engineering researchers per capita. The United States ranks seventh. Finland takes the top spot, followed by Sweden, Japan, Singapore, and Denmark. Norway, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand round out the top ten…” (64)

Sweden's high-quality scientific and technological development is renowned throughout the world.

Technological products invented or developed by Swedish firms include the selfaligning ball bearing, the cream separator, the three-phase electric motor, and a refrigerator without moving parts. Sweden's more recent applications of sophisticated technology range from powder metallurgy to the Hasselblad camera and the Viggen jet fighter. Six of Sweden's largest industrial corporations are engineering companies: Volvo, SAAB-Scania, ASEA, Electrolux, SKF, and L.M. Ericsson. In 1998, high-tech exports were valued at $13.7 billion and accounted for 20% of manufactured exports (65).

And the two countries are also the world equality between sex top ranking listing.

Finland is one of the most equal societies in the world. Finland has grown much faster than the US.

“Between 1960 and 2010, Finland’s average annual per capita income growth rate was 2.7 per cent, against 2.0 per cent in the US. This means that, during this period, the US’s income rose 2.7 times while Finland’s rose by 3.8 times.” (66)

Finland is going further in its social-economic democracy experiment by introducing the basic income scheme.

The two-year pilot scheme will provide 2,000 unemployed Finnish citizens, aged between 25 and 58, with a monthly basic income of 560 euros ($581.48) that will replace their other social benefits. These citizens will continue to receive the basic income even if they find work. Kela, the organisation which runs Finland's social security systems and is running the pilot scheme, hopes the basic income experiment will boost employment, because the current system can potentially discourage the unemployed to find work as their earnings reduce the benefits they may receive.

"For someone receiving a basic income, there are no repercussions if they work a few days or a couple of weeks," said Marjukka Turunen, head of Kela's Legal Affairs Unit, in a press release.
"Incidental earnings do not reduce the basic income, so working and self-employment are worthwhile no matter what." (67)

The implementation of welfare state like Sweden, Finland and other Scandinavian nations created a healthy social mobilisation opportunity and success. It is far better than in the US and UK where it worked in the opposite direction (68).

All nations on Earth have their own positive and negative equilibrium scale and point and line. That is natural. Each country has its own specific criteria based on its make-up and character.

Democracy in the developing countries

Some developing nations are very poor and backward or have complex social make ups, extremist elements, strong hierarchical social systems, traditions and values, poverty, disease, harsh environments, tribal, clan conflicts and social fragmentation. They need genuine and effective assistance for building and nurturing a real democratic system step by step. This cannot be done without a great sacrifice, dedication and sincere good will. It must be undertaken without motives based on self-interest. It takes time and patience and should not be expected to always succeed. In this context, many nations will never achieve democracy on their own.

The fact is that, democracy through representative via election is costly. Almost all politicians in developing nations cannot afford to spend million or millions in election campaign, political party cannot rely on political donation to keep party function and enter election without a huge and persistence funding. Then, they must rely heavily funding by national wealthy, powerful local influential people, specific group in their community to keep survive and win election. And as general perception go, be a politicians in developing nations is not a national obligation to do good and build better nation, but is a kind of investment and a high profit return business like activity. Even though this is not all true. So, the outcome is predictable. Then, to successful build a truer democracy in developing nation is needed to be redesign.

Attempts by world powers to ‘interfere’ or impose democracy on these ‘problem’ developing nations may fail. Instead of promoting a successful democratic system, such meddling may simply prop up a strong leader or dictator, who more often  than not only further fragments the country, creating corruption, chaos, civil war, and, ultimately, a failed state.

Nation building in developing countries usually unravels four to six years after American intervention ends. Professor Minxin Pei and Professor Samia Amin note that US intervention efforts usually don't produce real democracies, and that in most cases fail, resulting in greater authoritarianism after 10 years (69).

Professor [Bruce Bueno de Mesquita] Mesquita and Professor [George W. Downs] Downs evaluated 35 US interventions from 1945 to 2004 and concluded that in only one case, Colombia, did a ‘full fledged, stable democracy’ develop within 10 years following the intervention (70).

The US interventions worldwide are strictly based on self-interest. The first requirement is the target state must accept US control and the US dictating state policy directions. The target states often have no democratic credentials. Even when they attempt to develop a genuine democratic system, the US ensures it fails if it does not meet its requirements (71).

Samuel Huntington argues that there are a variety of different cultures and value systems in the world that do not conform to Western ideals.

“Western culture, particularly American culture, emphasizes individualism to an extent no other culture that I know of does. Other cultures put the emphasis on community, family, and social factors, whereas we talk about the rights of individuals. When we have gone abroad and have had to exercise our influence, very naturally, we bring our values and cultures with us and try to persuade, at times coerce, other people to accept them.” (72)

Many Latin America watchers believed that democratization and the market reforms that began in the 1980s would curb corruption. It turn out to be, they provided new opportunities for corruption.

Democracy and donations and hungry for donations and politicians are not a good mixture. In Mexico, it brought an ‘out of control [corruption] booze-up’, wrote Luis Carlos Ugalde, a consultant, in Nexos, a magazine. In Brazil, where entire states count as single constituencies, in the fiercely and expensive campaign,  Candidates spent 4.1 billion reais ($1.3 billion) in last year’s state and national elections, not counting the race for the presidency. All at the mercy of Campaign-finance laws are riddled with loopholes. In Chile donors are meant to give money through an agency that hides their identities from the candidate. But within the country’s small elite, such secrets leak out. Surveys find that political parties are Latin America’s least trusted institutions (73).

The question is, have we learnt from history yet?

India and Malaysia among others were relatively successful in implementing ‘Western’ democracies. However, they are an exception. These nations experienced colonial rule and were exposed to some form of modern governance and legal institutions long enough to accumulate some western governing experience and nurture democracy. However success came at a cost - fragmentation, corruption and gridlock.

The follow statement might can explain the nature of state, nation development largely in the developing nations better. Why a nation turn to be authoritarian ruling?. Apart from late, slow development prior to historic, complex racial composition, culture-tradition, believe and value, level access to advance knowledge, geography, natural resource and sometime involve with ‘luck’ certain opportunity.

The statement is, most of authoritarian state or nations are the result of the interaction against all form of imperialism threat.

Practically, for developing nations, economic liberalism and advance is a more pressing issue than social and political democracy. Both complement each other and take time and effort.  It is a lesser matter if a nation or a community achieves equality economically or through the political and social domains. In the end, ‘old’ politics in a new world will not survive poorly evolution.

How to build, rebuild or improve democracy

The EU implemented central funding largely to reduce inequality between states and share prosperity. It is a form of economic democracy.

Chief news editor of New Scientist Niall Firth found four types of democracy:

- Direct Democracy where citizens vote on policy decisions directly (Use in ancient Athens, partly used in Switzerland through referendum).

- Representative democracy where citizens vote for representatives who make decision on their behalf (Used in most modern democracies).

- Liquid democracy where citizens give a mandate to a leader and can take back their mandate at any time.

- Deliberative democracy which is a form of direct democracy in which citizens participate in policy debates as part of a consensus-building process (74).

Greg Rudd is the brother of Kevin Rudd a former Australia prime minister. He has a teacher's college degree and worked as chief of staff in the Bob Hawke and Paul Keating governments, both were Australian Prime Minister. He was also involved with international politics for UNESCO and business with China (75).

He has criticised Australia’s two party dominated political system that, where in fact, parties share much of the same policy. Their over 80% policies were/are similar the same. He proposes getting rid of the term ‘opposition’ as it ‘has led to opposing for opposing’s sake…’

Rudd believes the parliament should create policy, not the government of the day. “Cross-parties parliamentary committees and subcommittees are established to develop bipartisan policy to strategically position Australia. Outside experts are co-opted to serve on these committees…” (76)

“Political parties have no intention of improving the operating model of our parliamentary democracy,” he says. “It will destroy their career structures, thus their patronage and power. So we have no choice but to start a new Common Sense Party. It will be a centre party based on logic not career. The centre is ripe for something new and imaginative, a cooperative logic that retains the tensions humanity needs to be creatively productive.” (77)

Singapore is one of the world’s best political and economic success stories measured by outcome.

“Lee Kuan Yew was quite simply, and unquestionably, one of the outstanding national leaders of the last hundred years. He worked on a small canvas, but what he achieved in tiny Singapore not only transformed the lives of his own people profoundly, but had an immense impact beyond Singapore in shaping the Asia today”.

This statement was written by Bob Hawke, the former Australian prime minister from 1983 to 1991.

He took Lee Kuan Yew’s opinions seriously and become one of the longest elected Labor Party prime ministers of Australia. Lee Kuan Yew ruled Singapore for 31 years. It was almost a one party state with no press freedom. Those who criticised his politicians were often round up and put in jail. What he achieved was no the country has no corruption, the third highest per capita GDP in the world, measured in PPP terms, the highest competitive economy and the number one in place to do business in the world (78).

Professor Ha Joon Chang states that, “You will never be told that all the land in Singapore is owned by the government, and 85 percent of housing is supplied by the government’s own housing corporation. 22 percent of GDP is produced by state-owned enterprises (including Singapore Airlines), when the world average in that respect is only about 9 percent.” “So I challenge my students to tell me one economic theory, Neo-Classical or Marxist or whatever, that can explain Singapore’s success. There is no such theory because Singaporean reality combines extreme elements of capitalism and socialism.” (79)

Norway too has its own distinct social-democracy system. It is neither a capitalist or socialist democracy. As the Economist reports: “It is a capitalist country but it is dominated by stateowned enterprises … The government owns about 40% of the stock market … The public sector employs 33% of the workforce in Norway, compared with an average of 19% for the OECD countries. The state is undermining the work ethic: most people enjoy a 37-hour working week, and three-day weekends are common. In 2011 Norway spent 3.9% of GDP on incapacity benefits and early retirement, compared with an OECD average of 2.2%.... The country’s reaction so far to the oil-price drop has been to embrace socialism more firmly: in local elections on September 14th the left made big gains in most of the country’s big cities, including Oslo and Bergen, on a programme of higher spending and zero reform.” (80)

Jean-Paul Sartre a French modernist thinker had an interesting view on modern politics. He opposed all forms of dictatorship. Nor did he support democratic systems on the grounds that large corporations take advantage over citizens.

The Chinese government advocates a democracy system based on every nation’s politicalsocial and economic make up. China points out that although ‘Western democracy’ is the good thing, but every nation must choose a democracy that suits its national reality. (People’s Daily warns against ‘trap’ of Western-style democracy. In 090614).

At a close personal meeting between President Barack Obama and president Xi Jinping on 12 November 2014 during the APEC summit in Beijing, the Chinese president said, “our democracy does not just mean one person one vote. When we consult public opinion, we do more than Western democracies do. Normally, Western politicians only represent certain levels or specific areas, but we must represent all of our people…” (People Daily, Oversea press) (81).

The Chinese’s world largest multination telecom system builder and equipment producer firm Huawei, has introduced employee’s ownership system to the corporate world and have a highly successful outcome. Huawei says that Mr Zhengfei (the founder owner and president of the company) himself holds only 1.4% of the company’s total share capital, with 82,471 employees holding the rest (82).

Is this collective capitalism or collective socialism on the show? Or is it unique to China?

The evaluation democracy, a term coined by Chinese scholar Chen Fangren, is Eastern meritocracy. Leaders are chosen from a holy circle at the top, based on ‘virtue and ability.’ These officeholders must then listen to public opinion as it ‘evaluates’ their performance from people below (83).

In fact, the Chinese has achieved great results in economic democracy on a scale that has never seen in world history. But China’s score for economic equality is average and its score for social-political democracy even less.

Meanwhile a new democratic idea came to light in the US in 2014. A new political party named Transhumanist fielded its leader and party founder Zoltan Istvan as a US presidential candidate in 2016.

Istvan felt “…sick and tired of seeing career politicians-nearly half of them lawyers.” The party motto is: “putting science, medicine, and technology at the forefront of US politics” (84)

Today many Western democracies are in a state of turmoil, their citizens confused and seriously doubting the system, especially in the US.

A Journal of Democracy paper, written by Professor Yascha Mounk and Professor Roberto Stefan Foa, found that in 1995, only 6 percent of wealthier Americans born after 1970 thought it a good thing for the army to take over at a moment of democratic failure, today it is growing to 35 percent. The growing percentages preferring a strong leader to elections (32 percent) and thinking that experts are better placed than governments to make big decisions (49 percent) all illustrate the anti-democratic trend in America (85).

Professor Ross Garnaut, an Australian economist, world economic expert, speaking at the Commonwealth Bank's recent Global Markets Conference “…the basic contradictions between capitalism and democracy are becoming more apparent and the 21st century could see some of the biggest changes in modern economic history.” (86)

Digital Democracy

A new form of democracy is gaining momentum,

In 2000, there were some 400 million people around the world had access to the internet; by the end of 2015 3.2 billion people will. And the internet reaches into these people’s lives in many more ways than it could than 15 years ago… “Technology is no longer a vertical industry, as it’s been understood by everyone for four decades,” says John Battelle (87). 

“For hundreds of thousands of people around the world the answer is simple – use the internet. New online tools are revitalising old democratic practices, bypassing the political middlemen and even offering the prospect of a world without ‘old style politic’ politicians at all.“

For some, the birth of the internet may spell the end of politicians. Digital rights activist Aaron Swartz believed it could reinvent democracy:

“As the internet breaks down the last justifications for a professional class of politicians, it also builds up the tools for replacing them. (‘see four flavours of democracy, p 41’). While the idea is old-it first popped up in an 1884 article by Lewis Carroll-it is only in the past few years that the internet has made it possible for the system to function as it was originally intended…. Democracy should be about connecting policy to the will of the people."

The Deliberative democracy is a form of direct democracy in which citizens participate in policy debates as part of a consensus-building process.

“People want to have more of a say in the decisions that affect their lives…’digital democracy’ is reinventing our decision-making processes-and leveraging the power of the internet in doing so. It is the only hope of regaining the legitimacy of our current democratic systems,” say Kekkanen.

When people have meaningful, productive roles in making public decisions and solving public problems, people get smarter, more equitable, more broadly supported public policies, (88).

Hierarchical systems entail tight control and strict ranking of social and political status. Today in the capitalist world, political status and social hierarchical difference tend to fall into socalled privilege.

In this day and age, they should not be confused or misinterpreted to mix with an organised working system or structure.

No one should enjoy special privileges, but should carry on their duty in a working ranked system distinguished from the old social, political and economic hierarchy.

Another aim of democracy, is universal human rights. It seems a perfect theory with wellintentioned aims. It seems to be the supreme goal of democracy. But without making a balance with responsibility and reality, there will be no democracy and human rights will remain an unfulfilled beautiful, imaginary dream. Of course, advanced developed nations will meet many criteria for human rights and responsibilities while the poorer, less advance nations and communities will struggle to catch up. This opens the way for advanced nations endlessly taking advantage of developing nations. The truth is backwardness not only creates and multiplies hardship, shortcomings and human rights abuses, it leaves nations vulnerable. Developing nations to this day struggle to improve and survive, while fencing off interference from outsiders, which always makes matters worse. It very often becomes sinister tool use by powerful, developed nations to suppress and control developing nations via for world domination.

Actually, the 10 December 1948 Human Rights declaration by the United Nations, that the human rights terminology and interpretation is still incomplete without including other areas. For example,

Developed nation should do or not doing


The right to live in a free of gun violence, homelessness, live below poverty line, unemployment and new skills retraining provision rights.

Six basic necessity is a mandatory right: food, shelter, medicine, clothing, education and basic transportation.


Practice mutual beneficial co-operation in all necessary engagement in the international scale.
Prohibit using threat, coercive action or violence, war against developing or other nation.

Prohibit interference against other nation sovereignty: social, political and economic system aim to manipulate, control or change the course to suit its own interest.

There is against human right to poaching developing nation human capital and should stop and mean: their well train, skills, young population, wealthy people of by all mean. For example: scientist, technician, pharmacist, physician, dentist, nurse, academia, economist, business manager, engineer, lawyer, teacher, sport figure and other.

Developing nation

The right to be peaceful and securely development of their own choice.

The right to acquire necessity support and protection from UN.

The right of free from political interference from or against other state.

The truth is, for developed nation ‘brain drain’ migrant intake is an absolute unfair unjust gain or stealing, for developing nation ‘brain drain’ immigrant outbound mean human capital and national treasure lost, causing poorer, hardship struggle, critical and damage to national development and proper functioning. The remittance send back to their own ‘former’ country are very small, unreliable and any nation cannot put hope and rely on it.

To make it short, more complete human rights classification:  should it apply to any developed nation that intentionally refuses people decent standards, a safety net or the right to live with in a merit base society free from any special privilege for elites few?  Should it include the right to live without the fear of unprovoked violence, mental or physical harm, coercive pressure and threat without adequate protection by the state?

The democracy exporter and driver should consider reality, and not right, in fact, democracy cannot be export, especially from one value based, social and economic development difference level, and to other difference norm and value believe society.

It is nowhere the fear about the consequences of this more clearly felt than the fear of what – in lieu of faith – stand as the foundations of what are called ‘European values’. It may be, as Cupitt has also said, that ‘the modern Western secular world is itself a Christian creation’. It is another transform value. After a period of often gleeful rejection of any such notion, in recent years a significant number of philosophers and historians have returned to accepting this idea (89).

Western concept of democracy founds on Christianity faith, express through social, political (also system), law, value, norm, culture and civilisation. Today the faith is fast declined especially in Europe follow by North America…the US. To try to force Western version of democracy upon non-Christian nations or former colony of ‘mix transform Christian’ Christianity nations in other part of the world does not produce good result. And most are failed and should reconsider.

Developed nations attempting to manipulate, control or bribe governments, officials, corporates and force nations to implement the Washington Consensus is also a breach of human rights. Tax avoidance and bending the rules and laws against developing nations is inhumane. It must be stopped and punished under ‘new’ international law.

Real ‘new’ democracy will be needed to suit today’s developed and developing nation’s relationship so both can survive together with mutual respect and peace. World democracy will only be achieved when central institutions establish and process simultaneously on a world scale. New politics and preconditions are needed. Many nations will never achieve democracy or social democracy, unless, until we have a neutral entity such as the UN and EU and with utmost good will and with patient.

So, at the same time authoritarian, corrupt politicians and dictators are a symptom earlier political evolution, largely in the developing nations. Many will never get away from that condition. Only a ’new’ global governance system can change that.

Another important issue is the rights and free will of Indigenous people around the world. All humans are entitled to have the rights to live the way what they choose that fits with their own needs, values and beliefs.

Democracy in terms of humanity is the dialogue, interaction and synthesis of opposites governed by the Law of Evolution. A fundamental condition of democracy is ensuring all world citizens share a rightful status and are treated humanely. Democracy could also mean equal rights and opportunities, equality in social economic mobility.

In some aspects the UN voting arrangement seems unfair and unjust, but allowing a small nation the same voting rights as a very large nation would not reflect fairness and equality either. Still the UN structure and power of authority is not fair enough to claim it is truly democratic in principle.

It is not so democratic and the world has developed and changed since WWII. The UN’s power of authority and structure must be overhauled before it can become a truer democratic, global governance and institution. 

Democracy must be based on free will and recognition of a nation’s sovereignty, integrity and rights except in critical circumstances needing the approval of new set of rule and principle and a world scale ‘new’ governance body.

Indeed, humankind has never have a perfect democratic system and may never achieve this ideal because we are governed by Natural Law and the Law of Evolution. If anybody wants to find absolute form of democracy, the advice is to go to Hollywood.

So, if  bad politics is about cheating, lying, horse trading, smear campaigns, bullying and stand over tactics, then its opposite is reason, logic, scientific enquiry, equality, rights and responsibility. The counter balance will hopefully outweigh the bad and more advanced form of democracy will evolve. The question is how long it will to become a reality?

Chapter 6. Economics: Capitalism the Industrial Revolution and the Digital Revolution

By common interpretation, economics is “the branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” (90)

Ha Joon Chang, a South Korean-born economics professor who teaches at the Faculty of Economics at the University of Cambridge, defines economics as “Politics. As such, we shouldn’t be thinking in terms of an ideal answer – the discussion should never close… politics is creating, shaping and reshaping markets before any transaction can begin.” (91)

Professor Chang seeks to, “debunk this widespread view, propagated by the current generation of economists, that somehow you can neatly separate economics from politics. They say, ‘This is the area of the market, and no political logic should intrude.’ But actually, what you count as a political logic or market logic partly depends on your economic theory. Free market economists frequently see minimum wage legislation as mere political intervention.” (92)

Professor Chang defines economics as having nine schools: “Austrian, Behaviourist, Classical, Developmental, Institutional, Keynesian, Marxist, Neo-classical and Schumpeterian. All have their strengths and weaknesses; all only partially explain how economies function. Each school focuses upon different interests and issues, so they can only address a limited range of scenarios. Their economic focus is concentrated in different areas - for instance, the Marxist school on production (not trade and exchange like the Neo-classical school).” (93)

Dr Cesar Hidalgo, a physicist, expands upon these views and was summarised in The Economist in 2015:

“Economies grow…because the information contained in them grows—not just in people’s heads, but also in the social networks that connect everyone and even in the objects that populate the world. What is more, this ever-expanding pool of information did not start with humans, but dates back to the beginning of time. ‘[W]e are born from it, and it is born from us,’… [Dr Hidalgo’s] aim is nothing less than to lay out a universal theory of information—one that applies to everything, from the lifeless to the living, and all scales, from atoms to economies… [Dr.] Hidalgo sees nature as a big computer that has been ‘growing’ information for billions of years and whose physical incarnation is nature as we know it.”

“Ultimately, the economy is the collective system by which humans make information grow… If some countries are richer than others, [Dr Hidalgo] explains, it is because some economies are better than others at making information—and thus themselves—grow… If members of a society do not easily trust each other, for instance, they will be less likely to form the networks that are necessary to share knowledge and know-how.” (94)

The above findings are a very important step forward that will contribute to the scientific interpretation of economics.

In this author’s opinion, economics is also the main driving force behind human development and evolution. Economics is the central driving force behind human evolution and world change. To this day, economics has developed into a highly complex system of positive and negative choices. More realism and multi-disciplinary knowledge of science and technology is the only answer. This said, all of the science, technology and experience that humans have accumulated to this day cannot answer all economic questions. At best they form a foundation that explains more things than at any other time in human history and well into the future.

Currently, the concept of a free market economy - a neo-liberal ideology - is enforced upon the world by the leading, developed nations. The welfare state and social democracy follow closely behind. In developing nations, economic development tends to involve a mixture of feudalist, capitalist and semi-capitalist systems that are blended with a region’s own culture, values, tradition and belief systems. In short, modern capitalism has grown out of and been shaped by industrialisation and has, in turn, created early capitalism, orthodox capitalism, socialism, welfare and social democratic states. The process of industrialisation has given rise to the Digital Revolution, whose force and effect has evolved and spread to the world faster and unabated to this day.

When discussing modern economics, the Industrial Revolution is an important milestone that cannot be ignored. It significantly affected worldwide development and the achievements it has facilitated over the last few centuries are enormous. It has helped humankind become increasingly distinguished from all other living things, at times, also promoting bias and a lack of care. Yet, the laws of nature dictate that humans, animals and all other beings live together, interacting in a close relationship, with mutual respect.

Socially and politically, industrialisation is the primary force in the evolution of modern economics and society.  It has seen the demise of feudalist and conservative classes - their ideals; social and economic structures and systems; and outdated consciousness. It has given birth to the capitalist class, the working class and an ever-growing middle class, which includes white collar workers, technocrats and so forth. Since its emergence, capitalism has come a long way, originating in Italy then spreading through the Netherlands, England, France, Germany, the Scandinavian nations and the US. After this, it was adopted by Japan, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Spain and South Korea to name a few.

The Industrial Revolution is the biggest, most positive step forward that humankind has ever made. How did it happen and what were the consequences? It was the greatest step forward in human evolution, the scale and complexity of which out-sizes any other development in history. It could also turn out to be negative, leading to the end of humanity and the world, given its potential to promote tension, conflict and destruction.

Industrialisation has revolutionised all modes of production. It includes the evolution from the wooden, horse-drawn carriages to the horseless carriage or the mechanically-driven car. The revolution continues, with constant innovation, change and enhancements in science, technology and life in general. Outcomes include hydraulic mechanics, electronics, the internet and other digital tools (like smart phones). Advances in nuclear and solar energy help humankind to explore new ways of living and working in all corners of the earth, including the ocean depths and outer space. In addition, industrialisation has helped to eradicate negative elements such as backward beliefs, values and superstitions. Most of all, it has helped to eliminate feudalist regimes and influence societal structures, systems and consciousness. The advances ensuing from the Industrial Revolution are still governed by the Law of Evolution, with both positive and negative phenomena ensuing from them.

Ryan Avent, in The Economist’s Special Report on the World Economy, argues that the world is now in a third wave of economic development:

“Both the first Industrial Revolution, starting in the late 18th century, and the second one, around 100 years later, had their victims who lost their jobs to Cartwright’s power loom and later to Thomas Edison’s electric lighting, Mercedes Benz’s horseless carriage and countless other inventions that changed the world. But those inventions also immeasurably improved many people’s lives, sweeping away old economic structures and transforming society. They created new economic opportunity on a mass scale, with plenty of new work to replace the old.”

“A third great wave of invention and economic disruption, set off by advances in computing and information and communication technology (ICT) in the late 20th century, promises to deliver a similar mixture of social stress and economic transformation. It is driven by a handful of technologies—including machine intelligence, the ubiquitous web and advanced robotics—capable of delivering many remarkable innovations: unmanned vehicles; pilotless drones; machines that can instantly translate hundreds of languages; mobile technology that eliminates the distance between doctor and patient, teacher and student. Whether the digital revolution will bring mass job creation to make up for its mass job destruction remains to be seen.” (95)

Industrialisation and globalisation do not just make most of world’s economies interdependent and wealthier, they have also accelerated inequality. The gap between the rich and the poor in a nation is overall wider, and the mix result of reducing distance in some but wider gap of growing wealth between developed and developing nations is continued or growing wider than ever. So, too, is environmental damage and change in a system that’s coloured by more complicated ways of living.

Like it or not, the Industrial Revolutions have driven technological advance and become part of our daily lives. With it, have come steadily rising living standards and, most importantly, the ability to solve countless problems that were previously unsolvable. Its advances have changed the way in which humans perceive the world, nature and themselves. It has opened the way to innovations that earlier humans never imagined, and the pace of invention, adaptation and change is becoming ever-faster and more complex.

The point of economic transition

Avent’s report further outlines how one era is ending and giving rise to another.  Up until now, governments, corporations and working people have tried to solve economic problems by inventing and adapting to changing circumstances - often successfully, either easily or via blood, sweat and tears.

Today, it can be seen that “in Europe, the use of value-added taxes has allowed governments to maintain high public expenditure at relatively low economic cost. America, which currently has a progressive tax system but spends less on helping the poor, might need to review its system.” (96)

Beyond this, the Industrial and Digital Revolutions have brought to the world the greatest, most sophisticated and globally reaching changes. It has come to the point where neither one nation, one continent nor one society can address the issue alone, be it national, political, social, economic, environmental, ideological or systemic. Not even the international organizations mandated to run and govern the world community have addressed these problems effectively. The world has come to a time when its governments and nations need to redesign the current system and set a new one in its place for once and for all - one that addresses the needs of current and future generations. (97)

Since the Industrial Revolution started in England, the world has developed quickly, causing fundamental change. With this, humankind has seen certain ways of life come to a close whilst witnessing innovation and change in others. The power of monarchies and religions has been significantly reduced, with the latter being strongly held in check. The old forms of slavery and colonisation have been eliminated. Innovation, science, technology and modern knowledge have been gaining ground, developing and changing all aspects of life faster than ever. Capitalism eliminated peasantry, but it created new and distinct forms of inequality in society. These great changes, at social, political and economic levels, have given birth to and consolidated ‘capitalist democracy’ as a tool and method for governing. These factors have created imbalance between humans, nature and all other beings. They have also provided the basic foundation with which humankind can build effective political, social and economic systems in the future to come.

Industrialisation not just given birth to capitalism and liberal democracy, it has divided global economic development into two main groups:

In 2013, OECD Stat report put the world total population at, 7,162,120,000.  Some 34 developed OECD nations have a total population of 1,257,114,000, the rest (5,905,006,000) is the developing nations total population (98).

A developed or high income nation should have a Gross National Income (GNI) per-capita exceeding $12,616 per annum. A developing nation or low/middle income nation would have GNI, an income below $12,616 (99).

In this writing, there is also the option to add modern education, healthcare, home ownership factors into equation. Also we could use classifications such as First World, Global North, Western nations, OECD member nations and industrialise of developed nations. And Third World, Global South, less developing, pre-industrial, emerging economies as developing nations.

In the US, politics and economics have interacted to create a system of gridlock, decay and dysfunction. Each political party largely blames the opposition (but not themselves). Their approach to dealing with issues is to repeal and reject the opposition’s ideas, policies and measures. They believe that such strategies will revive the American Dream.

In Britain, the Labour Party accused the Conservative–led government of betraying the “British Promise of upward mobility, tempered with egalitarianism.”

In Brussels, the European Union works to promote the European Dream via consensus, which tends to protect favoured firms and industries via the use of subsidies. A few EU leaders admit that their countries’ travails owe more to external forces (e.g. American) than to internal problems – the explosion in global competition, followed by a second wave of automation (100).

That, however, is not enough - the leaders of the EU are missing the point.

In addressing the problems above, first and foremost, the developed nations must acknowledge the evolving and progress of time and era. They must grasp how to digest and solve problems, and how to adapt to the new reality,

1. The large-scale industrial hollow out, which accelerate fastest since the 1970s and continues today into high value-add and high-tech industries.

2. Currently and in the future, globalisation will favour developing nations over the developed nations.

3. Many of the developed nations have systems which are out-dated.

4. Most national governments and economies are based on mature market principles and are too expensive. The system is tired to deal with today’s problems effectively.

5. The attitudes of politicians, the rich and the privileged are not flexible or adaptable enough for the issues facing them. Can they change at all?.

6. Automation and digitalisation both enhance and destruct economic health, but in return create new industry and new job. It is more positive than negative, but it needs time to ‘adjust’ adapt.

Serious steps and action are required to help the world nations adapt to and resolve the issues confronting them.

The power of World Scale Groupings and Net-workings (WSGN)

Since the end of the Cold War, the world’s economies have been able to benefit from relatively peaceful and stable times. They have opened up their markets, becoming more cooperative and, thereby, improving world economic conditions. This has led to a new Grand scale of globalisation… the formation or upgrade of world economies, institutions, groups and alliances networking or call World Scale Groupings and Net-workings (WSGN):

The Group of 7 (G7), which consists of the US, Japan, Germany, England, France, Italy and Canada - the world’s seven largest industrialised economies;

The European Union (EU) - the world’s largest single economy - has the newest and most progressive ideas and policies about world peace, management and administration.  It consists of 27 members;

The Group of 20 (G20) includes twenty of the world’s major developed nations and emerging economies. It includes the EU (as a single member), the US, China, Japan, Germany, England, France, Italy, India, Canada, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, South Korea, Australia, Mexico, Turkey, Argentina, South Africa and Indonesia;

BRICS includes the world’s largest and fastest growing and developing economies, among which are the resource-rich, pre-industrialised nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa;

The Group of 77 (G77), consisting of 130 developing nations who have organised to protect their rights and interests;

The North America Free Trade Association (NAFTA), consisting of 3 members - the US, Canada and Mexico;

The Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) consisting of 21 members;

The Arab League (AL) consisting of 22 members;

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) consisting of 11 members;

The Africa Union (AU) consisting of 53 African member countries;

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is an economic and political organisation of eight countries in Southern Asia;

The Union of South American Nations (USAN) consisting of 11 members;

The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) consisting of 34 members;

the Asia Co-operation Dialogue (ACD) consisting of 30 members;

The East Asia Community (EAC) consisting of 13 members;

The Central Asia Union (CAU) consisting of 5 members;

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) consisting of 6 members; and  the Pacific Alliance (PA), a regional integration initiative formed by Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru (101).

As globalisation progresses, the world’s nations are becoming highly interconnected, interrelated, intertwined, integrated and interdependent ever;

Regional and Local Area Networks (RLAN) and with WSGN and World Digital Webs and Networking (WDWN) (which have been very successful in digital Hi-Tech areas such as telecommunications and transportation and other networks). Today, the world is more in unison over common security issues and other things that they have never wanted or been able to share before.

The world seems so small, with physical, digital and transport systems linking it within seconds and hours reach. This is also the case with world economic progress.

However, with their global business relationships, the developed nations have formed highly sophisticated networks and cooperative arrangements amongst themselves. This has resulted in a huge, global network of interest-sharing, influence and control that is strongly endorsed and supported by their governments, as the following reports show:

In 2011, physicist and researcher, Dr James B. Glattfelder, analysed the inner workings of a system (such as the global economy) as being more than a sum of its parts. In doing so, he illustrated who has the power to control the world. From Orbis 2007 [in Zurich], a database listing 37 million companies and investors worldwide, they pulled out all 43,060 [Transnational Corporations] TNCs and the share ownerships linking them… Each of the 1,318 had ties to two or more other companies, and on average they were connected to 20. What's more, although they represented 20 per cent of global operating revenues, the 1,318 appeared to collectively own through their shares the majority of the world's large blue chip and manufacturing firms - the ‘rea’ economy - representing a further 60 per cent of global revenue. Further, results also show that these 147 super-entities… controlled 40 per cent of the entire network [of 43,060 TNCs and 60% of their revenues]. This means that these 147 entities run global business (102).

The United States takes home first prize with 24 companies cracking the researchers’ top 50 list, followed by the UK with 8, France with 5, Japan with 4, and Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands tying with 2 companies each. Canada has one company in the researchers’ top 50 (103).

The top 50 companies on the list of the ‘super-entity’ included (as of 2007): Barclays Plc (1),
Capital Group Companies Inc. (2), FMR Corporation (3), AXA (4), State Street Corporation (5),
JP Morgan Chase & Co. (6), UBS AG (9), Merrill Lynch & Co Inc. (10), Deutsche Bank (12), Credit Suisse Group (14), Bank of New York Mellon Corp (16), Goldman Sachs Group (18),
Morgan Stanley (21), Société Générale (24), Bank of America Corporation (25), Lloyds TSB
Group (26), Lehman Brothers Holdings (34), Sun Life Financial (35), ING Group (41), BNP Paribas (46), and several others.[3] (104)

In the United States, five banks control half the national economy: JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs Group collectively held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, which equals roughly 56% of the US economy. In 2007, the assets of the largest banks amounted to 43% of the US economy. Thus, the crisis has made the banks bigger and more powerful than ever. Because the government invoked ‘too big to fail,’ meaning that the big banks will be saved, protect by the government in all means because they are utterly  important, then, the big banks have an incentive to continue to expand and take bigger risks, because bigger risks lead to bigger  rewards, provided there is no failure. If there is failure and they will be bailed out in the end. Essentially, it’s an insurance policy for criminal risk-taking behaviour.

Such practice is still continued, the former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis stated, Market participants believe that nothing has changed, that too-big-tofail is fully intact. Remember, ‘market’ means the banking cartel (or ‘super-entity’ if you prefer). Thus, they build new bubbles and buy government bonds (sovereign debt), making the global financial system increasingly insecure and at risk of a larger collapse than took place in 2008 (105).

Why is the financial industry, at the centre of this looming insecurity?

According to Yahoo, Finance report, as of 12 May 2015; the US net profit margin by regional banks in the Southwest 23.20%, the Midwest regional banks 24.60%, Pacific regional banks have a net profit margin of 22.20%. The Southeast region has a net profit margin at 20.60%. In the Northeast 20.10% and regional mid-Atlantic regions banks have a net profit of 12.40% (106).

Today, finance; banking and insurance businesses are the most profitable sectors to run. They are free of the blood, sweat and tears associated with industrial manufacturing industry, as finance is relatively free from industrial action. They seem only to shuffle/manage paper, control and make decisions. They make steady profits that are high and appear to be sustainable. Best of all, they have a non-declared guarantee by the state. So, the financial sector today is one of the most secure sectors of the national economy. This sector has the most powerful political lobbies. These lobbies are powerful and hold sway on many national issues. There are many national economic decisions too big to allow to fail, and many CEOs too big to jail for breaking the law. The latter colours a lot of national decision making.

This is negative and leads to system volatility. Some of the multiple adverse consequences are white collar crime and corruption, accelerated inequality, poverty, violent crime and homelessness. In developing nations it creates even greater poverty, hunger, violent conflict, civil war, failed statehood and refugees. 

Central planning, central distribution and inequality

The consensus today is that centralised economies, like the USSR, China before 1979 have failed not withstanding their claims to central planning.

The capitalist economies, like in the US tout the trickle down benefits of the capitalist system, spreading wealth in an economically stratified society. However, distribution from the top down in the US is also problematic. This is principally because the US holds to the ideal of orthodox capitalism. It stubbornly resists the fact that the nation and the world is fast changing.

Many past Western governments have made policy determinations, strongly favouring the corporates and the affluent privileged classes. This core policy driver has been justified on the basis, that backing corporates, will lead to a trickle-down effect, benefitting all society. It has been proven, however, that this does not work and the situation is deteriorating day by day.

The historical records of capitalism in the twentieth and twenty first century, however produces evidence of frequent economic crises, like the Great Depression, the Global Financial Crisis of Great Recession of 2008 which we are barely fully recovering from even today. All together: 24 times between 1836-1927 year, and 14 times from 1929 to 2009 the world has suffered economic crises – recession and depression – started by the US.

(The list detail shows when, how, trigger by whom and how long, there is not convenient to print here, advice to go to the site by yourself) (107).

Most of all, long running economic inequality in the society is becoming severe, especially in the US.
New research shows that the top 0.1 per cent’s share of US wealth has tripled since 1980. Rupert Murdoch, the executive chairman of News Corp, the head of the world’s most powerful media empire told the G20 finance ministers meeting in Washington DC, that money printing by central banks had exacerbated inequality and fanned discontent with the global economic system (108).

The US Massachusetts senator, Elizabeth Warren said, “both Republicans and Democrats have misread the economic challenge and been co-opted by the forces of greed”.

“The pressure on the middle class is not simply a natural force, it is the result of deliberate decisions made by the leaders of this country. America’s enemy, in other words, lurks within. This is not a top-vs-bottom story, this is a top-and-everyone-else story. This is a 90-10 story.” (109)

The US has a pro-elite system of education…the Ivy League club, largely only rich and powerful could access. It is not actually based on merit and hard work, as most reputed world’s universities are,
“During the last 50 years, private ‘feeder’ schools in Japan came to dominate entry into elite colleges. Intense organisational competition shaped the organisational environment and changed the pathways available to social elites.” (110)

The French have  Fils et filles de-sons and daughters of –has passed into French language as shorthand for pampered children who are parachuted into plum civil service posts or star cinema roles thanks to their parentage.

“How can new talents emerge if the places are already in large part occupied by the descendants of these aristocrats? Children of artists, politicians, bosses and sports men… The name has become an entry ticket allowing people to jump queues, start a careerregardless of whether there is talent.” (111)

The executive director of the international agency OXFAM, warned of the following factors driving inequality, ahead of the annual World Economic Forum, meeting in Davos;

The explosion in inequality is holding back the fight against global poverty at a time when one in nine people do not have enough to eat and more than a billion people still live on less than $1.25-a-day…. The combined wealth of the richest one per cent will overtake that of the other 99 per cent of people next year unless the current trend of rising inequality is curtail… Extreme inequality isn't just a moral wrong. We know that it prevents economic growth and it threatens the private sector's bottom line (112).

The Australian Broadcast Corporation (ABC) reported from the World Economic Forum in Davos, that inequality was growing at an alarming rate; many measures to ensure equality had been overridden by fast-changing technology.

“More than 212 million people will be jobless by 2019 against the current level of 201 million,” the International Labour Organisation (ILO) head Guy Ryder said in Geneva.

The United Nations has warned that unemployment will rise by 11 million in the next five years “due to slower growth and turbulence.” (113)

“Today’s rich may have worked for their success, but tomorrow’s won’t have to. Already, [Thomas] Piketty argues, the very richest earn more income from their wealth than their labour. And just as the ruthless robber barons of the late 19th century gave way to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s boozing heirs and heiresses, today’s CEO’s and hedge fund managers will give way to a generation of children who simply won the birth lottery.” (114)

The following statement shows how inequality developed and how it will impact on the world.

‘Inequality’ begins with a clear statement of the harm done by rising income gaps: they unfairly punish those who suffer bad luck. They undermine economic growth and social cohesion. Perhaps most importantly, inequality in economic resources translates directly into inequality in personal opportunity. Wealth generates comfort even when it isn’t being spent; the rich enjoy the fact that they are insured against future hardship or could use their wealth in future to satisfy personal or professional goals (115).

The outcome of individual economic freedom can be great inequality, which discount the realistic notions of democracy. The governance of complex modern societies requires technical knowledge – and we already face the danger that the gulf between economic and technocratic elites on the one hand, and the mass of the people on the other, becomes too vast a gap to be bridged. At the limit, trust might break down altogether. Thereupon, the electorate will turn to outsiders to clean up the system.

We are seeing such a shift towards trust in outsiders not only in the US but also in many European countries. A complacent view is that the distrusted might let off steam but the centre will hold. This is quite possible. But it is a risky strategy.

“So what are the root causes of this divide in attitudes? …Perhaps the most fundamental cause is a growing sense that elites are corrupt, complacent and incompetent.” (116)

Let see how current world politicians and experts attempt to exploit the situation, in order to secure personal benefits against the public good.

The advocates of trickle-down economics argue that, when the rich get extra income, they will invest it and create more jobs – and a higher income – for others. Those people, in turn, spend their extra money. Eventually the effect trickles down the whole system, making everyone better off, in absolute terms. So, what seems like a moral outrage – giving more to people who already have more – is in theory a socially benign action.

The trouble is it does not worked. In the past three decades, states with pro-wealthy policies have seen economic growth slow, except in countries like China and Vietnam that needed to jump-start socialist economies.

In the UK, upward income redistribution since 1980 has seen the share of the top one per cent rise from five per cent of national income to over 10 per cent. Yet the annual growth rate of income per person has fallen from 2.5 per cent between 1960 and 1980 to 1.8 per cent between 1980 and 2013.…

“The reason is that the rich have not kept their end of the bargain… Investment as a share of GDP used to be 18 to 22 per cent in the 1960s and 1970s but since then has been 14 to 18 per cent, except for a few years at the end of the 1980s.”

“Moreover, concentration of income at the top has boosted the political influence of the super-rich, allowing them to push for policies that benefit themselves but create harm in the long run”. (117).

Keeping such unjust policies going will create two polarised nations comprising, the rich and the poor. Be warned, in the digital age, where people have access to information on the Web, Inequality will sow dissension, promote mass rebellion and perhaps lead to social breakdown.

For several years now, in the western nations, populist politicians and liberal intellectuals have been outspoken about the rapid growth of income inequality. But in the last several months, this topic has been taken up by a different and unlikely group of advocates: a small but vocal band of billionaires.

They rang the alarm bell. Among them are Johan Rupert, Rupert Murdoch, Paul Tudor Jones, Jeff Greene, Lynn Forester de Rothschild, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Bill Gates and others.

 "Ten more billionaires are pledging to give away at least half of their fortunes to philanthropic causes. They signed the Giving Pledge -- an effort started in 2010 by Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates -- to encourage billionaires to commit to giving away most of their money either during their lifetimes or in their wills. The pledgers are now 137 strong and hail from 14 countries (118).

Paul Tudor Jones II is an American billionaire businessman who founded Tudor Investment Corporation, a private asset management company and hedge fun.  Giving a talk in Canada, he said;

“Now here’s a macro forecast that’s easy to make and that’s that the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest will get closed. History always does it. It typically happens in one of three ways — either through revolution, higher taxes or wars. None of those are on my bucket list,

He acknowledge, higher profit margins do not increase societal wealth. What they actually do is exacerbate income inequality, and that’s not a good thing.

Now capitalism has been responsible for every major innovation that’s made this world a more inspiring and wonderful place to live in, ‘Capitalism has to be based on justice … I’m not against progress.’” (119)

According to William D. Cohan, a former Wall Street banker who has written frequently about billionaires, if the investor class were truly interested in targeting unfairness, its members would try to alter the policies of the Federal Reserve, which tend to help the rich, or do away with inequity-inducing programs like tax incentives for hedge funds.

He further said, “Most billionaires, he added, are apt to address inequality by donating portions of their fortunes, not by seeking systemic economic change.

“Charity? Yes,” Mr. Cohan said. “But levelling the playing field? No.”

“And yet the extremely wealthy do face an abiding risk from festering inequity: The havenots might finally lose patience and turn upon the haves.”

“That’s the real danger,” Mr. Cohan said. “This little thing called the French Revolution.” (120)

The 2008 Subprime Mortgage Crisis and its broad consequences

In many developed nations the financial sector especially, investment banks and it’s off shoots like the derivative investment trade, hedge funds and stock market drive ‘nonproductive’ sectors of the speculative world economy instead of the productive sectors of the world’s economy. This has resulted in the diversion of large amounts of funding in to, invented shell companies, money laundering, tax avoidance, grey and underground economies of shadow banking and fraudulent economies. This does not just worsen inequality, it also accelerates the frequency of economic chaos, recession, depression and could causing economic collapse.

The 2008 Subprime mortgage crisis, commenced in the US, due to the political and economic systems. The Cold War was over, economic reform was in full swing in China, and Russia and emerging economies joined in the move to expand and propel the world economy forward. US politicians and the corporates saw the opportunity of ushering in age of prosperity.

After the 2008 Subprime mortgage crisis, there were endless arguments among politicians, each blaming the other party. Claims such as ‘You cannot over regulate the financial system’ and ‘You cannot deregulate…’ gained wide circulation.

Looking back and making a balanced rational analysis, we learn many significant things about economic evolution.

It was Ronald Reagan as president who started to drive a process of huge corporate deregulation, financial liberation and business privatisation in the US. As president Bill Clinton pushed down interest rates and offered other financial incentives. Both presidents reduced the interest rates to enhance the growth of the GDP and provide investment incentives at the same time reducing regulation. (First strategic mistake, tactical correct, not withstand other factors’ flaws, the practice was a combination of ‘Wild West’ negative factors, a perfect formula for the 2008 economic crisis).

They established the so-called ‘private firm’ Freddy Mack and Fannie Mae companies, to underwrite housing mortgage credit loans. The financial and banking sector heavily Influenced and manipulated the rules and direction (Second mistake).

These financial entities were authorised to provide credit, with lower mortgage securitisation levels and recklessly incomplete background checks, violating the fundamentals of successful banking practice. (Third mistake).

The buyer and seller, merchant bankers were then authorised to step in, control and manipulate the market by issuing and marketing derivative instruments among the banks and in the stock market (Fourth mistake).

The rating companies gave Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae the AAA highest credit rating (Fifth mistake).

The economists largely went along and happily shared the ‘bubble’ boom economy. A handful of ‘real’ economists rang the alarm bell but very few people listened to them (Sixth mistake).

The so-called mainstream media with its crippling hold on entire corporate interest, followed the lead, reporting only the bright side as if talking up the economy was in everyone’s interest (Seventh mistake).

Dr Alan Greenspan expressed his trust of all players, even though they had bad reputations for exerting political pressure and using all sorts of dirty tricks to cower the Security Exchange Commission (SEC) and violate weak and complicated laws (Eighth mistake).

The hedge funds and investment banks stepped up their business because this manifested itself as a once in a lifetime opportunity of making billions out of ‘exceptional’ circumstances (Ninth mistake).

So, the escalating frenzy propelled frenzy. As the ‘bubble’ grew the more investors and consumers joined the stampede. The stampede then developed a herd mentality. Greed intensified the herd, until the bubble burst causing an earthquake of panic and a crisis that was out of control (Tenth mistake).

The politicians, public servants and bankers, who were involved in creating the crisis were never prosecuted (Eleventh mistake).

The Obama administration take no responsibility move by did not making system reform to the ‘Wall Street’ financial structure and system (the best chance and time) (Twelve mistake).

The crisis produced a deep and complicated negative impact on the US and the world,

Was it man made? Were there major systemic faults? Who was responsible for this blunder?  You can be the judge?

Unfortunately, it's clear that for many investment banks business continues pretty much as normal and that another crisis is only a matter of time. Certainly, there's greater scrutiny of bonuses – but many bankers think they were not responsible personally for the crisis and they're worth every penny they're paid. Clearly they're not (121).

The government did not prosecute the ‘criminals’ who committed fraud, reduce bankers’ power or introduce legislation so authorities could supervise, monitor and control Wall Street activity effectively.

The economic crisis forced the US to gather the world nations to tackle the crisis before it had further negative impact at home and aboard. The US could not clean up the mess, stabilize the situation and return to normal economic growth alone. This meant the US has lost much of its economic leadership role. The G20 was called on to help.

“A theme of this volume is that the G20 at the leaders’ level was brought into being to address the current crisis, which is in fact a three-dimensional crisis: an economic crisis that has created a crisis in confidence in markets that has affected nearly everyone on the globe; a crisis in public trust in political leaders, manifested in opinion polls in many countries; and a crisis in faith in the capacity of the system of international institutions to avoid crises and better represent public concerns for financial stability, growth, and development.” (122)

At home, the US government made a huge bail out to protect the financial and banking system from collapsing. It was too big to let it fail, the perpetrators were too big to go to jail.  Instead government injected huge sums of taxpayer money into the financial system. It authorised the Reserve Bank to print money in the name of the public and further increase debt. Since then, the world has not yet recovered from the GFC.

We all know about TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which spent $700 billion in taxpayers’ money to bail out banks after the 2008 financial crisis. That money was scrutinised by Congress and the media. In fact, it turns out that that $700 billion is just a small part of a much larger pool of money that has gone into propping up our nation’s financial system. And most of that taxpayer money hasn’t had much public scrutiny at all.

According to a team at Bloomberg News, “at one point last year the US had lent, spent or guaranteed as much as $12.8 trillion to rescue the economy. The Bloomberg reporters have been following that money.” (123)

About Quantitative Easing (QE), central banks create money by buying securities, such as government bonds, from banks, with electronic cash that did not exist before. The new money swells the size of bank reserves in the economy by the quantity of assets purchased—hence ‘quantitative’ easing. Like lowering interest rates, QE is supposed to stimulate the economy by encouraging banks to make more loans. The idea is that banks take the new money and buy assets to replace the ones they have sold to the central bank. That raises stock prices and lowers interest rates, which in turn boosts investment. Today, interest rates on everything from government bonds to mortgages to corporate debt are probably lower than they would have been without QE. If QE convinces markets that the central bank is serious about fighting deflation or high unemployment, then it can also boost economic activity by raising confidence. Several rounds of QE in America have increased the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet—the value of the assets it holds—from less than $1 trillion in 2007 to more than $4 trillion now. Virtually, it is also mean the debt creation from thin air and public will have to pay back later (124).

The GFC has not just worsening social- economics of inequality, the world over. It also exposes how debt level has accelerated unabated till this day.

Developing nations borrow money with the object of growing the national economy and escape backwardness and poverty. In some instances borrowings are made to satisfy individual political aspirations or drive incompetent local economic management and fund corruption.

Developed nations, usually borrow future money to spend for today, with the expending of next generation.

Most affluent nations of the West, turned to borrow money to fund economic growth with the short term view of political survival, win elections.

It’s somewhat like a ‘little’ Ponzi scheme where using future money for today, at high interest rates, results in little or no financial activity.

The above observations are confirmed, by the review of statistics below.

McKinsey, a well reputed Global Management Consultant, has this to say about the impact of the GFC, on economies;

Richard Dobbs, McKinsey research said, ”All major economies today have higher levels of borrowing relative to GDP than they did in 2007, the firm writes. The debt-to-GDP ratio has gone up 17% since the crisis; in other.

We’ve generally seen around the world a growth in debt, words, debt has risen 17% faster than GDP over the past eight years.”

“When we look since the start of the financial crisis, debt levels haven’t fallen at all. They’ve gone up,” “So, we’ve been able to enjoy ourselves by carrying on spending. Governments have been able to have less austerity around the world. But we’ve gotten to a position where it’s not clear how long we can carry on with that.”

It’s a number so big: $57 trillion. That’s how much debt – comprising government, households and the private sector – has been added to the global total since the financial crisis,

Global debt totalled $199 trillion in 2014, 286% of global GDP. In 2007, total debt was $142 trillion, 269% of GDP.

That’s the key point. Debt levels in and of themselves don’t mean much; what matters is the ability to service that debt. The real issue is when you look at some countries, especially when you get aging populations. Rising debt levels and a shrinking work force are a ‘toxic mix,’ he said.

“Dobbs drew the metaphor of a kitchen with a gas stove, where the gas is on and filling the room. Either somebody’s going to open a window and release the gas, or somebody’s going to flip a switch, set off a spark, and…well, you know.” (125)

Today in the commercial world, entrepreneurs gain more ground because of globalisation. They push the trade unions and workers to reduce their wages and entitlement. In contrast, the entrepreneur, increases his/her own salary.

Cooperation between the workers and employers, is the passport to a safe job and secure firm. However, owing to the prevailing ‘rat race and/or the pursuit of rank’ the corporate employer is able to exploit the worker, pushing him/her to over compete to stay in the job.

In some nations, minimum wages are so low, that employees cannot live on them. But against all logic, employers authorise huge pay rises and bonuses for senior executives. This outrages and causes bitter resentment among employees. It builds volcanic pressure for change.

In some quarters scientific management in the work place has become a dehumanized rat race.
…workers are more productive if you treat them as human beings, “The reaction to the Times piece shows that digital Taylorism is just as unpopular as its stopwatch-based predecessor. Critics make some powerful points. ‘Gobbetising’ knowledge jobs, measure everything, pushing people over their limit and constant peer review all have the negative effect innovation, pleasure, anxiety and distrustful. Indeed, some firms that graded their staff, including Microsoft, General Electric and Accenture concluded that it is counterproductive, and dropped it (126).

We need to look into current capitalism system, realise its weakness and short coming and do something effective enough to correct or change it.

Economics and class

Today’s capitalism evolved from English capitalism, which was hierarchical with a feudalist monarch at the pinnacle. Progressing down the pyramid, came the church, wealthy landlords, leaders of the armed forces, bureaucrats (the bourgeoisie) then at the bottom free workers and peasants.

These social structures matured with the industrial worker commanding considerable social and political bargaining power.

In the last three centuries the capitalism-based systems have changed profoundly, impacting on class composition and character.

Class identity features were simpler and somewhat different from the class definitions encountered today.

For example, bourgeoisie meant landlord, middleclass defined by economic and social status and more or less to associate with feudalist monarchy in the United Kingdom. The upper classes were identified with the aristocracy and royalty, with wealth playing a lesser role in in defining social class status.

“How did the bourgeoisie (literally dwellers in towns) originate out of the old medieval peasant class, in opposition to the medieval titled aristocracy (kings, dukes, knights). Did the bourgeoisie create capitalism or did capitalism create the bourgeoisie, according to Marx?“ (127)

Another way to see class is by the Max Weber class classifications, where emphasis is placed on the socio- economic spheres.

The three components of stratification in the Weber theory, comprises;

1) Class is a person's economic position, based on birth and individual achievement.

2) Status is one's social prestige or honour, which may or may not be influenced by class.

3) Power is one's ability to get one's way despite the resistance of others (128).

All of these classifications are better interpreted in less developed and less complex societies than those that exist today. Liberty, equality and freedom had limited exposure in these situations. Modern open education occurring, churches, convents, synagogue, temples, mosques  and royal sponsorship of high class schooling with just a very small number of privileged people involved, still persists in many developing nations.

Today, this situation has completely changed, in many countries the monarchy and religion are reduce or losing their role and influence, especially in countries like France, Germany, Italy, America, Brazil, Russia, India, China, Vietnam, South Africa, Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. In these countries the republic and secular systems, have replaced the monarch.

When the above definitions are applied to Webers times in Europe, a trend pursuing status and power, is revealed. This is the case in contemporary America and nascent republics of today.

But when the definitions are applied to developing nations, the social conditions emerging, will be more or less those resembling Europe, in the 19th and -20th centuries. These conditions will be coloured differently by culture, religion, character and era.

The progress of capitalism and degree of industrialisation, will be major factors influencing the emerging social conditions, in individual nations.

In these circumstances, the progress of capitalism and project investment, will depend on science, technology and their implementation, in prevailing industrial process. The development gap between developed and developing nations will be driven by the adequacy of science and technology in the national industrial process.

Class classification and change, then and now

Since ancient times, classes have always been influenced and dictated, by politics, economic and social development. Reviewed below is a snapshot of the evolution and progress of the class system;

The book argued that, Class should no longer be defined according to occupation, that social classes are now the result of three distinctive kinds of capital: economic capital (a person’s wealth and income); cultural capital (their tastes, interests and activities), and social capital (their social networks, friendships and associations).

The finding reveal that Britain class system has been fundamentally remade.

“Where there used to be longstanding differences between the middle and working classes, we have now moved towards a class order which is more hierarchical in differentiating the ‘wealth elite’ at the top from ‘the proletariat’ at the bottom, but which is more fuzzy and complex in its middle layers. We hope the book will open up debate about the meaning of class today and allow us to meaningfully confront the contemporary challenges inequalities in today’s society have created”.

Professor Fiona Devine, University of Manchester said: “The Great British Class Study reminds us that the class divisions of the early 20th century have been outdated notion. The old manual/non manual divide has long gone as has the hard division between the middle and working classes. The boundaries between these classes are now more porous.”

The old aristocratic upper middle class has been replaced with a business elite with very wealthy and high income which the overwhelming majority of the population could never can be achieved in their lifetime. At the other end of the spectrum, we can see a proletariat living on low pay and struggling to get by. The book shows that people’s chances in life remain very unequal. The challenge is we must do something about it (129).

“But today, new research conducted by social scientists in the UK have built a new model of class structures, in which citizens are divided into seven groups. This research takes into account variables such as one's social and cultural capital. How are these measured? The survey includes questions about whether social media is being used, whether a person attends a gym or plays sport, and the kinds of music they might enjoy.”

“This model reveals that 6% of Britons are in the elite, and 15% are on the other side of the spectrum, under the banner of the Proletariat, who have very little money, social, and cultural life.”

“…In Australia there’s far more mobility across those class systems, and income is no longer a key factor that defines it” (130).

The seven groups in detail are;

Elite: This is the most privileged class in Great Britain who have high levels of all three capitals. Their high amount of economic capital sets them apart from everyone else (6%).

Established middle class: Members of this class have high levels of all three capitals although not as high as the elite. They are a gregarious and culturally engaged class (25%).

Technical middle class: This is a new, small class with high economic capital but seem less culturally engaged. They have relatively few social contacts and so are less socially engaged (6%).

New affluent workers: This class has medium levels of economic capital and higher levels of cultural and social capital. They are a young and active group (15%).

Emergent service workers: This new class has low economic capital but has high levels of ‘emerging’ cultural capital and high social capital. This group are young and often found in urban areas. (19%)

Traditional working class: This class scores low on all forms of the three capitals although they are not the poorest group. The average age of this class is older than the others (14%).

Precariat: This is the most deprived class of all with low levels of economic, cultural and social capital. The everyday lives of members of this class are precarious (15%).

Twentieth-century middle-class and working-class stereotypes are out of date. Only 39% of participants fit into the established middle class and traditional working class categories (131).

“Historically, one of the most widely acknowledged aspects of American exceptionalism was our lack of class consciousness. Even Marx and Engels recognized it. This was egalitarianism American style.

Yes, America had rich people and poor people, but that didn’t mean that the rich were better than anyone else”. “Successful Americans stubbornly refused to accept the mantle of an upper class, typically presenting themselves to their fellow countrymen as regular guys. And they usually were, in the sense that most of them had grown up in modest circumstances, or even in poverty, and carried the habits and standards of their youths into their successful later lives.”

“America also retained a high degree of social and cultural heterogeneity in its communities. Tocqueville wrote of America in the 1830s as a place where “the more opulent citizens take great care not to stand aloof from the people.” That continued well into the 20th century, even in America’s elite neighborhoods.”

“While the new upper class was seceding from the mainstream, a new lower class was emerging from within the white working class, and it has played a key role in creating the environment in which Trumpism has flourished”.

“Then things started to change. For white working-class men in their 30s and 40s—what should be the prime decades for working and raising a family—participation in the labor force dropped from 96% in 1968 to 79% in 2015. Over that same period, the portion of these men who were married dropped from 86% to 52%. (The numbers for nonwhite working-class males show declines as well, though not as steep and not as continuous.). These are stunning changes, and they are visible across the country.” (132)

One massive change in the past affects today’s class formation, “In America. For instance, incomes at the top of the scale began pulling away from the rest quite soon after 1945. Yet household inequality—taking account of taxes and transfers—did not rise until what Mr. Atkinson calls the ‘Inequality Turn’ around 1980. Several factors contributed to this, including changes for women and work. After the Second World War, when female laborforce participation grew rapidly, high-earning men tended to marry low-earning women; the rising numbers of working women reduced household inequality. From the 1980s on, by contrast, men and women tended to marry those who earned like themselves—rich paired with rich; rising female participation in the workforce exacerbated inequality” (133).

According to Charles Murray,

According to three research methods about classes by Cliffs Notes, the report suggests that in the United States today;

“Approximately 15 to 20 per cent are in the lower class. The lower class is typified by poverty, homeless and unemployment, people of this class, few of whom have finished high school.”

“Thirty to 40 percent are in the working class. The working class are those minimally educated people who engage in ‘manual labour’ with little or no prestige. And or skilled workers in this class—carpenters, plumbers, and electricians—are often called blue collar workers.”

“Forty to 50 percent are in the middle class. White collar workers have more money than those below them on the ‘social ladder’... Made up of upper and lower middle class. They divide into two levels according to their level of wealth, education, and prestige.”

“One to three percent are in the rich, upper class. This class divides into two groups: lowerupper and upper-upper. The lower-upper class includes those with ‘new money,’ or money made from investments, business ventures, and so forth. The upper-upper class includes those aristocratic and ‘high-society’ families with ‘old money’ who have been rich for generations.” (134)

The US could be a place where the old world’s small fragment feudalists have very little or no influence on contemporary society. Further the US has her own strong religious influences. It shares many common interests and exhibits the new world’s orthodox capitalist phenomena.

An academic review of current publications reveals that:

“The ideological divides that characterised politics for much of the past 200 years have receded, and the old distinctions between left and right have become less meaningful. As the working classes have lost economic and political power, labour organisations and collectivistic ideologies have declined. Institutions that traditionally brought disparate individuals together, from trade unions to the church, have faded from public life. As a result, Europeans have begun to see themselves and their social affiliations in a different way. Increasingly, they define social solidarity not in political terms but rather in terms of ethnicity, culture or faith… The politics of ideology have given way to the politics of identity.” (135).

Likewise Professor Mike Savage reflects: “By the 90s, there was a feeling that class labels were no longer important, we were no longer obsessed by class… But the social and economic inequalities highlighted by the financial crisis have reinvigorated British people's obsession with class,”

In America, “It was never common for people to start at the bottom and work their way to the top.
Now it is close to impossible.

Research by Nitin Nohria, the dean of Harvard Business School, and his colleagues has shown how in the second half of the 20th century a corporate elite where family networks and religion mattered most was replaced by one whose members required an MBA or similar qualification from a business school.”

“More than 50 years ago Michael Young warned that the incipient meritocracy to which he had given a name could be as narrow and pernicious, in its way, as aristocracies of old. In America some academics and thinkers on the left are coming to similar conclusions. Lani Guinier of Harvard speaks for many when she rails against the ‘testocracy’ that now governs America. Once progressives saw academic testing as a way of breaking down old structures of privilege; there is now a growing sense that it simply serves to advantage those who have been schooled to excel in such situations. Heirs to Andrew Jackson on the right have their own worries about the self-perpetuation of an American elite, but no desire at all to use government as a leveller. Both sides can agree that the blending of merit and inheritance is un-American. Neither has plausible ideas for what to do about it.” (136)

There is another dimension where class evolved, changed fast and forcefully.

There are class surveys recently, which indicate a change in class, character and composition, occurred globally. There is a fast growing middle class. This could mean that a digitally qualified population will dominate the world, in addition increasing its market and consumption power share national and internationally. This would mean higher spending, consumption and more new products on the market. This could alter the economic and political power, would have positive and negative outcomes.

Class surveys, in the publication below has produced vital class change data, detailed below;

Research area: Global Development Outlook January 2010, the Emerging Middle Class in Developing Countries

DEV/DOC (2010)2, 28 © OECD 2010,
The Emerging Middle Class in Developing Countries
DEV/DOC (2010)2, 16 © OECD 2010

Table 1. The Global Middle Class, 2009: People and Spending

Number of People (millions and global share) Consumption (billions PPPUSD and global share)

North America 338 18% 5602 26%
Europe 664 36% 8138 38%
Central and South America 181 10% 1534 7%
Asia Pacific 525 28% 4952 23%
Sub-Saharan Africa 32 2% 256 1%
Middle East and North Africa 105 6% 796 4%
World 1845 100% 21278 100% (p.16)

Table 2. Numbers (millions) and Share (per cent) of the Global Middle Class

2009 2020 2030

North America 338 18% 333 10% 322 7%

Europe 664 36% 703 22% 680 14%

Central and South America 181 10% 251 8% 313 6%

Asia Pacific 525 28% 1740 54% 3228 66%

Sub-Saharan Africa 32 2% 57 2% 107 2%

Middle East and North Africa 105 6% 165 5% 234 5%

World 1845 100% 3249 100% 4884 100%

Equally striking is the growth in purchasing power of the middle class. Globally, demand from the middle class may grow from USD21 trillion to USD56 trillion by 2030. Again, over 80 per cent of the growth in demand comes from Asia. This shift in demand may well be disruptive of existing supply chains. The fact that Asian consumers may substitute for US consumers tells us simply that in numerical terms Asia could become large enough to offset the stagnant purchasing power most analysts see as likely in the developed world. It does not tell us anything about the nature of this demand in terms of what products will be consumed and where they will be made. But if the Asian middle class does rise, Asian savings may fall and redress current global imbalances to some degree. (p.28).

Table 3. Spending by the Global Middle Class, 2009 to 2030  (millions of 2005 PPP dollars)

                         2009          2020         2030
North America 5602 26% 5863 17% 5837 10%
Europe 8138 38% 10301 29% 11337 20%
Central and South America 1534 7% 2315 7% 3117 6%
Asia Pacific 4952 23% 14798 42% 32596 59%
Sub-Saharan Africa 256 1% 448 1% 827 1%
Middle East and North Africa 796 4% 1321 4% 1966 4%
World 21278 100% 35045 100% 55680 100%

Figure 7 illustrates the shift. In 2000, Asia (excluding Japan) only accounted for 10 per cent of the global middle class spending. By 2040, this could reach 40 per cent, and it could continue to rise to almost 60 per cent in the long-term. The steep increase in Asian demand, and the replacement of US demand by Asian demand, is clearly seen as a trend that accelerates in the coming decade. (p.28) (137).

The middleclass income is being set, at an average value of $3,650 to/and $36,500 on different middle classes in individual developing and developed nations (138).

Or according to organisations like the United Nations and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Middle class person is classified as a person who spends $10 in developing and $100 per day in developed countries.

That's when you have a disposable income and enough money to consume things like fridges, or think about buying a car.

As the UN suggests, the growth is being driven by industrialisation. The industrial revolution of the 19th Century transformed the economies of Britain, the US and Germany. The move from agrarian to industrial societies generated income rises that created the middle class.

Now it's the turn of emerging economies, particularly in Asia. In Indonesia, for instance, investment now exceeds 30% of GDP, a sign that there is more manufacturing (139).

From Mr Guy Ryder the head of International Labour Organisation (ILO) in Geneva, today

“…the middle class comprised more than 34 per cent of total employment in developing countries from 20 per cent in the 1990s.” (140)

“The Brookings Institution estimates that there are 1.8 billion in the middle class, which will grow to 3.2 billion by the end of the decade. Asia is almost entirely responsible for this growth. Its middle class is forecasted, to triple to 1.7 billion by 2020.”

“By 2030, Asia will be the home of three billion middle class people. It would be 10 times more than North America and five times more than Europe.”

“The United Nations describes it as a historic shift not seen for 150 years.” (141)

“Today the conflict is no longer between the working class and middle class; it is between a tiny elite and the great majority of citizens. This means that the crucial questions for future politics in the developed world will be how and when that majority develops a sense of common interest. The more current trends continue, the more pressure will build up to tackle inequality once again. The signs of such a stirring are already visible, and in time, the practical consequences will be as well.” (142)

The trend of times, is where the working class will regroup and find a real ally in the middle class. The working class will be brave enough to enter the digital world and organise.

Alternately, it will swell fast, with the middle class taking the lead. They will share a common concern over the lack of a socio–economic safety net and the need to create one.

They will be pressed by a desire to create a global community which is just, fair, equitable and peaceful for all.

A recent example is demonstrated by the US where the boundary between the working and middle classes is becoming porous with time. The working class and middle class are forming alliances for the fight back.

The Trans-Pacific-Partnership (TPP) in trade across pacific of 12 nations promoted by Barack Obama. The preparation and negotiations have been long and were held for more than six years, with the primary object, achieving progress.

In 13 June 2015, the president asked congress to grant the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), a newly created organisation equipped with presidential authority, to make lasting agreements which comprise trade pacts.

Only 28 out of 181 Democrats voted to endorse the president’s idea. They rejected a trade adjustment package of about one billion dollar, intended to compensate workers damaged by the proposed new trade pact. The final vote tally was 126-302. This effectively killed off the TPA deal which took long hours of hard work.

“The primary cause of failure, was the fear of Trade Unions and the vast majority of working Americans who suffered from the past trade deals and feared repetition.” (143)

“This is what was happening behind the success, Labour leaders and their rank and file feared that, whatever the overall benefits to the economy, the emerging deal would accelerate the loss of jobs for blue-collar work that pays well…”

“While a broad coalition of unions and liberal activists can claim credit for beating back the president’s favored legislation, the key to labor’s display of force in Congress, according to supporters and opponents of the trade deal, was the movement’s unusual cohesion across various sectors of the economy — including public employees and service workers…”

“Since March, according to the American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organisation (AFL-CIO), union members have held 650 events opposing the legislation. They have made about 160,000 phone calls to members of Congress and written more than 20,000 letters. The federation also produced digital ads, which have received more than 30 million views, aimed at several dozen members of Congress.” (144)

From being driven by economics and a blend of social and culture, geographic and globalisation, progress and expansion are now driven by the science and technology of the Digital Revolution.

The movement is international, embracing a variety of nations like Western Christian nations, the Eastern European, Islamic, Middle Eastern, Africa, Latin America, Asia, East Asia, Southeast and South Asia nations. It appears to be immune to differences.  What they all share is, the prolonged inequality. This must be tackled.

Power and influence is now shifting to the developing nations. It is generating pressure against developed nations and has been escalating rapidly, with a voice in many international forums. The era of burgeoning alliances between Cyber Kids’ classes of other working people, is becoming a reality.

No doubt, the class issue still exists. However it has adjusted and adapted considerably. Progress in the future world, will depend on how the players adapt to the times and technology and advance.

The economics of developing nations

All nations will not enter the industrial capitalist system at the same time and same level of development. The world has many nations that are immature, under developed, in decline and handicapped by a variety of socio-economic issues.

Today classification of the world, falls into the basic categories of;

Industrialist capitalist developed nations.

Emerging capitalist/feudalist developing economies nations.

Semi feudalist largely ‘agrarian’ agriculture based developing nations.

Mixture of the last two categories with agrarian, semi feudalistic, tribal and indigenous developing nations.

Actually, all the developing nations have followed the footsteps of developed nations. Their progress has been dependent on how they implement industrialisation and manage a working balance of the influencing factors. These factors range from social, historical, geographical and political factors as well as economic, human capital, time and circumstance.

Successful implementation depends on securing a working balance of each major component.

Trade is one of the most important economic activities. The primary indicator is the ability to accumulate wealth, progress and survive.

Trade is the fulfillment of the desire of two parties to exchange of what they have (goods and service), with each acquiring what they want, by mutual agreement.

Trade is a kind of human dialectic on evolutionary interaction and cooperation realm.

Trade is human’s most powerful tool to secure progress and survival on this planet.

Trade is an exchange of included science, all knowledge, ‘model’ experience, 'humanity' civilisation can be 'trade' copy and exchange in world scale.

Trade in capitalist terms is a hunt for profitable activity influenced by political manipulation and domination.

Trade can be win/win by both sides or dominated by one side.

Trade embraces human advancement and survival.

Trade offer the opportunity to people living in hot, warm or cold weather climates to exchange their agriculture, pasture, seafood products that not available for them.

Trade is human race’s barrier destroyer.

Trade is an international borderline eraser.

Trade could produce rewards such as peace and prosperity.

Trade can be politics – there is no free ‘market’ trade.

In a globalised world trade (large consumer and market size) can become the developing nation’s tool against a developed nation’s domination.

In the case of developing nations, a plentiful of labour force which is cheap, supported by ample natural resources, could form a powerful bargaining tool.

In the case of developed nations, the capitalist system mainly concerns itself with market expansion and maximisation of profit. This is achieved by domination which is largely unjust and unfair. There are no moral rights and or concerns regarding the survival of others.

It is apparent from history that Western powers have used Gunboat Diplomacy largely to open up new markets. In the past decades, trade has also been euphemistically referred to as the Washington Consensus.

The Washington Consensus is a largely a political tool which is quite often destructive to developing nations.

Developing nations must first nurture industries, which takes time, effort and governmental support.

This burden very often has to compete with the developed nations’ pursuit of success and survival as dominant stakeholders.

Developing nations collectively constructing an economic structure and engines of growth, is a priority. This usually takes decade or decades or longer. The reality is that certain industries need to be in government/public hands in order to make them function. They often need to be heavily subsidised.

A successful economic structure requires that practice. Some industries will fail due to the inability of government to manage and support. In contrast, absolute government control is toxic and will kill industrial progress. Every nation will develop a system suitable to itself, meeting local criteria.

There are many examples demonstrating the validity of this observation, particularly in South America.

The Central and South American economic crisis of the 1980s arose from the US orthodox economic ideology applied under the Washington Consensus banner. It promised corporate deregulation, financial liberalisation, business privatisation and world labour standards. The Washington Consensus banner was to enshrine International Monetary Fund (IMF) and economic management utilising World Bank (WB) principles to produce effective solutions.

Actually, it was a repeat of neo-liberal multi- national corporation hegemony, which took firm control and bankrupted Latin American national economies.

Brazilian Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) noted,

“…the wave of privatisations that had swept Latin America in the 1980s and 1990s-as governments sold off everything from airlines and energy producers to utility providers that left hundreds of millions of citizens stranded, too poor to participate in the expanding market economies.” (145)

There are cultural and traditional values and norms behind why communities choose to cling to their own way,

In 1926 Robert Redfield, an anthropologist from the University of Chicago who did much to introduce the study of modernisation, settled himself in Tepoztlán, a town 50km south of Mexico City, for fieldwork.

He described “a gap between ‘los correctos’ (the correct), the local elite who were gradually absorbing city ways, and ‘los tontos’ (the fools) who stuck with old traditions… The tontos were removed from modernity not merely by the walk to the town centre, but by their habits of mind”

Redfield found the bulk of the population living in the “Mexico of changarros (makeshift food stands), informal markets, cash-only family firms, peasant farmers and indigenous communities, as well as a vicious underworld. It is where half the population remains poor, on government figures, despite the promise of NAFTA, which came into force in 1994 (see chart)”

“David Robichaux, of Mexico’s Iberoamerican University, says that this part of Mexico is not limited to the 7 million or so speakers of indigenous languages. He reckons tens of millions of mestizo (mixed-race) Mexicans share family and community values that are as important to them as notions of modernization and progress… rather than reinvesting to improve their businesses’ efficiency, they may prefer to splash out on village fiestas and family gatherings… The romantic notions of the México profundo are often peddled by interest groups that benefit from this status quo, such as unions and old-fashioned political bosses with power bases in peasant communities.”

In follow-up to ‘Why Nations Fail’, a book which he wrote with Daron Acemoglu—James Robinson of Harvard looks at some of these failures and policy biases. He examines the way they affect the south of the country, which is poorer, more unequal and less urbanized:

“In colonial Mexico indigenous groups were exploited to benefit a small elite; in the latter two-thirds of the 20th century, the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) controlled a one-party state that left the south in the hands of local barons,”

On the other hand the CNTE, a rebel teachers’ union “used mob tactics across southern Mexico to thwart reforms. In Oaxaca the union’s Section 22 chapter promotes its own education agenda based around indigenous values such as communal work and village fiestas. It paralyzed schools for months in a bid to prevent exam systems being introduced for its members.” (146)

When the Asian economic crisis hit Thailand in 1997, it spread to other East/Southeast Asian nations. The Thai financial system was in the state of collapse; “7,000 companies disappeared. Some 55,000 debt and bankruptcy suits went before the courts. Eight banks and around 80 financial firms vanished. A few of the big corporate conglomerates were crippled. Others had to downsize and sell off assets.” (147)

The IMF was called to fix the Thai financial problem. It recommended a remedy, similar, to that applied elsewhere in the world. The IMF remedy demanded financial liberalisation. Thailand’s failed banks and financial investment companies (more than 70) were told to show their books and were compelled to internationally auction their assets as a fraction of their true value.

When this process was conducted many Thai firms were facing bankruptcy with an extremely weak financial situation facing the country. Thai former deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Professor Veerapong Ramangkura, asked Professor Stanley Fisher deputy head of the IMF to read and review the IMF - Thai government draft agreement, on the solution to the crisis.

The answer was ‘I am too busy and have no time to read it…it will be alright if Thailand used the standard IMF remedy, used around the world.’ This begs the question, as to how a universal/standard remedy could work with different nations with differing cultures and economic structures?, The Deputy PM argued with the IMF, but failed to get a satisfactory response (148).

Facing a crippling economic crisis, Thailand was compelled to accept the financial bailout loan, with its exacting terms and conditions set by IMF. The result was that that many foreign conglomerates bought into the Thai financial sector at bargain prices.

A comparable situation, has evolved and affected the socio political fabric in South and Central America where multi- national corporations took firm control and bankrupted the Latin America nations’ economies in the 1980s and 1990s.

Dr Barry Sterland who was two years in Washington on the IMF board, currently, appointed as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Australia Prime Minister and Cabinet indicated, Australia help Thailand resist US demands for hard-line austerity measures that would have made the crisis worse.

The region has bad memories of IMF involvement in the Asian financial crisis, “The IMF package involved policy mistakes that worsened the economic disruption and was overly intrusive.” (149)
Let’s see how IMF makes another blunder,

“The International Monetary Fund’s top staff misled their own board, made a series of calamitous misjudgements in Greece, became euphoric cheerleaders for the euro project, ignored warning signs of impending crisis, and collectively failed to grasp an elemental concept of currency theory… The three main bailouts for Greece, Portugal and Ireland were unprecedented in scale and character. The trio were each allowed to borrow over 2,000pc of their allocated quota – more than three times the normal limit – and accounted for 80pc of all lending by the fund between 2011 and 2014.” (150)

The conclusion and result is clear. Economic growth was in the hands of a very few MultiNational Corporations (MNCs). Local businesses crumbled in the face of open competition with the MNCs. The MNCs demanded the dismantling of social protection; shrinking of welfare and weakening the state. MNCs used tax avoidance and reigned supreme (151).

The US treatment of Thailand during the economic crisis was dismal and disappointing,

In a comparable situation, Thailand was on the brink of economic collapse, in the Asian Economic Crisis of 1997. As the Thai currency (Bhat) depreciated to half its value, driven down by hedge funds, the US government did nothing. A complaint addressed directly to the then president Bill Clinton by a Thai official got the response, that he could do nothing, saying something along the lines that it was just the way the system worked.

But when a similar situation erupted in the US with the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, the US government mended the investment rules to control the hedge funds business straight away. In particular short selling by hedge funds and banks was prohibited. Banks were barred from using their capital for speculative deals.

That was not the US stand during the Argentina economic crisis in 1999-2002 that caused the government to default on $82 billion sovereign bonds (debts). Hedge funds bought the credit/debts at the lowest price value, around 15 cent of the real value, and held Argentina to ransom, by demanding the debtor (the Argentina government) pay at the highest peak bonds value price. The dispute with hedge funds dragged on despite the IMF intervening on sovereign debt restructuring and 93% of creditors accepting new bonds worth one third of the original 2005 and 2010 settlements. Few hedge funds companies refused to take the offer. US hedge fund NML Capital Limited registered in the Cayman Islands tax haven who having paid $49 million in the secondary market for bonds worth $837 million by 2014 took the dispute to the US New York Supreme Court and won. No wonder Argentina’s Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner called hedge funds vultures (152).

She rejected the US court ruling in favour of NML Capital Ltd, declaring “Argentina has no reason to submit to this kind of extortion.” (153)

For centuries, immigrants from the poorer nations were strictly controlled and manipulated by rich and powerful nations. When they want labour or require high quality, skilled workers or scientist and engineers, they will let them in. At such times they will offer high salaries, good living conditions and special treatment. In some cases foreign millionaires are attracted in with generous offers. This results in millions of high skilled professionals being lost by developing nation’s citizen to developed nations. This is a major loss to developing nations, when they embark on large Infrastructure and development projects (154).

 “Their ‘brain drain’ migration’s destination country largely are the US, Canada or other OECD nations. It has been a contentious issue in the North and South debate ever since (p 4).

Available statistic of the immigrate to the US 1990 report at table 1, by selective statistic sample from 62 developing country from around the world show as follow,

China 404,579, Philippine 328, 454, India 304,030, Egypt 53, 261, Senegal 1,370, Zimbabwe 3,161, Tunisia 2,816, Jamaica 159, 913, Uruguay 15,716, El Salvador 263,625, Ecuador 89,336, Guatemala 127,346 and Dominican Republic 187,871 (15)”.


The number of so called ‘Brain Drain’ from developing country, overwhelming most are well train, good educate, and low and medium skills people. In these world’s scale wave and wave of ‘brain drain’ who migrated to the rich developed country have been persisted and increased since before and after World War II. Main reason is, due to rich and developed country heavily demanded, then lure them to migrate by offer far higher income and never dream of better living condition. The country in the forefront of this ‘plundering’ snatch other poor nation of human capital, where the amount of resource put forward of such investment and training of them are required long time and large resource spending. For the developing nation where resource and capital are so scarce, the result is ‘critical’ heavy damage to their country development ability, it one of the main cause of poor, conflict prone, war or fail ‘state’ system.

How Big Is Brain Drain?, IMF Working Paper, William J. Carrington and Enrica Detragiache, July 1998, pp. 4, 15

It is also one of the reasons why many developing nations’ have failed economic and developmental projects.

Indigenous society is more linking to developing nation than the developed nation in the world affairs

It is estimated that there are more than 370 million indigenous people spread across 70 countries worldwide. Practicing unique traditions, they retain social, cultural, economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant societies in which they live.

“Spread across the world from the Arctic to the South Pacific, they are the descendants - according to a common definition - of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived. The new arrivals later became dominant through conquest, occupation, settlement or other means… Indigenous peoples often have much in common with other neglected segments of societies, i.e. lack of political representation and participation, economic marginalisation and poverty, lack of access to social services and discrimination. Despite their cultural differences, the diverse indigenous peoples share common problems also related to the protection of their rights. They strive for recognition of their identities, their ways of life and their right to traditional lands, territories and natural resources… They possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources” (155).

Experts on the indigenous issue suggested; ‘People have this romanticized view that isolated tribes have chosen to keep away from the modern, evil world,’ says Kim Hill, an anthropologist at Arizona State University. But when Hill and others interview people who recently came out of isolation, the same story emerges time and time again: they were interested in making contact with the outside world, but they were too afraid to do so. As Hill puts it: ‘There is no such thing as a group that remains in isolation because they think it’s cool to not have contact with anyone else on the planet.’

And ‘In 1987, Sydney Possuelo – then head of Funai’s Department of Unknown Tribes – decided that the current way of doing things was unacceptable. After seeing tribe after tribe demolished by disease, he concluded that isolated people should not be contacted at all. Instead, natural reserves should be placed aside for them to live on, and any contact attempts should be left up to them to initiate.’ ‘Isolated people do not manifest among us – they don’t ask anything of us – they live and die mostly without our knowledge’ he says. When we do contact them, he says, they too often share a common fate: ‘desecration, disease and death.’ (156)

We need to make right conclusions and judgments on how we should live side by side together on this planet, with mutual respect. All beings can make positive and negative contributions to the planet. There are major things that all indigenous peoples around the world share in common. Firstly, they are fiercely independent. Secondly, their lives are governed by the sun, moon and seasons and associated traditions and natural impose experience. Thirdly, they are mostly accustomed to a social structure which many are strictly hierarchical and optimizes community living. Fourth, they have very simple healthcare requirements and healing knowledge. This is based on natural experience and empirically acquired information. Fifth they are fierce guardians of territory. Sixth, they almost completely submit and adapt to surrounding environments. Seven, they have many superstitions and beliefs.

Other features of their lives are listed below;

Some indigenous people are accustomed to slash and burn farming, mobile farming on arid land dependant on goat and cattle grazing and commercial narcotic production. They often practice shaman, hoodoo, black magic, holy spirit of god-goddess or ghost and some involve animal sacrifice.

Living in close proximity has resulted in a high degree of harmful inbreeding. In other cases, forced child marriage, child labour, modern slavery, excessive hunting characterise indigenous societies.

They should not be blamed or penalised for holding different beliefs and practice. But many of the more harmful practices governments should help persuasively adjust or abandon.

Of course, self-determination and free will must equally apply to all, especially the world’s indigenous people. They must have they choice and getting full respect from the rest of us: First, live isolate from other. Second, if they choose to join the outside world, they will have the full support and assistant of what they need.

In fact, indigenous people plight are closer link to developing nation. This include, social, economic and interrelate relationship.

Brazil success in scientific agriculture

History tells us that colonialism aims to access and control natural resources, labour, markets and a nation’s body politic. A nation achieving independence is then subject to the test of good economic management. One example is Brazil:

“There was a huge land mass the size of England, France and Germany combined in the north western corner of Brazil call Cerrado (Brazil Savanah)… Thirty years ago, the land was a swamp, shrub, poor grassland, acidic and of no farming value. The American father of Green Revolution Norman Borlaug once told New York Times that nobody thought these soils were ever going to be productive.  (But) The Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation or Embrapa set up by the then government in 1973 that did four things to change all of that.” (157)

“First, it poured industrial quantities of lime (pulverised limestone or chalk) onto the soil to reduce levels of acidity. This consisted of 14-16 and 25 million tonnes each year up to 20032004. Embrapa bred varieties of bacterium that help fix nitrogen in legumes, reducing the need for fertilizers. Second, Embrapa went to Africa and brought back grass called brachiaria, cross bred it with Brazil native grass, to produce a grass which served as grass feed, many multiples times more than native grass. This drove the enormous expansion of Brazil’s beef herd. Thirty years ago it took Brazil four years to raise a bull for slaughter. Now the average time is 18-20 months. Third, Embrapa turned soya beans into tropical crops which were confined in the past to temperate climates only by cross breeding. This has also shortened the harvesting period and makes it possible to harvest twice a year and most of all increases much more yields. Fourth, Embrapa has pioneered and encouraged farmers to do “no-till” agriculture, in which the soil is not ploughed nor the crop harvested at the ground level. The technic has retained more nutrients in the soil.”

“This optimisation of Brazilian agricultural productivity, has made Brazil a world leader, contributing to the feeding the hunger ridden parts of the world population. In 2009 the United States Department of Agriculture reported; Brazil is the world number one in the production of orange juice, sugar, chickens, coffee, beef, number two in soya beans, maize, number four in cotton and pork.” (158)

Brazilian and African governments, with the relevant business sectors have used the model improve African agricultural production. To be successful they had to guard against corruption and optimise the output gained from land leases.

One former president of Nigeria and member of Africa Progress Panel, chaired by Kofi Annan (former UN General Secretary) wrote to CNN, about how Africa could feed the world.  Between 2000 to 2011, Africa saw an estimated 948 land deals, covering 124 million hectares-an area larger than France, Germany, and the United Kingdom combined (159).

Aquaculture and the world food supply

“World food supply is always an important issue for us all. The good news is, a ‘blue revolution’ in aquaculture has expanded about 14 fold since 1980, according to a report by Joel K. Bourne, Jr in National Geographic. This healthy food industry produced 70 million tons in 2012, exceeding beef production for the first time and accounting for nearly half of all fish and shellfish consumed on Earth. For the first time aquaculture produced fish now accounts for 70 % fish product supply and almost 90% of the world’s fish oil. Further, 47% of the world fish production is farmed. Most of the growth is in Asia, home to 90% of the fish farms. The late comer Africa has been very keen to emulate Asia.”

“The aquaculture is relatively clean. It produces very little pollution. Its Return On Investment (ROI) is much more when compared to feed land animal and other farming…  cattle need 6.8 pounds of feed to produce one pound of body mass, pigs need 2.9 pounds, chickens need 1.7 pounds and fish needs 1.1 pounds.”

“The Chinese produce 42 million tons of fresh water fish farming a year. They raise pigs, ducks, and with vegetables fertilised with the pig/duck manure.  Ponds produce algae grazed by the carp. They farm cram, shellfish to eat and to clean fish farm water. Fish (or prawn) is farmed in paddy fields to increases both rice yields and fish yields. At the same time, they improve their farming techniques, by replacing 100% fish meal with 10% fishmeal or even 100% vegetarian diets such as, soya beans and other grains and krill.”

“Rick Barrows a US Department of Agriculture lab in Bozeman, Montana says, “We’ve been feeding mostly vegetarian diets to rainbow trout for 12 years now. Aquaculture could get out of fish meal today if it wanted to.”

The Aquaculture Industry, also invents and develops new farming products, by extracting from algae plants, the nutrient omega-3. Another area of active research, as reported by Stanford’s Rosamond Naylor says “would be to genetically modifying canola oil to produce high levels of omega-3.”

“Seaweed is five billion dollar business in East Asia. Farmers plant difference species of kelp that can grow up to five inches a day on the sea floor. The product can be supplied to the market fresh and frozen, a ‘virtuous’ vegetable high in nutrition with no need of arable land, water, fertilizer and pesticides.” (160)

Africa and the Global South

The Global South is being drained of resources by the rest of the world and it is losing far more each year than it gains. Africa alone loses $192 billion each year to the rest of the world. This is mainly in profits made by foreign companies, tax dodging and the costs of adapting to climate change. Whilst rich countries often talk about the aid their countries give to Africa, this is in fact less than $30 billion each year. Even when you add this to foreign investment, remittances and other resources that flow into the continent, Africa still suffers an overall loss of $58 billion every year. The idea that we are aiding Africa is flawed; it is Africa that is aiding the rest of the world (161).

The problem is compounded by the fact that over half of the developed nation food is wasted, and we use food stuff to produce biofuel.

In the past couple of decades, who could imagine that the forgotten continent could emulate the emerging economies and industrialise. The African Union assists with development and is modelled on the EU. Today Africa’s economic has grown steadily. Its collective GDP rose to a 4.9% annual rate between 2000 to 2008. Several countries halted their deadly conflicts, policy makers reduced inflation and cut budget deficits.  They lowered trade barriers, cut taxes, privatised [certain] companies and liberalised many sectors including banking. The African telecommunications Industry, grew fast. Up to 316 million people have signed up for mobile phones since 2000. In Africa, it is a vital tool, for conducting business and economic activities.  In this day 40% of Africans live in the cities. Urbanisation in Africa is creating jobs, boosting productivity and lifting incomes. The house hold income is projected to grow by 50% over the next 10 years. The African continent has 60% of the world’s uncultivated arable land and with low crop yields (162).

The African continent has 55 nations. All except Morocco is an African Union member. In the past decade, Africa became one of the world’s fastest developing and urbanising continents. Africa is now home to six of the world’s 10 fastest growing economies, IMF reported that many Africa countries are reducing their dependence on extracting natural resources (2014).

Economic development is not spread uniformly however, although there are 54 countries in Africa, 80 percent of Africa’s GDP is concentrated in just 11 markets. Among those 11 are some of the fastest growing economies, which include Nigeria, Egypt and Kenya. When deciding where to focus investment and resources, business will not only want to focus on those top 11,  but also consider which markets from the next tier are growing the fastest. Those are likely to include Ethiopia, Uganda and Mozambique (Figure 6) (163).

“Africa’s growth rate continues to rise, with sub-Saharan Africa’s 2013 growth rate of 4.7 per cent set to increase to 5.2 per cent this year. This is well above the developing country average of 3.9 per cent. In the past ten years, African countries have experienced unprecedented growth rates, with seven of the top 10 fastest growing economies in the world being those of key African countries this year.”

“Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique, Ghana, Republic of the Congo, Zambia and Nigeria, have all seen levels of economic growth, recently, that have forced foreign investors to turn away from their traditional investments, and start looking towards opportunities in the African continent.” (164)

“With digital technology, today’s African leaders have a powerful tool they can deploy to help clear away the primary obstacle to progress: the profound isolation of the vast majority of smallholder farmers. Until now, it has been very hard to get information to or from smallholders, preventing their efficient integration into the broader economy. But mobile communications can shatter this isolation and enable the creation of a new food system suited to contemporary needs. If farsighted leaders seize this opportunity, they can transform African agriculture from a symbol of poverty and backwardness into a powerful engine of economic and social development… The new African food system should be built around the idea that agriculture is about more than producing calories; it is about changing society. Its five components should be valuing the smallholder farmer, empowering women, focusing on the quality as well as the quantity of food, creating a thriving rural economy.” Mobile technology can help on all these fronts.

“Giving women cell phones allows them to transact business directly, without mediators; open bank accounts only they can access; receive information and training that local men might not support; and get market prices in real time in order to negotiate effectively with potential buyers.”

“As for food quality, only now is the true impact of malnutrition on poor countries beginning to be understood. It is an underlying cause of almost half of all the deaths of children under five around the world and leaves tens of millions more children, cognitively or physically impaired for the rest of their lives.”

“Digital technology can help advance all these principles simultaneously. It makes connections possible, transfers information instantaneously, and can help build virtual communities even among widely separated and remotely located individuals and communities.”

Some appropriate digital applications are already in use, and more are in development. In 2014, for example, “Ethiopia’s Agricultural Transformation Agency launched an agricultural hot line, and it has already logged almost 6.5 million calls. It also sends text messages and automated calls containing up-to-date agronomic information to 500,000 users. The agency is also developing the Ethiopian Soil Information System, or Ethos’s, a digital soil map analyzing the country’s soils.” (165)

One thing we must be clear about – food shortages and starvation are man made and could be eliminated by advanced knowledge. Developed nations monopolize, price control and hold back technology so as to take advantage the developing nations.

“An exact tally of food waste is impossible, so to calculate these numbers the Potsdam team used a proxy: food surplus, or the difference between the amount of food a country produces or imports for consumption and the total calories its populace requires. They ran the numbers for 169 countries (98 percent of the world's population) and calculated that in 2010—the year with the most recent data available—20 percent more food was available globally than what the human population needed. Overall, the higher a country's standard of living, the more food it wasted. The results were published in Environmental Science & Technology.” (166)

Elimination of the inequality demands different strategies in developed and developing nations.
A developed nation, with a capitalist society has high capacity, tools, experience and knowledge as well as a social and economic environment capable of in addressing reform.  But most choose not to.
A developing nation’s inequality problem stems from the remnants of feudalism, religious traditions of old, out dated social values and political structures. A large majority of the developing nations will not escape from these traps, but more are embracing the right reform strategy, to move forward. Advances will generally improve faster through constructive globalisation.

The evolutionary rule is inequality, whether in developed or developing nations needs to be addressed. Nations neglect the inequality issue at their own peril. Adverse economic developments, have mushroomed in many nations from the US, UK and many developing nations. It is imperative that inequality must be constantly monitored and acted upon, in order to secure a healthy economy.

Where is the future world economic heading?

Of course, the developed nations in the North of the planet and those in the developing South, have had an uneasy relationship, which is based on an economic imbalance. It is evident, that orthodox capitalism, has passed by its prime time and highly constructive period. Countries need to reduce feudalism and orthodox capitalism, entwined in their social fabric, in order to progress.

The processing time in evolving economies progressing towards industrialisation has dropped to around 30-60 years and could be shorter. By contrast to the British, the US and Japanese timeframes were around 300 years, 200 years and 130 years, respectively.

The current pyramid of power accentuates inequality and imbalance in societies, leading to conflicts and wars. The source of power is the control over knowledge, natural resources, labour, market and wealth.

All governments in the world face a critical choice. They have to decide if regulation will benefit all society or just a few selected groups. Will selective rational regulation be politically acceptable?
We live in an age of electricity, washing machines, microwave ovens, air conditioning, instant running water, gas and electric cookers and the contraceptive pill amongst other inventions. These inventions have improved our productivity and quality of living.

House hold work, has become less labour intensive and liberated many, particularly women, who can take on productive work outside their home. This also has generated wages which contribute to household income and wealth.

In developed nations, work, education, family planning, has enhanced the status of women. By comparison their unfortunate cousins in many developing nations, are handicapped by essential labour intensive activity in their home. Household activities such as getting water, gathering firewood, cooking, washing, each could need hour or hours to complete. Child bearing and caring, feeding time, education and so on demands endless time and attention. Owing to these demands, the luxuries of free time, freedom and liberty of choice are nonexistent. This situation can be rectified by appropriate adaptation, depending on the environment and culture.

New emerging economies can industrialise quickly by picking the successful industrialise models of developed nations and avoiding their mistakes and failures. Not all developing nations need to develop heavy industry and labour intensive manufacture in the current age of specialisation. They can be bypass heavy, polluted industry and take a short cut to less labour intensive industries. They could focus on pollution free service, or advance tech industries and secure better economic rewards. This could also lead to sustainable development.

Humans can pursue a powerful network of Constructive Globalisation Development (CGD) to reach One World, where different nations focus on different specialisations and exchange relevant goods and services. This will require specific planning by expert, zoning of the planet. It eliminates the need to imitate the UK and other developed nations, from start to finish, in order to achieve quality living standards with healthy GDP. This has the advantages of reducing pollution, achieving efficient productivity and producing good resource utilisation. Further it will impact all facets of human activity such as transportation, communication, construction and so forth. This method of planned development, will eliminate the waste associated with blind development.

Appropriate planned development, enables the identification of a working formula for each nation based on its society, culture, geography, economic and national make up. International interaction, cooperation and planned development facilitates productive networking between nations.

Professor Ross Garnaut, an Australian economist loosely breaks the world up into the top billion, the middle half which includes India and Indonesia and the bottom billion ‘those who haven't yet got onto the escalator of modern economic development’. These are largely in sub-Saharan Africa and some of Australia's island neighbours.

Australia sits in the top billion where the greatest challenges lie because of low productivity growth and low business investment.

Garnaut is relatively bullish on the middle half, but worries that unless the world changes course, the bottom billion could be the largest group by the end of the century.

“[Garnaut] suggests the best way to change course would include higher business investment and involve higher new exports, lower exchange rates and deliberate global policies to channel investment into the middle half. If we did do this we would see structural change in the middle and bottom billion. It would be a pretty good world for the globalisation of the economy, for the maintenance of democratic politics and would put downward pressure on income distribution in the developed world..”

Speaking at the Commonwealth Bank's recent Global Markets Conference, Garnaut said:

”…the basic contradictions between capitalism and democracy are becoming more apparent and the 21st century could see some of the biggest changes in modern economic history.” (167)

The Global North rich nations’ economic is in crisis prone mode, and need a big reform.

The head of the world's largest hedge fund, Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates, says the economy was not delivering prosperity to the bottom 60 per cent of income earners and this had helped hoist the ‘populist’ and ‘strong’ Donald Trump into power.

"I think as a manager, over the longer term, I'm worried more about the wealth and social gap and the conflicts that we're going to have with each other," he said at an investment conference in New York.
Australian Andrew Liveris, executive chairman of the recently-merged US chemical multinational DowDuPont, said a failure to address widening income inequality and an inadequate training of workers for digital disruption in the labour market had ‘come home to roost’.

"We have many, many open jobs but not the skills to fill them," Mr Liveris told The Australian Financial Review on the sidelines of the CNBC Institutional Investor Delivering Alpha conference.

"That means we have employment but it's ‘fake economics’ because the people getting employed are in service jobs, contractor jobs with no benefits and no real income growth.”

"It's almost a failure of Western democracies and capitalism," he said (168).

Obstacles to growth and of a close cooperation to deal with economic problem under Digital Revolution

According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, global public debt reached $50.6 trillion in
2013, compared with just $22 trillion in 2003. Much of the debt growth was due to (western) developed governments borrowing huge sums to spend and boost economic growth in response to the economic slowdown.

Professor Robert Gordon is an economist from University of Chicago. He worked for three decades at the US National Bureau of Economic Research Centre. Professor Gordon is pessimistic about the initial ideas, which drove invention and productivity. He maintains that more recent investments like the internet by themselves do not pack the same punch as they did at the beginning. However, antibiotics, telemedicine and other 20th century inventions when coupled with the internet, generate huge boosts to productivity, in addition to spawning new industries.

There are three (3) major obstacles, confronting humans in the 21st Century. They are;

1) Failure of the Internet by itself to pack the same punch, as it did in its infancy as a basic communication medium.

2) Americans and people the world over are getting older.

3) Growing income inequality.

The three combined obstacles above, are the cause of slow growth. Professor Larry Summers, a former economic adviser to Barack Obama, told the IMF 2013 meeting, that the US and other advanced economies faced a prolonged period of extreme slow growth known as secular stagnation (169).

So, it is certain that world economic future, especially in the US and EU, is not rosy. Spin doctors efforts are not going to brighten the future in the real world. It is vital that we identify the root cause of the problem of slow growth and fix it.

“The US has developed a Latin American-style income distribution. Its politics has grown infested with Latin American-style populists, of the left and the right… How should those in the centre respond? Successful politicians understand that the people need to feel their concerns will be taken into account, that they and their children will enjoy the prospect of a better life and that they will continue to have a measure of economic security. Above all, they need once again to trust the competence and decency of economic and political elites.” (170)

Let’s listen to top economist Professor Joseph Stiglitz. His data showed the wealth of the top one percent had increased from eight to 18 percent in the US during the 40 years to 2012.  In Australia it had increased by about a third to 8 per cent, however Australia’s inequality may have accelerated since then as a result of the housing boom.

The trend Stiglitz identified was that male workers had not done very well because the jobs held by men had become scarce:

“The growing number of angry white men was also linked to rising death rates among white males because of suicide, drug abuse and alcoholism, he said. And this is where Stiglitz drew his comparison with the Soviet Union, which was beset by income stagnation and rising death rates during its twilight years”.

The inherent inequality found in the US economy meant that ‘minor tweaks’ were not the solution.

“The global economy is headed for an extended period of stagnation unless we change the system”, according to Stiglitz, who argues that co-op businesses generated “greater trust and loyalty”, and this could lead to faster economic growth.

“The rules of the game are being set by those who are at the table, for their own interest, so it’s very important to have the co-op movement there as a reminder to big corporations about the dangers of excessive selfishness — and to keep the idea that there are alternative forms of organisation that ought to be discussed, that isn’t just the issue of government versus private sector.” (171)

The power of technology, globalisation and regulation has hugely advanced the economy in wider world scale. The success is not just limited to technology and innovation but also improved services, free offers, cut throat price wars wider scale grouping and networking. It is largely good news for developing nations and is the future trend that could spread into all industries. In a short time this could lead to a new and global shared economy, with little or without monopolies.

Then come the Digital Revolution. After Internet technology has evolving into WDWN. They are changing humanity way of being and forever.

The iPhone, released a decade ago this month, has profoundly changed all humans engaging their daily lives.

Personal computer in the 1980s, Apple’s gadget, and the smartphone boom that followed, gave rise to whole new industries, make old tool obsolete and created new business models.

Today iPhone has multifunctioning function and replace the old tools: from email and calendar to maps and calculators.

Entrepreneurial coders and upstart businesses could now reach consumers directly, creating new modes of shopping, entertainment, travel and more. App stores today offer an estimated 3.5 million to 3.6 million choices, including games, fitness programs, shopping and dating.

Smartphones has caused Eastman Kodak to go under. And most photos taken today aren’t printed and kept but tweeted, messaged or posted.

From the days of the phonograph, people have owned music, the smartphone accelerated a move away from that concept whether vinyl records, compact discs or downloads from iTunes. To effectively renting music from subscription services such as Spotify and Apple Music. And already, developed nations have more active smartphone than people and the service cost are kept low via persistent competition (172).

“In the industrial era companies used economies of scale to become giants: the more a steel company could produce, the more it could cut its unit cost, driving its smaller competitors to the wall, and the more money it had to invest in research, marketing and distribution. The same applied to any other principle for the virtual age by shifting their attention from the supply side (production efficiencies) to the demand side (network effects). Just as the old industrial giants used technological innovations to reduce their costs, the new tech giants use technological innovations to expand their networks.” (173)

“Network effects have always been powerful engines of growth: not only is success selfreinforcing but it follows the law of increasing returns. Some network companies even pay people to become customers in order to achieve scale...”
The cut throat competition, innovation have produce winner and loser, super stars companies like Nokia, BlackBerry, Blockbuster, Borders, Baring, Motorola and other are become history either much downsize, terminate or sale to the other. In the hardly imagination circumstance.

“Apple’s iPhones and iPads have become people’s constant companions because they are portable miracles. In disrupting many industries, tech giants are changing them for the better. Uber provides a service superior to that of established taxi companies, and is forcing them to improve, Airbnb offers a cheap and convenient alternative to hotels. Some high tech companies, such as Amazon and Uber, exert downward pressure on prices. Others, Google and Twitter, provide services without charge. McKinsey calculates that consumers in America and Europe alone get about $280 billion-worth of ‘free’ services – such as search or directions from the web – that would once have cost their users a significant amount of money or time.” (174)

Meanwhile top economist, Professor Jeremy Rifkin notes “…co-ops were emerging as the vehicle used by entrepreneurs to develop new businesses based on technology that could overcome barriers to entry… For example, the plummeting price of solar panels meant many communities were becoming their own power generators, especially in Europe and the US, which now threatened the big utilities.”

“Co-ops are the energy producers of the 21st century, he said. And while the car-sharing Uber was not a co-op, many of its drivers had recently begun using mobile technology to set up their own taxi businesses.” (175)

The good news is that due to globalisation and relentless competition, we have economies of scale around the world. Consumers are getting more numerous and better informed. Products and servics are getting better. Prices are declining owing to the increases in the volume of production. Consumers, especially in developing nations, will benefit most from this development.

The impact of declining profits and the possible consequences are detailed below:

“Competition remains the ugliest aspect of market reform. Extreme competition and non at all exist side by side.”

“Peter Fuhrman of China First Capital, an investment bank, describes competition among private firms as ruthless and that parts of China may be the most capitalist on Earth.” (176)

The China (East Asian) Confucius work ethic and competitive culture will for ever drive down profits and could put the nail on the ‘domination and monopolisation’ coffin once and for all.

World scale competition is driving down profits and extreme competition will take some firms to the brink of failure as they operate with very small profit margins or at a loss.

A  McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) report, states “Two things in particular are shaking up the comfortable world of the old imperial multinationals. The first is the rise of emergingmarket competitors. The share of Fortune 500 companies based in emerging markets has increased from five percent in 1980-2000 to 26% today. These firms are expanding globally in much the same way as their predecessors from Japan and South Korea did before them. In the past decade the 50 largest emerging-world firms have doubled the proportion of their revenues coming from abroad, to 40%. Although the outlook for many emerging markets is more mixed than it was just a couple of years ago, troubles at home may push rising multinationals to globalise more rapidly.”

“The second factor is the rise of high-tech companies in both the West and the East. These firms have acquired large numbers of customers in the blink of an eye. Facebook boasts as many users each month as China has people: 1.4 billion. Tech giants can use their networks with big data centers rapidly to colonize incumbents’ territories; China’s e-commerce giants Alibaba, Tencent and are doing this in financial services. Such firms can also provide smaller companies with a low-cost launching pad that allows them to compete in the global market.” (177)

Indeed, in the foreseeable future, we will see the advent of global economic competition, East Asian style. Profit margins will be smaller and smaller. Profit margins, at a survival level of 2-3 percentage point could be the norm. At such a rate, private or government enterprise will not matter anymore.

The international capitalism we know today, might get a dramatic dressing up and profound transfiguration.

The question is, do the world’s politicians understand what state they are in? Will they know how to adjust and adapt to the changes ahead to survive?, It is worrying!

Is the world’s economic development heading towards dangerous competition and confrontation, or will we learn to cooperate and survive together in peace.

“In the years ahead, China is likely to account for between one-third and one-half of growth in global incomes, trade and commodity demand, and its significance will only increase as its share of the world economy rises… In ‘The Economic Consequences of the Peace’, John Maynard Keynes asserted the primacy of economics, observing that ‘the perils of the future lie not in frontiers and sovereignties but in food, coal and transport’. His call for strong policies directed at promoting mutual prosperity and co-operation went unheeded, with catastrophic consequences. Today the perils of the future have much to do with China's rise and with the worlds of commerce and economics. Let us hope that we find the wisdom to manage them well.” (178)

In another changing, the cut throat competition among developed and economic fast growth developing nations will play into the hands of developing nations as so call ‘divide and gain’ from below.

Some or group of developing nations could hold the balance of power in future world affairs. Let’s hope they play it intelligently. Humans and all beings in the universe are governed by the Law of Evolution. For humankind economics and industrialisation are important components of evolution. In particular developing nations will be the greater beneficiary. No rational person will be able to stop it.

To industrialise whilst growing, requires a global scale, scientific knowledge base, rules, regulations, planning, supervision and control. The absence of these factors in part or in full, could lead to global devastation and chaos.

The English Industrialisation over 300s years ago and that of today, stand in stark contrast.

The difference, in scope, scale, complexity and its impact on human beings, is very different. New industrialisation and growth, can be archived with minimal pollution. The release of heavy pollutants can be avoided. Waste can be reduced and recycled; energy consumption can be minimised.

Sustainable development can be achieved, through a modern world scale economic governance body.

There will be no real democracy, however, if high economic inequalities persist and get worse. In the current situation, many nations would be impossible to achieve a positive led equilibrium development outcome. But at least, an acceptable equilibrium must be stuck, on an evolutionary basis could allowed.

Today, it is clear, that GDP is not the only criteria of economic development particularly with developing economies that are based on early state capitalism. In these countries service industries are virtually non-existent with, manufacturing lacking automation. By contrast, the economies of developed nations rely on inputs based on service, value adding and automation.

There are some problems using GDP in this day. It is difficult to adapt in a broad based society which has welfare, innovation, value added products and services components, house hold components featuring a spouse, caring for elders and relatives, sex workers, middlemen and so forth.

The conclusion is clear, economists must improve the measure of real GDP, to enable its usage as an effective tool (179).

In fact, there is a need to produce a more workable GDP system, to quantify the quality of living and level of productivity.

This can be done by –

Separate measurements and yardsticks based on two types of economic activity – productive and ‘rent seeking’ non-productive. To evaluate national real GDP grow and economic health.

Separate as type A real economy; manufacturing, digital, science and technology, education, communication, housing, machine and vehicle, agriculture, fishing industry and other. Apart from type B non-productive economy; derivative investment, speculation trade, (e.g. most of Hedge Fund), most of stock market buy and sell, national defence spending or any other non real-economic activity.

Economic development through different political systems, has brought us to this point of time. From here, we can see the future trends, or predict some outcomes utilising knowledge of science, experience and intelligence, from past and future economic evolutionary trends.

It is evident that in future humans will work less and play more, due to innovation and other advancements.

Perhaps, orthodox capitalism will be the last system to be eliminated before we enter a highly secure-social democracy. The world will defeat poverty, global warming and imbalance extreme inequality.

It will become smaller by way of highly interdependent, interrelated, integrated multiple WSGN and WDWN. Globalisation will bring us closer than ever before. National borders will have a less meaning. Human civilisation will be more mingled and mixed than ever. World war will become history. This should not be an empty dream or wild imagining.

As we get closer to our ultimate goal, however, the risk of nuclear war or other catastrophe will also accompany development. The outcome, will depend on our understanding of evolution enabling us to foresee the future (through Cyber Kids quality-consciousness). We will need a world scale governing system. It could be real if only if we try a bit harder.  What do you think?

Chapter 7. Cyber Kids Generation

Who can achieve the advanced, secure, peaceful and bright future…One World?

The Cyber Kids Generation (CKG), the net Generation, generation Y, the globalised, millennial generation have lived with the Internet, the Digital Revolution and social media as an integral and natural part of their lives. They are digital natives – digital age people who were born shortly before, during and after the ‘communication and information revolution’.

Cyber kids live with and use computers, the Internet, tablets, smart phones, Instagram, Skype, YouTube, all digital gadgets and equipment and all sorts of 21st Century scientific and technological advancements. All these effective tools have become an important part of their livelihood and their way of life.

In this writing, CKG should be defined as people born between the years 1970s and beyond. Those born earlier are less exposed to the digital era. The latest born have higher exposure to the digital way of life. Those who came before, especially born before year 1946 should be call the sunset or Twilight Generation (TG). They are Baby Boomers Generation.

Specific surroundings define the human mind, our thinking, actions, evolving or how we adapting. Therefore, CKG have a much different lifestyle, thoughts and worldview compared to the TG. Due to early or lately expose to high tech electronic, to computer, mobile phone, copy machine, text message gadget, automation and digital automation, and most of all Internet and today smart phone and other high tech electronic machine and device. These kids will have a very distinctive attitude to all things thrown at them in their daily life. Their typical character is clear:

Cyber Kids have the habit of asking more questions: why, how, where is the evidence? Can you prove that? Does that make sense? All this is their common instinctive behaviour. This means they will have a scientific attitude to the world they live in. At the same time, they have the opportunity to enjoy and explore through new technology - TV, internet, tablet - all kinds of documentaries, reports, films, real life, see more of the wider world in all sides and dimension, and understand natural world, all living things than any old generations can do.  Through digital technology they are exposed to all surviving knowledge and experience, the arts, music, dance and cultures from all around the world.

They watch and participate and enjoy sports, entertainment and travel more on a wider global scale, by land, air and sea, even into outer space. They will enjoy cyber exploring in their ‘imaginary universe’ by computer, video, audio, DVD, smart phone, Instagram, Skype, eBooks and other electronic consumer items. They can access most global information and knowledge instantly and easily unlike any past human generation.

Cyber Kids possess the most ‘globalised visioned’ connecting with all human races worldwide. They are the most educated, curious, creative and bravest generation in human history. They are the people that are most fitting of Charles Darwin’s praise:

“If you had an idea that was going to outrage society, would you keep it to yourself?” (180).

The environment that CKG grow up in is much more complex and advanced than that of the TG. This is the main cause and effect that distinguishes the two generations, apart from having the access to new sources and methods of acquiring information and experience.

The transparency created by new forms of digital technology and tools has led to different methods of addressing creative, ethical and conceptual problems and choices. There are fewer secrets as quality documentary films and DVDs posted online are more popular and accessible than ever. They give us a different angles and dimensions, providing a look behind the scenes and behind the story.

CKG have access to things people could not access or interpret with past technology. New forms of technology go to great lengths to provide wider access and reveal greater mysteries. Everything becomes available to the public eye (Wiki Leaks and the Panama Papers are posted online). They also expose the critical points that mainstream media misses, covers up or intentionally misleads. Media bias and lies promoting vested interests can mostly be uncovered with cyber technology.

The article Transparent Future says, “Writing signalled the end of prehistory; the printing press sent waves of change through all the major institutions but society-digital technology could have a greater impact than anything that has come before. It will enhance the powers of some individuals and organisations while subverting the powers of others, creating both opportunities and risks that could scarcely have been imagined a generation ago . . . the tremendous change in our world triggered by this media inundation can be summed up in a word:  transparency.”

Where secrets are hardest kept, information and knowledge are equally available to all, as common as the air we breathed. And the new generations are striving to get soul into their lives to survive as healthy humans.

In the digital era, CKG have the privilege of using new effective mediums to gain access to the facts. This enhances their collective, accurate decision-making. With their creative treatment of actuality and their interpretation of the modern world, they will gradually be guided in character by their own consciousness.

In the past few decades, documentary films on all sorts of: economic, social, political issues, the natural world, all fields of science, have become increasingly popular. IMDb (Internet Movie Database) reports that in 2014, there were 9,936 documentary films released, an almost fourfold increase compared to 2,695 in the year 2000.

“I really do think we are living in a golden age of documentary film-making”, says Lucy Walker, British documentary maker. “There is a frustration with traditional media and a hunger for documentaries that have the stamp of integrity. The week it opened, my film was number one at the box office in terms of what they call ‘per-screen average attendance’.   . . (It is) about the lives of people living on a garbage dump in South America (and) had the highest per-screen average across America. That tells me that people are looking for bigger truths about the way we live now, truths they are not getting from Hollywood or the traditional media.”

“The availability of cheap digital cameras and software has also meant that, for every campaigning film like Walker's more hard-hitting nuclear weapons documentary,

‘Countdown to Zero’ or Charles Ferguson's Inside Job, a riveting, clear-headed exposé of the ruthless financial tsars behind the 2008 global financial meltdown, there are a host of smaller, stranger documentaries being made, many of which seem to push the boundaries of the form almost to breaking point.” (181)

Or, as New York journalist and film critic Eric Hynes summed up neatly: “When the time comes to honour and elevate a documentary, we seem to want reassurance that it’s all true, all above board. Tell me a story but try to tell it straight, make me feel but don’t make me think about how I’m feeling, give me the facts without calling the facts into question.” (182)

After all, on the formal education front, CKG are on the verge of the digital online education revolution. This will offer the largest pool of students a new form of quality education that is cheap, convenient and wide-ranging. It could spread out across the digital world. It will strike very hard at traditional top universities that are slow to change (183).

Let’s look at the ‘Understanding a misunderstood generation’ report by INSEAD Emerging Markets Institute, the HEAD Foundation and Universum Global. They posed dozens of serious questions to more than 16,000 young people born between 1984 and 1996, from 43 countries across every continent.

The results of dozens of in-depth large-scale surveys, examining the lives and attitudes of the CKG have shown that Cyber Kids have the numbers, and,

“will make up 75% or more of the global workforce in little more than 10 years. Culture and technology is evolving creating a new world and so must leadership evolve.” (184)

Let’s see what the difference,

Superbosses acknowledges the value of great people (employee) could stay with them for shorter period of time. So, they will focused on leveraging the talents of their ambitious protégés to the full while they had them. They will give them the best of opportunities to shine, not available elsewhere.

When protégés did leave, supperbosses will maintain close contact with them. First, from this contact, the supperbosses will gained access to wider network of talent. Second, gain privileged access to business opportunities and new ideas (185).

The Negative side of Digital Revolution

However, the downside is CKGs’ lack of experience. They also have limited practical knowledge and skills that can only be gained through doing, learning and engaging in all sorts of activities. One aspect of concern voiced by Susan Greenfield is: ‘As a neuroscientist I am very aware that the brain adapts to its environment - if you're placed in an environment that encourages, say, a short attention span, which doesn't encourage empathy or interpersonal communication, which is partially addictive or compulsive ... all these things will inevitably shape who you are.’ With the pace of technological change 'unprecedented' in human history, she feared some young people might grow up with short attention spans, keen to conform to their peers and lacking an ability to discern the impact of their actions (186).

New positive practices and trends also come with negative effects and it is worrying that, at the moment many young Cyber Kids are obsessed by or addicted to selfie-led likes.  So the virtual world of the internet could lead to ruthless narcissists who also ‘ . . . might not develop empathetic centres in their brains, the pre-frontal cortex, which governs empathy and compassion, needs social nourishment in order to grow and develop synaptic connections. This starts with the mother’s gaze, the incredible stare of love that stimulates the brain. It is further developed by gazing at, and with, other people, through smiles, sneers, flushes and changing voice tone, expressions of grief, pain or anger.’ Susan Greenfield even refers to pheromones, the smells we emit that give signals to others. It is a neurological crisis according to the British scientist, Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford (187).

Cyber Kids will more or less encounter this common behaviour: individualism, selfies and narcissism. These three are sharing common ground, intimately related and reinforce each other. They have positive and negative effects in different ways, circumstances and conditions in different societies.

Individualism is embedded and widespread in modern developed capitalist societies, where freedom, liberty and privilege give people a sense of entitlement to their own rights. Actually, the positive side is peace of mind, more independence, focus on doing and spurring creativity (188).

The privileged class and middle class will adhere more to such (often) extreme behaviour and attitudes. The negative side is that (at the very extreme) they will, with strong selfinterest, ignore the surrounding world, blind to the fact that there is no absolute individualism. He or she still needs to rely on goods and services from others, to share public facilities, security.  Everyone needs a functioning structure and system around him or her.  We must all pay tax and get support and protection from public authorities. In the most extreme cases, if unchecked, privileged Cyber Kids could become a ‘little dictators’ or bossy.

But in developing nations, people live in under-developed environments, meaning they are too poor and lack the independence or conditions to live and survive independently. Apart from a very small number of rich and powerful rulers that can enjoy and solidly defend their individual rights, the overwhelmingly majority of the population strongly rely on a tribe, group, collective and community structures. By working with and relying on each other they survive within a hierarchy structure set. The positive side is, they can help each other to live better and survive through social and economic difficulties, war and natural disasters. The negative side is, having limited innovation and low self-esteem; they are perpetually seeking care and love. They may become dependent and ‘subservient’, allowing themselves to be dictated by the prevailing system and/or leader. The scope, scale of this threat depends on how advanced a society is:  people’s capacity to produce, share, invent and survive in society.

In reality, individualism is the main breeding ground for today’s ‘selfie’ and narcissistic behaviour. ‘Narcissists believe that they are special and can be understood only by special people.’ ‘ . . . In some measure, with narcissistic patients, those difficult people, so needy and, at the same time, so rebarbative. (Sigmund) Freud seems to have thought that narcissists were untreatable, because of their resistance. Heinz Kohut, a Viennese doctor, acknowledged that there was such a thing as ‘bad narcissism’ akin to the DSM definition: arrogant, demanding, and so forth. But from this bad narcissism he split off a new ‘good narcissism’, the feeling that brings color to your cheeks, boosts your self-esteem, makes you vivacious and creative. It also makes you loving,’ he claimed (189).

Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) who renowned of his work as the greatest artist, painter, sculptor, architect, military engineer, draftsman, writer, mathematician and inventor. Who also had the ability to intersect art and science perfectly and intelligently. Jules Verne’s (1828-1905) Around the World in Eighty Days published in 1873, and many other kinds of science –fiction stories have been made public since. All these stories and works share a common purpose of adventure, excitement, the bizarre, fantasy and imagination related to science and technology. They explore the past and a new future invention.

However, some are fusion works of science, myth and supernatural stories put together in order to create an exciting fantasy or sensation to attract audiences. Very few have future world ideas and visions based on science-fact. Very often when the story is made into a film, the situation gets worse.


Central to most of ‘Hollywood’ film producers is the aim to make a large profit. That is the priority. The film industry is a very tough business. Films can lose huge amounts of money while a few can make surprisingly big gains. Therefore, the Hollywood film will compelled to employ the following successful techniques, methods and ingredients;

1) The ability to capture the mind and emotion; involve spectacular, extravagant, charming beautiful, humorous, jolly, look good, feel good, model like, sensational characters. The film must express joy or be unique, bizarre, weird, ‘crazy’ and out of ordinary. It can be supernatural or a conspiracy story. It can induce speculation, fear, horror, nostalgia or the mythic. Very often, it must blur the border of reality and the imagination, effectively building an addictive desire and mind control.

2) New film technology is a plus – special effects, slow motion, fast track forward or backward, multi vivid colour, 3D, surround sound, emotive facial expressions and extraordinary character all play a part.

3) Super heroes play a central role – characters that seem perfect, charming and can do no wrong, while enjoying fame and honour. Or the opposite – characters who play off their positive and negative qualities and behaviour. Or both – the good guy, bad guy scenario. As a stereotype the good guy is very often handsome or superior and the bad guy is always, inferior or ugly.

Let’s look at one of the latest highly successful box office success stories –the science fiction movie Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Here is how an article in the Economist describes it:

Disney has skilfully capitalised on their intellectual property and in so doing, cemented its position as the market leader in the industrialization of mythology. Its success rests on its mastery of the three elements of modern myth-making: tropes, technology and toys… Both film-makers merrily plundered ancient mythology and folklore… In Homer’s day, legends were passed on in the form of dactylic hexameters; modern myth-makers prefer computer graphics, special effects, 3D projection, surround sound and internet video distribution, among other things… multiple media formats. The Marvel and Star Wars fantasy universes are chronicled in interlocking films… toys, merchandise and theme-park rides… In all, more than $32 billion-worth of Star Wars merchandise has been sold since 1977.

In uncertain times, when governments and military might seem unable to keep people safe or stay honest, audiences take comfort in the idea of superheroes who ride to the rescue…. Ultimately, however, these modern myths are so compelling because they tap primordial human urges—for refuge, redemption and harmony. In this respect they are like socialmedia platforms, which use technology to industrialize social interaction. Similarly, modern myth-making, reliant though it is on new tools and techniques, is really just pushing the same old buttons in stone-age brains (190).

As we can see, the storyteller or filmmaker is caught in the law of evolution - in the logic of positive and negative contest. Will the film have a positive or negative effect and influence on the audience? A positive outcome could persuade the audience to be more inventive and contribute to a more progressive world. The remnant of TG has shown this clearly. Look into the past as if it will repeat itself in the future (much questioning logic). But if storytelling is based on myth or out of touch with reality and contradicts to scientific notions it will not stand up. If the storyteller exploits emotions, steals the creative consciousness of the young generation and bombards them with outdated concepts the outcome will be negative.

Very often, storytellers mesh fiction and science together neatly; because science and myth can both produce surprising ‘miracles’ and unexpected, unthinkable outcomes.

We are living, therefore, in an interesting time that will test the Cyber Kids resolve, and their intelligence. Will CKG be able to decide if what they consume are positive, inventive, forward thinking ideas or not? Can Cyber Kids use critical thinking on a story or film? Do they take it seriously or just enjoy it as entertainment and relaxation with an open mind?

It is a testing time, but under the law of evolution, we believe CKG should pass such tests easily.

Modern science and technology cannot give an answer for everything around us, but both have advanced our knowledge on more disciplines, fields, area at a faster pace while providing a deeper understanding than at any other time in human history. In the Stone Age almost nothing was known about how the human body functioned or its relationship to disease, virus, pathogens and the surrounding environment. Today people have an adequate knowledge of the heart, brain, blood, nervous system, DNA and how the nature, environment dictates human innovation and adaptation to nature.

After all, CKG is still need to adapt and change to comply with evolutionary law and rules. Know more about Law of evolution and how it interact best with natural law. They need to understand more about natural law and develop their instinct to survive, live better and secure their future…for ever.

What Cyber Kids inherited from Twilight Generation and how can they deal with it?

In terms of human evolutionary history, the TG was the generation of people who lived, struggled, developed and made both positive and negative contributions to human evolution before the Digital Revolution. The role they played has produced, overall, more positive than negative developments in the most important fields and disciplines, in their own right and era. On the negative side the next era depends on our decision to avoid taking the absolute destructive step such as nuclear war. To do this we must reform an out dated world governance system…produced by TG consciousness.

But be realistic, without the TG’s work, contribution and sacrifice, there would be no Cyber Kids or new era of Digital Revolution. The TG built and created the world’s institutions and systems of knowledge and order, including early and simple digital technology. It has made the world’s systems function and has built a foundation from their own environment in their own time and era. This generation has had its own qualitative standards and values of their own rights. Most of all, in assisting adaptation capability, the past mistakes and short comings made by TG could be the Cyber Kids value lessons.

Susan Greenfield’s description of ‘Baby Boomers’ puts the TG’s main contribution as cars, television, refrigerators and the printing press:

“They did make greater advances with those technologies on some people's lives, but we were still living in the real world when we use those things.” (191)

The Earth from Space and Humanity from Space (Note: Mankind from Space has the same content information to Humanity from Space, but own by difference company) documentary films are the most up to date that Cyber Kids have the most qualification to understand better, and could also to enhance their clearer and stronger vision, thought and consciousness.

Earth from Space are taken decades and ongoing, by using NASA over 120 satellites equipped with high power cameras watching every part of earth year round 24/7. And with the help of various fields and discipline of knowledge and scientific-technology and tools. The film has make the first time humans can closely see how visible and invisible natural earth working clearly before our eyes. This led to the much invaluable knowledge and secrete that we must know (as basic or common sense). And how the natural forces that surrounding us work, together to create an engine powerful enough to nourish and guide life, lead to diversity.

“To visualise these stories DSP will use cutting edge technology, turning raw data into authentic moving images, building on expertise from a previous (and highly-praised) project; ‘Earth From Space’. Using this technique, we can map humanity's behaviour in stunning, never seen before detail, revealing how our civilisation grew, how it works today, and what the future might hold.” (192)

Mankind from Space is using and sharing the same technology tools. It is depiction and compress to show how ancient world developing into modern one. The film offers priceless picture, graphic, statistic table in colourful digital form. The film show how world’s science and technology, social, economic and civilisation progression. Film emphasis on showing Digital Revolution of sea, air, land communication, transportation, trade and economic engagement hundreds and thousands of land trade route, sea cargo liner and airliner in running graphic and picture, and digital invisible webs and networks of communication.  This is obviously become a so called WDWN structure and system that wrapping up the entire world we live.

“From the global perspective of space, this 2-hour special reveals the breathtaking extent of our influence, revealing how we’ve transformed our planet and produced an interconnected world of extraordinary complexity.”

“From the perspective of space, the evolution of humans from hunter-gatherers to the dominant global species is chronicled. The documentary also shows how humans transformed Earth; and how small flashes of innovation changed the course of civilization. Also: the challenges humanity will face in order to survive” (193).

Cyber Kids is born and evolving under the high of the human achievement: WSGN and WDWN era. Earth from space and Humanity from space documentary films are just perfectly reflected and showing what are it’s all about. It is no doubted Cyber Kids will be intelligent and brave enough to think outside old box, if it has one or two, determination, making decision and act to the best of their knowledge and ability.

CKG also will have to shoulder what the TG left behind. What they have inherited needs to be identified

Security, negative or destructive activity and reproduction, the pressing issues CKG face are:

a) Constructing a world new governance system

b) Nuclear war (see chapter 9)

c) World over population (see chapter 8)

d) Climate change and environmental degradation (see chapter 7)

e) New technology, invention deems cannot be control and threaten to humans survival

f) The unknown and unexpected

They are also concerned about their livelihoods and wellbeing,


Global debt totalled $199 trillion in 2014, 286% of global GDP. In 2007, total debt was $142 trillion, 269% of GDP.

According to a new report from the research firm McKinsey & Co, “All major economies today have higher levels of borrowing relative to GDP than they did in 2007.” The firm writes, “The debt-to-GDP ratio has gone up 17% since the crisis; in other words, debt has risen 17% faster than GDP over the past eight years.”

As Richard Dobbs says, “Rising debt levels and a shrinking work force are a ‘toxic mix’.  So, is this a problem? Well, it’s certainly troubling. But it’s hard to know exactly where it all goes. Mr Dobbs drew the metaphor of a kitchen with a gas stove, where the gas is on and filling the room. Either somebody’s going to open a window and release the gas, or somebody’s going to flip a switch, set off a spark, and . . . well, you know.” (194)

Dobbs shows that many of the current world’s governments, from both developed and developing nations, are addicted to creating an unaffordable mountain of debt as if this is the only way to secure national well-being. It derives largely a result of the shortcomings of political desire:  a combination of short sightedness, self-interest, emphasis on the shortterm and shunning long-term future plans.

Cyber Kids should make it known to their elders that it is irresponsible and could plunge their generation into economic oblivion. They should closely scrutinise the risks the TG are taking now as the burden could become unbearable in the future. Any nation that incurs an overburden of debt with weak capacity to repay it is at great risk and will suffer. The negative affect it poses to the world and their future is worrying.


Unemployment is a pressing problem for all – but mostly for the CKG.

”By 2019, more than 212 million people will be out of work, up from 201 million, according to the ILO’s report World Employment and Social Outlook” (195).

The employment situation has improved in the US and Japan, the report finds, but remains difficult in many advanced economies, particularly in the Eurozone. The ILO has previously forecast a global unemployment rate of 5.9% this year and next, compared with 5.5% before the global financial crisis in 2007 (196).

The world is facing a worsening youth employment crisis: young people are three times more likely to be unemployed than adults and almost 73 million youth worldwide are looking for work. The ILO has warned of a ‘scarred’ generation of young workers facing a dangerous mix of high unemployment, increased inactivity and precarious work in developed countries, as well as persistently high working poverty in the developing world (197).

“As at February 2014, the seasonally adjusted rate of youth unemployment (age 15-24) across the 28 EU Member States (EU28) stood at 22.9%, more than double the overall unemployment rate of 10.6%. The EU28 youth unemployment rate in 2007 was 12.1% respectively.”

In Greece, the youth un-employment rate for November 2013 was 59%. This contrasts with the situation in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, where unemployment has been consistently low and hovering around or below the 10% mark since December 2005.

Youth unemployment rates in different regions in 28 member states has shown that in Spain and Cyprus, the rates of youth unemployment in December 2013 were 54.3% and 40.8% (198).

The current pressing problem of today’s youth unemployment is a big issue. It means CKG are facing huge pressures on how to survive well in the future. OECD April 2013 report on Youth Unemployment rate for people aged 15-24 revealed the EU average is 22%, the OECD average 16.5%, the US average 15.5%, Germany’s average 6.9% and Greece’s average is 60%. (World Youth Forum report).  It is a serious situation looking at how developed nations manage their national affairs with little concern for the next generation. It will create a crisis of stability and survival for them. Therefore, it is left to the Cyber Kids to take responsibility and fend for their future. There is only one choice - to treat the world’s affairs as one and adjust and shape them accordingly. Actually, the world’s future is in the hands of Cyber Kids, not today’s politicians.

Youth unemployment increased by as much as 24.9% in the Developed Economies and the European Union between 2008 and 2012, and the youth unemployment rate was at a decades-long high of 18.1% in 2012. On current projections, the youth unemployment rate in the Developed Economies and European Union will not drop below 17% before 2016 (199).

In 2012, youth unemployment was highest in the Middle East and North Africa, at 28.3% and
23.7%, and lowest in East Asia (9.5%) and South Asia 9.3 %, (see Table A2 chapter 2.2, p13).

In Central and South-Eastern Europe (non-EU) and CIS from 2011 to 2012 the youth unemployment rate came down from a high of 20.4% in 2009 to 17.9% in both 2011 and 2012.  It is projected to remain slightly higher (18%) until 2018 (Figure 2 and Table A2, chapter 2.2.4, p17).

In Latin America and the Caribbean between 2010 and 2012, regional youth unemployment rate resumed its downward path to reach 12.9% (chapter 2.2.5, p19). In the Middle East it was estimated in 2012 at 28.3%, and is projected to increase gradually to 30% in 2018 (Figure 2 and Table A2), (chapter 2.2.6, p19).

In North Africa youth unemployment reached 23.7% in 2012. The unemployment rate for young women was even higher, at 37%, compared with 18.3% for young men in 2012.  In Sub-Saharan Africa youth unemployment was 11.8% in 2012 (chapter 2.2.8, p20) (200).

Recently, most developed nations race to increase the pension eligibility age out of desperation. However they fail to acknowledge that the elderly workforce is being shunted by employers who have concerns regarding their productivity, effectiveness, adaptability to new working environments, salaries, safety and long-term promotion within the company.

Those in governing systems should prepare to deal with unemployment issues with a realistic mindset, respect for human dignity and ethical means. Instead of blaming the victim, they should acknowledge the shortcomings of the system (where the system is at fault), because while competition increases productivity and innovation, at the same time it creates winners and losers, resulting in unemployment.

While politicians are shifting the pension age from 65 to 67 years (or at the extreme 70 years), in reality, who is going to employ older people with the same wages and entitlements as younger ones? If this continues to happen, the result would be an unemployment ‘trickledown effect’ with older workers taking the jobs of the middle aged and the middle aged taking younger employees’ jobs. Has the problem been solved? There has to be a realistic and better solution to this issue.

Why should they find ways to create suitable employment for older people, if it means fair pay and flexible working conditions, part time work, instead of looking at over 65 year olds as victims? Governments should also look at a long-term solution such as strictly imposing a compulsory pension saving funds from the start of a person’s working life. Governments and employers need to create work and employment conditions that suit the older workers such as more flexible working hours, part time work, subsidies or just leaving them alone with dignity and respect.

Old forms of capitalism built on obsolescence is giving way to a new one in which products get better after they are bought, according to The Economist.

“This robs firms of ability to make a quick profit by selling new models, but may bind them much closer to their customer.”

“Michael Porter of Harvard Business School predicts that the wirelessly connected products, and the resulting entry of manufacturers into the battle for customer loyalty, will bring a ‘new era of competition.’ Makers of products will gain an equal footing with retailers and the owner of  technology ‘platforms’, such as Google, as all three vie for consumer’s affections. Manufactures will also be able to expand into providing services.” (201)

This means we need to talk through job loss problems and outcomes prior to automation.

As civilisation rapidly advances, so, all things around us are getting more complex or hyper complex. The human mind has to encounter, respond, engage, accommodate, absorb and digest all things that are thrown at us. Either we are unprepared and suffer inadequate precious ‘fact’ knowledge or we are poor learners. If we positively adapt and change we will have clear minds and a healthy conscious.

Otherwise we will be unable to dispel any mistakes and we will get into trouble by making the wrong decisions. It all depends on what attitude we have, and what direction we take, how we learn and understand the world.

Fortunately, since the CKG were born and closely associated with scientific and technological leanings, they are more aware of the need for positive and negative equilibrium and how to better exercise positive forces. They cannot let the Twilight Generation’s old, out-dated; negative values and thinking contaminate and confuse their judgement and future direction.

It’s time

Humans have passed through the ages of stone tools, simple wooden tools, iron and steel tools, mechanical tools, digital/computer tools and multi-function ‘electronics’ digital and dynamic technology.

How can CKG manage to journey further with an effective, confident and right mindset?

Ask the Cyber Kids one or two questions. Are they able to solve problems such as billions of humans living with poverty, ignorance, danger, uncertainty, sickness and death?. Amid very advance and abundance of all sorts of things humans created (actually, humans at this era know very well how to make a right solution to most critical problems), but with the old mind set, [short sight, narrow mind, narrow heart, selfish, slave to the old politics and negative history] they will not doing it. Do they have the sense of responsibility; the drive and confidence to address the problems the TG have left behind? If they fail to firmly take the helm, what will happen?

Let’s see what positive change is occurring.

This is what happened in the Cyber Kids Digital Revolution Era. News Corporation is one of the world’s largest media empires. At its Australia branch (The Australian daily newspaper), the deposed former CEO, Kim Williams and the current CEO, Julian Clarke, sparked a dispute that became public. In Kim Williams’ book, ‘Rules of Engagement’, he argued: “I am emphatic that, as a result of digital technology, many of the old paradigms and power constructs are breaking down or are already broken. The Internet has no respect for the establishment and is a furiously strong levelling agent. New models in all things are becoming commonplace.”

He stated further: “Consumers have, in the main, moved into a digital sphere and they are dictating the ‘rules of engagement’.  And, . . . if we live true to the possibilities afforded in the digitally empowered era . . . while some of these forces can have profoundly destructive elements in some aspects of traditional news media, others are learning and adapting to what’s already happening in telecommunications, entertainment, and some other media companies. The forces are now dramatically affecting other industries such as education, finance and retailing. The impact on politics is every bit as challenging. Fresh thinking and creative ingenuity can win through because the cost of entry is now lower than at any time before, so the cost of failure has never been lower.” (202)

“Machine translation, too, will be improved by deep learning. It already uses neural networks, benefiting from the large quantity of text available online in multiple languages. Dr. Ng, now at Baidu, thinks good speech-recognition programs running on smartphones could bring the internet to many people in China who are illiterate, and thus struggle with ordinary computers. At the moment, 10% of the firm’s searches are conducted by voice. He believes that could rise to 50% by 2020. Just as the printing press put scribes out of business, high-quality Artificial Intelligence (AI) will cost jobs. But it will enhance the abilities of those whose jobs it does not replace, giving everyone access to mental skills possessed at present by only a few.” (203)

It is true, like in the past, today’s employment stories tell us machines replace human labour and cause job loss. But as often as not they sooner or later create new jobs. As research by the McKinsey Global Institute suggests:

In fact, history shows that technology-driven productivity can be, and has been, compatible with rising employment. In the United States, more than two-thirds of the years since 1929 have seen positive gains in productivity and employment. In France, a 2011 McKinsey study showed that over the past 15 years, the Internet had created 2.4 jobs for every job lost.

The study found, employees with science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) backgrounds will be in particularly short supply. In the past few years there has been a huge increase in the size of the global labour pool but the next era will be defined by a global battle for talent as companies compete to hire people with the crucial – and rare – skills that they need.

Amid these huge transformations, the challenge for government and business everywhere is clear: we should be preparing ourselves for the jobs of the future, and preparing in a way that will offer people rewarding, continuous work, as industries change and adapt to external forces (204).

Sooner or later, the CKG will become the majority of the world population and replace the TG. They will fast become the majority of the human species. Most of them are better educated. They are a highly qualified people. They are virtually a ‘new’ middle class in their own right. But they have little in common with the old ‘bourgeoisie’ middle class.

Cyber Kids have the numbers, they have the voting rights, they have the brainpower and they will hold the world’s central stage and change the world forever. The old middle class is past. Its remnants are largely of European past and to a lesser extent, Asia and elsewhere. Little is being heard of them on the American and Africa continents. It will be a hard battle in the 21st century digital world.

Cyber Kids and Digital Revolution in developing nations

Today, It is the most important time and era of humankind evolution journey, where millions, hundred and thousand millions of world citizenry in the developing nations become the member of world’s scale Cyber Kids family.

Recently, advances in digital technology or Digital Revolution make it possible to create a complete register of millions of individual ID cards and data - instant, fast, effective, and efficient. The data bank has the capacity to combat fraud and corruption. This registry and distribution system could allow authorities to distribute grants, benefits, subsidies and entitlements; collect tax, sample and test data. It was impossible to complete such tasks in the past, let alone to carry out any productive, vital daily work among the poor, developing countries. It is a great step forward.

As a report in The Economist confirms, even some very poor countries are starting to build robust records of who gets what. Brazil was a trail blazer: its Bolsa Família (family grant), a stipend for poor families is paid on condition that the children are vaccinated and go to school. In 2003, the grant replaced several smaller schemes. Its register of recipients is published online to help reduce fraud. At least 22 other developing countries now have similar records, and several more are building them, including Indonesia, Kenya, Bangladesh and Bolivia. Such lists cut administrative costs, and make it less chance that the same person benefits from overlapping schemes.

Using biometrics technology as well helps cut fraud. A recent data by the Centre for Global Development (CGD), a think-tank in Washington, found 230 programmers in over 80 countries that verify identities with biometric information, including voter registries and health records. Some are keeping track of the recipients’ social spending. Databases that store fingerprints or iris scans will exclude ghost (deceased) recipients. Checking such data at disbursement means the right person is paid.

Mobile-payment systems are another ingredient of an efficient, fraud-resistant scheme, because they record what has been paid, make it easier to reach remote areas and can incorporate security checks and reduce the need to transport and store cash. Indonesia is planning to make payments via pre-loaded SIM cards. Other countries, including Nepal, are working on ‘branchless banking’: roving teams or local vendors equipped with fingerprintreading devices disburse the cash. Some even publicize the amount dispensed to make sure operators do not cheat illiterate users (205).

The Digital Revolution era has made education widespread and more accessible to most people around the globe, in and outside school, university and today everywhere. Anyone especially in the developed nation could travelling the world without leaving computer room, can access most information, knowledge, where ordinary people could not access via quality documentary DVD into almost all aspect and subject what he or she want to see and want to know from expert, professional provider institution and entity. Even one who willing to spend time and a fortune to gain such access or privilege are impossible. More importantly, this accessible opportunity is fast and wider available to developing and poor nation around the world. Further, online money will totally replace paper money. Automation will become more apparent in our lives than ever. Elections, voters and public opinion will rely on digital tools and data. Working hours and days tend to be shorter and fewer. Leisure time will be abundant. What’s a world?.

What’s more since WW II, the literacy rate among women has been explosive. Women have increasing entered the work force.

Both the quality and quantity of knowledge has been multiplied. Almost anyone has had access to information in the past 100 years and especially in the past 50 years. The proportion of people who have access to knowledge measured by their literacy rates began accelerating after 1475 when Sweden had 1%, Great Britain 5%, France 6%, Germany 9% and Italy 15%. The world average from 1820 was 12%, but in 1850 it was 17%.  By 1900 it was 21%, by 1950 it was 36%, and by 2010 it was 83% (206).

These days, humans have proven they are capable of making and producing anything we need, often over producing. Therefore, if Cyber Kids see the world as one, human races is one, globalisation is a long term positive endless process, and a basis for One World creation. Then, no doubt, peaceful, prosperity, secure survival is assure, the future is in this species positive judgement and decision.

Is it a real world or imaginary, a ‘promised land’ or paradise ‘very little’ without corruption, privilege, and ‘more equitable’ equality of distribution of wealth?  Not quite yet.

Then, it is safe and precise to say,

Digital Revolution is clearly a wonderful and miracles creator humankind have ever seen.

Can Cyber Kids tolerate income inequality?

“Wealth inequality has continued to increase since 2008, with the top percentile of wealth holders now owning 50.4% of all household wealth,’ according to one report.”

At the start of 2015, Oxfam had warned that 1% of the world’s population would own more wealth than the other 99% within a year. Mark Goldring, Oxfam GB’s chief executive, said:

“The fact it has happened a year early – just weeks after world leaders agreed on a global goal to reduce inequality – shows just how urgently world leaders need to tackle this problem.”

“This is the latest evidence that extreme inequality is out of control. Are we really happy to live in a world where the top one per cent own half the wealth and the poor own just one per cent?” (207).

Today it does not matter if the middle class and working people are from Western culture, Eastern culture or other cultures. It does not matter if they are Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim; black, white or yellow. Their common language is a digital, scientific worldview. That is most important and could melt into a global force for change. They are sharing critical common interests.

Cyber Kids cannot rely on old-style politics and politicians. They should stay away from old politics and design their own new political system. Where, they live in a sophisticated, multicultural, closely tied, interconnected, interrelated, intertwined, interdependent globalising world.

Actually, the new generations respond to evolution far better than the older generations do.  For them, much knowledge and ideas are just common sense (and many could not understand by older generation). It is much easier to understand and form part of their common knowledge. If they develop maturely, this world system can be overhauled and rebuilt. Is it fact or fiction?

Bear in mind, the TG has much critical unfinished work left behind, a legacy that CKG will inevitably need to address and tackle. For example, new ineffective global institutions, global governance, the threat of nuclear war, population issues, world environmental issues, ignorant, unfair and unjust exploitation of developing nations and national governance systems among other issues. What should they do? Wait for change to happen or take action now before it gets worse and is too late.

In the end, it will come to this fact - so far the TG has a habit just too concern themselves with the short term. They are largely short sighted, stubborn, conservative and self-centred. Usually when they set out to solve problems, their solutions are superficial or skin deep. Or very often, they are forced to act by popular demand. They are captive to the ‘time line’ era and frustrated by their own limitations. The much more powerful, multi-purpose modern tools, knowledge and new experience of Cyber Kids armed with the digital internet, mobile phones and touch screens could spark a renewal and break the grid lock. But will it make any difference?

One thing is certain; all humans share the same desire for good health, prosperity, social, economic and global security in a peaceful world. But with the current available knowledge and experience, do humans have enough confidence to fulfil that desire? It is a challenging question that CKG have to face.

The CKG is growing up fast and advancing in all aspects in an unprecedented way. The world that they are inheriting is full of complex things being discovered, created and produced with countless challenges ahead. It is the responsibility of CKG to stand up and take charge of the evolution of their future. It is time.

Tell the past generation, Cyber Kids have no need to solve problems the old way. Can the new generations of the 21st Century tackle world issues in a more intelligent way and succeed better than their ancestors did? Of course, by the Law of Evolution, rules and principles, CKG can and will do much better.

In the 21st Century world, the CKG generation has the largest space and time to conquer for their future. In short, Cyber Kids, the new middle class and working people are becoming healthier, more progressive, strongly decisive and equipped with powerful modern knowledge that makes them confident and brave. So, if yesterday’s middle class gave birth to modern democracy, could Cyber Kids’ and the new middle class, working people and likeminded people of today and tomorrow, build a new world governing system?

The world is in your hands

Of course, much science and technology is difficult to understand. It takes time and effort to know. It seems mysterious. It can be misleading and misused. Furthermore it creates either positive or negative outcomes. It has its limitations and cannot answer all things humans need or want to know.

Yet in some senses, this has largely changed. In the Cyber Kids’ era, scientific and technological knowledge and its products have entered all of our lives from the bed to the dining table, workplace, and public space - everywhere. Technology is involved somehow in all our activities. It is easier to digest information and knowledge, and simpler and faster than ever to learn and understand many things that are taking a shorter time to become common sense or common knowledge. Further, it is easier and more effective for us to link the knowledge of one scientific discipline to another. This is what Cyber Kids enjoy and practice in their daily life. It will be their entire future and the future of the next generation.

Behind this, there is a high expectation that the leadership of the CKG (who are well equipped with a 21st Century complex new world vision and consciousness), could accommodate and blend past generations’ knowledge and experience with their own to innovatively create a new world. They will be the central catalyst to bringing about new qualitative change that will be the most important since the end of the Stone Age.

The past generations’ accumulated knowledge and experience creates the foundation for what humans should do now and in the future. It is part of human nature to concentrate on dealing with immediate issues, problems and activities as a matter of survival. True, many seems irrelevant to our daily lives today. But in the real human world, human survival and advancement to this day is due to magnificent strategic planning for the future. Having clear, intelligent vision and good judgement enables people to systematically prepare, prevent, produce and examine human activities. It enables us to link, invent and improve, problem solve and to better shape our future. There should be a sense of pride and acknowledgement that humans are the only species to be able to achieve this.

It the time Cyber Kids using the all global interact of webs and networks WSGN and WDWN in it’s full potential; to unite like mind and demand for a new world order…where all gain more or less, depend on their own circumstances. Most of all very little or non are loss.

Therefore, Cyber Kids needs a serious world scale organise system as to campaign, education (meeting, discussion, debate, exchanging idea, testing, example, mock debate on constitution, exchange experience and knowledge), making known of what is the stage the world currently is, What the grave serious threat to humankind is, what is the new evolutionary of practical-positive led world will be look like, what is the way out of today political gridlocks, uncertainty and the threat of critical issue world’s have, Who will gain, who will loss of what, what the future bright and prosperity and peaceful world look like, how can we achieve such goal with our intelligent, current capability, quality base to achieve our desire to keep survive and live better life for very long durable distance ever.

With time on their side, Cyber Kids will find the way and their own leaders - their very own champions who talk their language, share their dreams and know what they face and how to solve their problems in the short, medium and long term. It is ‘inconceivable’ that the most advanced human era cannot sort out and create a new suitable vision for humanity’s future and survival.

Other issue Cyber Kids are expected to confront

What is the Cyber Kids’ world vision in terms of social and economic equality, jobs, living standards and a new way of life? How will globalisation affect their lives? How will global security and local security issues related, the environment, superpower, religion, international and ethnic conflict impact on them?

Who can deny that as we have more than enough knowledge and consciousness by the electric herd, we can develop new ways of living together humanely. This is the very promise of natural selection.

The advantage of CKG is that they are young. Young people can adapt, change and respond to evolutionary rules and principles far better than older generations. It is much easier for them to understand and develop their own common knowledge. If they develop maturely, without a doubt, they can change the world. It is a greatest challenge ever before facing humanity. And the time is pressing.

All things that we invent, acquire or experience dictate our thoughts and in turn our consciousness. Humans seem to emulate computers or vice versa. But computers have no mind that can comprehend right or wrong on its own. Human working systems come with thoughts, concepts and functional tools. Cyber Kids need the newest ones that fit with what they encounter day by day, not old outmoded systems. That way they can determine where we stand on the evolution timeline and be able to evaluate the next step or future trend.

Future world governance should guarantee basic rights such as a just and fair political system and distribution of wealth. It should provide health care, environmental sustainability and more concern for people on ‘necessary welfare’ by providing safety nets.

Ultimately, humanity has created a guarantee for better survival by improving the quality of life. It seem, next era world will be, the conflict between humans will become secondary. The conflict between humans and nature will become primary.

Should CKG draw the line and distinguish themselves from the TG’s old qualities and ideals?

Looking at to the worldview of Cyber Kids we can see a very clear difference from that of people in past centuries.

….even in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Crimea, many European governments—including those of Germany and the United Kingdom—still chose to make further cuts to their military budgets. And a 2014 WIN/Gallup International survey only reinforced US doubts about European publics; just 29 percent of French citizens polled, 27 percent of British citizens, and 18 percent of German citizens said that they were willing to fight for their country. (Sixtyeight percent of Italians said they would outright refuse.) (208)

This reflects how humankind is yearning to solve problems and conflicts in a civilised way, not the old ways.

Indeed, only humans are able to adjust, partially control or manage some of Charles Darwin’s restrictions and limits of evolutionary law and principle. It seems that humanity has gained a larger (but still partial and different) level of success to liberate or manage our own evolution in human terms, which will be a turning point in the history of human evolution. It is going to be the end of history.

But beware; there is some faults or unhealthy attitudes we always have. ‘For millennia, philosophers have understood that we do not see life as it is; we see a version distorted by our hopes, fears and other attachments…’ (Like anger, bias, prejudice, unexamined beliefs, discrimination, aggression, emotional reasoning, lack of knowledge or accurate information, lack of critical thinking and learning skills, morality binds and blinds, herd behaviour, allegiance to a team, a group, hypersensitivity, traumatic stress disorder, so on and so forth). These behaviours could all easily lead a person to make misjudgements, misunderstandings and stay away from the real world. So, in the classroom teaching thinking skills is one of the most important lessons there is to prepare a student to go into the world with right attitude and tools.

“The goal is to minimise distorted thinking and see the world more accurately. You start by learning the names of the most common cognitive distortions (such as over generalisation, discounting positives and emotional reasoning). Each time you notice yourself falling prey to one of them, you name it, describe the facts of the situation, consider alternative interpretations and then choose an interpretation more in line with those facts. Your emotions follow your knew interpretation. When people free themselves from the irrational thought that had previously dominated their consciousness, they become less depressed, anxious and angry.”

“Critical thinking requires grounding one’s beliefs in evidence rather than in emotion or desire, and learning how to search for and evaluate evidence that might contradict one’s initial hypothesis. But does campus life today foster critical thinking?.” (209)

There is the critical anxiety, worrying persisted since First Industrialisation to today Fourth Industrial Revolution; “The First Industrial Revolution used water and steam power to mechanize production. The Second used electric power to create mass production. The Third used electronics and information technology to automate production. Now a Fourth Industrial Revolution is building on the Third, the Digital Revolution that has been occurring since the middle of the last century. It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.” (210)

“Could machine, technology, artificial intelligence take over people’s job, competing on innovation to the point we could become subordinate to them? Economists and historians disagree and play down the threat. People held similar concerns in the past during the industrial revolution, according to Tom Standage, the Economist. Instead, while innovation destroyed some jobs it created new ones at once or later on. That is the norm. No doubt, the fourth industrial revolution will be similar. Further, Artificial Intelligent (AI) will have fatal short comings. It cannot completely emulate human intelligence. During the Industrial Revolution ‘Luddites’ worried that machines would take all the jobs, and now some worry we will have a Frankenstein scenario where AIs will ‘wake up’ and do unintended things.” (211)

Cyber Kids will make mistake, or many mistakes, as it had been happened to all human beings.

Mistakes or wrong doing are natural and part of adaptation process. Also un-intend, innocent mistakes, necessary mistakes, by chance and accidentally mistakes could be useful to human next activity, next decision making, to be not to repeat again is equal to wisdom, logical and part of evolution process and development.

Today, ‘millennial generation’ CKG of wealthy or middle class have the huge trending to exercise their quality.

They are the spearhead of change, huge fan of the so called Social Responsible Investment (SRI) society trend. This is what has change,

In the coming decades, first, they will inherit TG wealth estimates by Deloitte consultancy firm at 2020 of $24 trillion.

The US Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment, a lobby group estimates that more than a fifth ($8.7trn) of the funds under professional management in America is screened on SRI criteria,
In 2008, when she was in her mid 20s. Mrs Liesel Pritzker Simmons, the Hyatt Hotels descendant fired her bankers and advisers for making wrong answer to ‘impact investment’ she want to hear, In 2015, she launched ‘The ImPact’, a network pledging to ‘create measurable social benefit’ through its investments. It has over 125 signatories, as her generation’s answer to the ‘given pledge’ launched in 2010 by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.

According to Morgan Stanley survey, 75% of millennial agreed that their investments could influence climate change, compare to 58% of overall population. They are also twice as likely as investors to check product packaging or invest in companies that espouse social or environmental objectives.
Matt Bannick from Omidyar Network, an impact-investment firm said “…today over half of application to Stanford Graduate School of Business mention the school’s efforts to alleviate poverty in developing countries”.

Today 12 stock exchanges require listed companies to disclose ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance criteria) information: EU legislation mandates similar disclosure from pension fund; rating agencies rank companies.

Politics also comes to play: one option is to dump shares in firms allied to President Donald Trump.

Any money managers who pay only lip-service to SRI could face robots and millennials fury and punishment (212).

Cyber Kids need to go to the ‘real’ world. Their advantage is overwhelmingly greater than previous generations. Scientific and technological knowledge is more common and easier to access than in any time in human history. The rule of the thumb is that whoever gains valuable ‘factual’ knowledge and knows how to use it, is the one who will be success and has leadership quality.

In the eyes of Cyber Kids, the world has changed so much since we stepped into the digital age.

Empires and superpowers of all sorts have either expired or their influence is much fading. The world’s population is more interested in fair economies and creating a safety net, social justice and wellbeing, survival and peace. So, those who want to be respected and trusted cannot win their hearts and minds by force, dishonesty or disrespect. Today, modern tools and higher civilisation set the standard. Could Cyber Kids dare to believe that this stage of our human advancement will bring us all into the new world? Absolutely, “No Cyber Kids…No One World.”

Cyber Kids are mainly the product of all our latest Digital Revolution. They are the generation that are distinctively different from the past generations. They are actually and largely the product of the Silicon Valley revolution. They have experience of globalisation, world integration, fast and wider communication, new forms of retrieving information, knowledge and learning. They enjoy technology and equality, democracy, information, education, sport, entertainment, arts and leisure, multiculturalism and racial harmony never before available in human evolution record. They are the owners of the (future) new world. The Digital Revolution has had one of the most profound effects on the human way of life, our view of the world and the universe and most of all consciousness to a point impossible to imagine. They are not the sons and daughters of Isaac Newton’s time. They are the product of a mature world that has gained the definite advantage of humankind’s long accumulated experience and knowledge superior to any time in human history. They are brave, confident, lovers of learning, straightforward, merit based, open minded and realistic. This should be enough to dispel many doubters.

So, in the not so distant future, so-called old stereotypes of middle class will gradually disappear as the TG era comes to a close. Many of the old bourgeoisie (whether by birth or by climbing the social ladder) will disappear. Today, in this new era two billion of the new middle class will be and making different. They will be exposed to modern science and technology. They will have a modern education and an internationalised mind set. Many will make progress out of social mobility. They will crack the wall in huge numbers and turn to being middle class by their own making, not by birth. Their worldview and personal perceptions are much clearer cut than the old middle class. They will grow their own characteristic differences from the old class. They will not hold such narrow views and timidity when it comes to conflict and making changes, adapting and changing decisions.

These Cyber Kids will make big changes to the world as globalisation, Digital Revolution and the new 21st century environment creates the generation that will change the world according to what they live and know.

Here are the issues that Cyber Kids should tackle,

1. Outlaw war and all nuclear weapon.

2. Develop a new local and world governance system (where every world citizen will gain).

3. Develop world scale cooperation and fair competition as the new norm.

4. Prepare for a new 'political'  world governance system and make sure the old one becomes history.

5. Make the Digital Revolution a powerful and effective medium that Cyber Kids use to work out new ideas and leadership as the hallmark of their intelligence.

Indeed, CKG are the 21st century human species that have the humanistic mission and mandate to build the new world. The world is in their hands.

Certainly, this is a great time, a great transition period for humanity. And we need the bravest and greatest decisions. It will require a very small sacrifice, a very small cost for us to apply our newfound knowledge and experience under the guidance of the Law of Evolutionary and principals. The rewards will be immense. Let’s hope this is an open opportunity and is not the last chance?

But ask yourself, can Cyber Kids, the most advanced and most sophisticated citizens of the world ever, live in the ‘TG cocoon’ of old world ideals and survive?

Chapter 8. Environmental issue

Never before have we had to face an expected disastrous event comparable to the impact that climate change and global warming will have on humanity. In the modern age, science and technology have had both positive and negative impacts on the progress. The environment has been adversely impacted by increasing pollution and it is imperative that we must harness the creative wisdom of scientific knowledge, coupled with intelligent constraints in order to reduce pollution and achieve the full benefits of nature.

Evolving from the Stone Age through the Industrial Revolution from 1760 -1830, to the present, our diverse human activities while generating massive industrial benefits, also, threaten the ecology of the planet. When the positive impacts of human activities are weighed against the negative, the net impact on the planet is increasingly negative.

A major sticking point between the G7 developed nations and the developing nations, is that responsibility for the adverse impact of greenhouse gas emissions caused by the industrial revolution, has not been properly shared. According to the developing nations, the problem of greenhouse gas emissions must be fixed by the developed nations, as they were the beneficiaries. This means the developed nations should remedy the impact of greenhouse gases on the six billion members of the developing nations.

Another possible solution, is that the developed nations should embark on a greenhouse gas emission reduction plan cooperatively with the developing nations. As well all nations should be utilising sound scientific methodology and renewable energy projects employing solar energy, wind turbine farms, clean gas, lithium ion batteries, biology and other kinds of clean and renewable energy.

It is vital that the solutions to the environmental problems, should be long term, sustainable and should be free of political self-interest and superficiality. Where required developed nations should be willing to sacrifice living standards whilst developing nations impose selfrestraint in order to optimise the solution.

Current progress in addressing environmental issues

The UN has played an important role by convening conferences of environmental experts, to address the issues adversely impacting on the planet. The result of the meetings and world government consultations in 1976, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1996 resulted in setting up the office of climate change tasked with generating solutions for the climate change Issue. Listed below are the achievements of the office of Climate Change in Chronological order;

1. 1997-Kyoto Protocol formally adopted in December at the Conference of the Parties 3 (COP3).

2. 2001- Release of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s third Assessment Report.

3. 2001-Bonn Agreements adopted, based on Buenos Airiest Plan of Action of 1998

4. 2001-Maraketch Accords at the Conference of Parties (COP)7.

5. 2005-Feb.16 - the Kyoto Protocol entered into force. To mark this date, some Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, as well as institutions and organizations, have planned events and other activities.

6. 2005- November –December - First Meeting of the Parties (MOP1) to the Kyoto Protocol takes place at Montreal.

7. 2007 -IPCCC Fourth Assessment Report released.

8. At COP 13, Parties agreed to Bali Road Map.

9. 2009 — Copenhagen Accord drafted at COP15 in Copenhagen.

10. 2010 — Cancun Agreements drafted and largely accepted by the COP, at COP16.

11. 2011- The Durban Platform for Enhanced Action drafted and accepted by the COP17.

12. 2012- The Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol is adopted by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) CMP at CMP8.

All the above changes were adopted subject to the precondition of there being No Legal Binding (213).

An international environmental treaty was negotiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), informally known as the Earth Summit. The object was to forge a legally binding global climate treaty and to cut carbon emissions compliant with the currently available scientific advice.

The last climate change conference was convened in Warsaw, Poland on November 2013. It was referred to as Conference of the UN Framework Convention –COP19. The UN Framework Convention had a major deficiency, in that it failed to meet the target goal.

It must be noted, that the UN climate Change Conference monitors progress and keeps governments on the track of the Climate Agreement –p2 (214)

Disagreement between developed nations and developing nations

Developing nations clashed with developed nations, when Jayanthi Natarajan the India Environment Minister led a walkout comprising India, China and other developing nations with a combined total representation of 133 nations.

This was due to the developing nations maintaining that the developed nations failed to honour a pledge made at the Copenhagen Conference to provide $100 billion by 2020, to rectify environmental damage

“The 100 billion is a goal. We need to establish a very clear roadmap," said (Jayanthi Natarajan). "Unless that is provided for, it will be impossible for us to take forward any meaningful discussion and we feel the negotiations will be rendered completely meaningless,” she told the journalists.

“Most of all, representatives of the poorer nations argued that the financial burden associated with global warming is out of reach for them.” (215)

Ms. Natarajan further stressed that developed countries had to increase their emission reduction pledges under the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. “I only see with dismay that they are cutting down on their pledges”. (216)

In the United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP20 held in Lima Peru December 1 to 12, 2014, the overarching goal of the conference was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) to limit the global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius above current levels. The negotiation session between developed and developing nations was as always difficult as expected. The talks proved difficult because of divisions between rich and poor countries over how to spread the burden of pledges to cut carbon emissions. The agreement adopted hours after a previous draft was rejected by developing countries, who accused rich nations of shirking their responsibilities to fight global warming and pay for its impacts (217).

The developing nations accused the developed nations of trying to avoid the share burden of financing environmental damage, instead of rectifying the environmental damage exclusively, as pledged at the Copenhagen Convention. It was further, maintained that developing nations did not have the resources to implement environmental damage rectification.

As such it was claimed, that sharing the burden environmental damage rectification, was not realistic and would not work.

It is evident, that these clashes will continue unabated at future summits, unless a rational compromise is reached. This compromise will enhance the productivity of summits which to date, have resulted in limited progress.

Need for balanced view and compromise

In the current stalemate, a balanced view expressed by a Peruvian official, Pedro Sloan, belonging to the Peruvian Society of Environmental Law (SPDA), is refreshing. He considers creating a climate change adaptation strategy based on ecosystems and environmental compensation, sustained by natural infrastructure, an essential part of the negotiations. And “Climatic justice, added to nation's vulnerability, should allow a better mapping of what responsibility corresponds to each country," Sloan says. "It should allow that the goals and responsibilities (of COP 20) are viable and seek equilibrium of roles, which will in turn allow equilibrium on the planet." (218)

Sir David Attenborough, a leading environmental and natural scientist and film producer, has stated that;

“The future of life on Earth depends on our ability to take action. Many individuals are doing what they can, but real success can only come if there’s a change in our societies and our economics and in our politics. I’ve been lucky in my lifetime to see some of the greatest spectacles that the natural world has to offer. Surely we have a responsibility to leave for future generations a planet that is healthy, inhabitable by all species.” (219)

In 2012 Attenborough was further quoted as saying that “the planet has always and will always look after itself but: what worries him most about the future of natural world is that people are out of touch with it…over half the world is urbanized; some people don’t see any real thing except a rat or a pigeon…ecosystems are incredibly complex and you fiddle with them at you peril.” (220)

Thanks must go to this incredible man. He is a one and only, who has changed the consciousness of everyone by presenting us with the clearest natural world view.

A balancing act

The world community largely agrees that climate change is real and could threaten our survival. This situation is aggravated by the poor understanding of the climate.

“According to the IPCC, we must act swiftly, forcefully and globally to keep warming below the dangerous two degree celsius threshold. Energy sources such as solar, wind and nuclear that emit low or zero levels of carbon dioxide, along with technologies that can capture and store carbon, must triple by 2050, and greenhouse gas emissions must fall by 40 to 70 per cent, compared with 2010 levels.

The shift might be surprisingly affordable, cutting global economic growth by only 0.06 per cent a year, the panel has said. But if we wait until 2030, the necessary actions will be much more expensive, and it may become impossible to avert the threshold.” (221)

Prior to implementing a balanced solution, it is important to ascertain whether the climate change and global warming are manmade. The scientific consensus supports this. In order to ensure a sustainable future aspects of human activity must therefore be modified.

Let’s listen to chief scientist at Baidu Research in Silicon Valley. Professor Andrew Ng comment on how fiction could be causing or being used to arose imbalanced judgements or manipulate emotions.

“Andrew Ng of Baidu says worrying about super-intelligent AIS today Is like worrying about over population on Mars when we have not even set foot on the planet yet, And decades of science fiction have made it a more tangible fear than, say, climate change, which poses a much greater threat.” 222)

Food waste is a factor driving global warming

Torgny Holmgren of the Stockholm International Water Institute told a conference that in India up to 40% food rots on the way to market. Americans bin 40% of what they buy, wasting $165 billion. Britain throw away 600,000 tons of food a year. The fact that a third of all food grown globally never gets eaten is astonishing. But it also suggests one simple solution to meeting future food demand under climate change: eliminate food waste and there will be far less pressure on land, water, energy and biodiversity, plus huge greenhouse gas (223).

Evidence in support of the prevailing food waste, is available in the report of Tristram Stuart of Cambridge University, UK, where he states that;

“If we planted trees on land currently used to grow unnecessary surplus and wasted food, this would offset a theoretical maximum of 100% of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion.” (224)

Tristram Stewart, goes on to maintain that:

“The UK, US and Europe have nearly twice as much food as is required by the nutritional needs of their populations. Up to half the entire food supply is wasted between the farm and the fork. If crops wastefully fed to livestock are included, European countries have more than three times more food than they need, while the US has around four times more food than is needed, and up to three-quarters of the nutritional value is lost before it reaches people's mouths“ (225).

The UN North America Food Waste Report states that:

Every year, consumers in industrialized countries waste almost as much food as the entire net food production of sub-Sahara Africa (222 million vs 230 million tons). The amount of food lost and wasted every year is equal to more than annual cereals crops (2.3 billion tons in 2009/10).

In the US, organic waste is the second highest component of landfills, which are the largest sources of methane emissions. Around 30-40% of the food supply is wasted, equaling more than 20 pounds of food per person per month (226).

The evidence in previous paragraphs indicates a simple solution to meeting future food demand under climate change. Eliminate food waste, by replanting land devoted to agriculture. Replant the land with trees, devoted to decarbonising the atmosphere. This will not only eliminate food waste but would reduce the carbon footprint (227).

Another factor which can enhance decarbonisation, is recycling and elimination of current overproduction through automation, thereby ensuring optimum utilisation.

With the increasing global population, coupled with burgeoning industrial activity, driving excessive carbon pollution, there will a breaching of the 2 degree limit set by the United Nations Climate Change Conference, held in Lima, Peru, in 2014.

Clean energy generation, is a facet of human activity, driving mobile electrical power generation, with the object of decarbonising the atmosphere and reducing carbon pollution.

Japanese and Germany electric carmaker companies Nissan, Toyota, BMW and Volkswagen are at the forefront of research and development in the field of clean energy generation.

BMW and Daimler AG, in the Western Hemisphere, have formed a joint venture with BYD Chinese electric carmaker, in the Eastern Hemisphere with the object of replacing existing dirty technologies.

The above activities, have gained rapid traction not withstanding heavy lobbying and political pressure backed by numerous vested interests, connected to the old polluting technologies wedded to carbon pollution. These lobbies have received the sanction of powerful corporate groups associated within the motor vehicle Industry.

In January 2008, the Israeli government endorsed a proposed plan, to replace all vehicles in the nation with electrical engine in 10 years. The Project was to commence in 2011 (228).

In the middle of 2009, the German government approved a plan to spend 500 million Euro in support of one million electric cars before 2020.

In the case of nuclear reactors, a major, innovative development employs a gas-reactor ‘pebble’ nuclear energy safety technology. This cooling system can prevent a nuclear reactor from overheating or meltdown. Another breakthrough is a new nuclear reactor processing technology. It offers the option of recycling nuclear spent fuel material about sixty times over (229).

There are popular mass transport, high-speed train networks operating in Asia and Europe. It is fast becoming a mode of mass transport, gaining worldwide approval. At present, the train has commercial top speed of up to 430 km/h.

The principle benefits of this mode of mass transport, are detailed below:

1) Little or no pollution.

2) Reduces traffic congestion in big cities, as it replaces individual cars producing pollution, by taking them off the road.

3) When compared to airflights inside 1,000 km, it ensures faster, convenient, safer and cheaper travel.

Saudi Arabia's Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced a $500 billion plan to build a business and industrial zone project name NEOM that links with Jordan and Egypt. He appointed Klaus Kleinfeld, a former chief executive of Siemens AG and Alcoa Inc, to run the project.

NEOM, the 26,500 square km (10,230 square mile) zone will focus on industries including energy and water, biotechnology, food, advanced manufacturing and entertainment. The zone, which will have its own tax and labour laws and an autonomous judicial system, is to power itself solely with wind power and solar energy.

The ambitious and far sight NEOM is situated on one of the world's most prominent economic arteries ... Its strategic location will also facilitate the zone's rapid emergence as a global hub that connects Asia, Europe and Africa (230).

On July 2008, Al Gore, former US vice president, proposed that with a $300 billion investment per year for a period of 10 years, the United States will be able to quit using energy sources that emit carbon dioxide (e.g. coal and oil) He stated that it is possible now to develop an energy system completely without carbon dioxide emission (231).

It will cost China over $6.6 trillion (41 trillion yuan) to meet its greenhouse gas reduction goals, in its strategy for United Nations climate negotiations, according to Chinese vice Premier Wang Yang (232).

Germany’s Audi car production company, has successfully tested the A2 electric commercial car. The car ran at an economy speed of 130 km/h and lasted a distance of 600km, on a single battery charging, two to three times better, than other existing world brand electric cars. Further, the energy usage and longer distance capabilities demonstrated, were superior to similar brands (233).

The US Tesla electric car company has launched a project, with the major benefits: lower prices per unit/per KW machine, the car can operate over 500 km on a single battery recharging. This is a significant breakthrough. Tesla is building five billion dollar ‘gigafactory’ in Nevada in partnership with Panasonic, its Japanese battery supplier. Production should start next year and by 2020 reach the equivalent of enough lithium battery-packs to power 500,000 cars.

Rather than banking on occasional breakthroughs, in future years, Tesla reckons steady improvements and the manufacturing efficiencies of its giant factory will reduce battery costs by some 30% and help it sell more electric cars worldwide. Some of the batteries, though, will also be offered to businesses and households for energy-storage. In May, Tesla announced the Powerwall battery for this market. A 10-kilowatt-hour version will cost $3,500 (excluding controls and installation). Even if big innovations in lithium technology fail to materialize, lithium batteries seem to have a bright future (234).

Until recently, it was a transition that many found unthinkable. The battery industry has turned to be a key to world-changing role. From car, households power grid, office, industries you name it. It pose to replace the old energy supply: coal, oil and gas and other.

Kenan Sahin, who heads CAMX Power, an American company that supplies materials for cathodes, says the lithium-ion battery’s cost and weight, its ability to charge and discharge repeatedly…,

Until now, the mainstay has been a cylindrical cell called the 18650, has an energy density of perhaps 250 watt-hours per kilogram. (The energy density of petrol, for comparison, is about 50 times greater; but the cell can store that much energy hundreds or thousands of times.)

In East Asia, “Huge expansion is under way. The top five manufacturers—Japan’s Panasonic, South Korea’s LG Chem and Samsung SDI, and China’s BYD and CATL—are ramping up capital expenditure with a view to almost tripling capacity by 2020 (see chart 2).

The vast $5bn gigafactory Tesla is building with Panasonic in Nevada is thought to already be producing about 4GWh a year. Tesla says it will produce 35GWh in 2018. Just four years ago, that would have been enough for all applications across the whole world.”

If it all goes to plan, Mr Musk [Elon Musk, the owner and CEO of Tesla Inc.] hopes to see the gigafactory become the largest building in the world, cranking out 100GWh a year—and to be joined by further gigafactories elsewhere; the next would probably be in China.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), a consultancy, notes that forecasts from oil companies have a lot more electric vehicles in them than they did a few years ago; OPEC now expects 266m, [Bloomberg expects around 510m] such vehicles to be on the street by 2040 (see chart 1). Britain and France have both said that, by that time, new cars completely reliant on internal combustion engines will be illegal” (235).

All of these are important causes of change to the world clean energy supply and environment impact and how industrial conduct and survival forever

Actually, from now on, the dream of a clean electric car roaming the world streets could become a reality. It is likely, emerging nations like China, India, Russia, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the US and others will be the main beneficiaries, as these national economies will be able to accommodate the change, due to national policy direction and economies of scale.

The competition to capture global industry for lithium-ion batteries business is heating up. Battery manufacturers that want to operate in the US face an uphill climb. Lithium batteries come with the risks associated with thin profit margin, on top of the higher cost of land, labour and equipment. Make situation worsen is the Trump Administration promotes US natural gas, and ‘low-emission coal’. It’s cutting Energy Department program’s budget that supports the deployment of batteries in half. Moreover, the US tends to invest in cutting edge research neglected manufacturing improvements that allow for implementation.

That let to Shirley Meng, who runs the Laboratory for Energy Storage and Conversion at the University of California, San Diego said. "But when technology leaves the lab and enters the market, we have to start talking with the Chinese companies."

In China, “4.8 million number of electric vehicle charging stations expected to operate in China by 2020, up from 156,000 this year.”

The anticipated Chinese dominance of the industry comes as the government sees an opportunity to become a clean-energy leader providing solutions to the rest of the world-and reaping the profits.

China already manufactures more than half of the world's solar panels, and doing the same with batteries would leave China controlling an industry worth $40 billion a year by 2025, according to a Goldman Sachs analysis (236).

The smart phone has become a valuable tool, in daily living, worldwide. It provides people with a very cheap and relatively clean communication system when compared to the land line phone. People can use the tool to establish social communication, connection, interaction and help each other, for trade and for doing low cost business (237).

It saves time, reduces travelling costs and significantly reinforces the reduction of CO2 emission.
China’s State Grid, is the world largest operator of electricity grids.

“State Grid Chairman Liu Zhenya outlined his company’s vision on Wednesday, saying a new global electricity network is the world’s best bet for overcoming resource scarcity, and limiting the effects of pollution and climate change. Knitted together by new, efficient, longrange transmission lines, the world grid, he said, could be running by 2050 and would tap advanced technology for renewable solar and wind resources.”

“Now it has big plans for the world: a $50 trillion global power network that harnesses Arctic winds and equatorial sunlight… Rather than far-fetched, the State Grid plan is straightforward and much of it is technically feasible,” some experts said.

“Most of its premises are fundamentally correct, said David Sandalow, a former US acting undersecretary of energy who has spoken with Mr. Liu about State Grid’s proposal,” (238)

“Volvo plans to build only electric and hybrid vehicles starting in 2019, making it the first major automaker to abandon cars and SUVs powered solely by the internal combustion engine.

Chief executive Hakan Samuelsson said the move was dictated by customer demand. It means that in two years, all new Volvo vehicles will have some form of electric propulsion.” (239)

“France will outlaw the sale of all petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040, its new environment minister, Nicolas Hulot, has announced (240).

“New diesel and petrol cars and vans will be banned in the UK from 2040 in a bid to tackle air pollution, the government is set to announce.” (241)

Earth from space and Humanity from space have given us visualise our earth natural system and humanity created the systems that serving all of us well. These gigantic WSGN and WDWN networks of digital webs, systems visibly by the films are wrapping up the planet earth, in parallel to the invisible atmospheric hugging the globe to keep the natural system function and the world we live in exist and life.

Sun power, Humanity from Space discovering scientific knowledge tell us that, at  the end, not very far future, all ecological beings will have to go back to the genesis phrase, go back to harness and depending on the sun energy alone.

Today, the world needs more power energy than ever before. Oil could run out in the next 50 years, coal could last till next century, to 2050, fossil fuel energy will add 300 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere. We need to think of  a new solution to crack the energy nut. The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS) in California’s uses over 300,000 computer control mirrors, to focus sunlight on the top of a giant tower. It turns water into hot steam driving turbine. This produces enough electricity supply to 140,000 homes. Also another source of renewable energy associated with the sunlight is wind energy. Wind power is the single most successful form of renewable energy. It is actively used around the world. Many nations get a significant portion of their energy through wind. Annually, the solar energy received directly from the sunlight upon the planet has been quantified to equal 20, 000 times the global demand for energy. With growing population, our thirst for power is set to accelerate. The Holy Grail for the pervasive future is to turn to the power from the sun (242).

“Using satellite images and CGI as a narrative device, Mankind from Space [or Humanity from Space] traces everything, air and shipping routes, underwater and above ground cables, roads, and display of global lighting that makes the world seem like a giant manmade bauble. The same device in 2012’s Earth From Space showed similar connections that made the natural world virtually a single entity.”

 “We’ve built layer upon layer of interconnectedness. We ring ourselves really tightly as a species, from the food we eat – you go to supermarket, that stuff has come thousands of miles – to the electronic transfer of money. We have data that shows the power struggles of the world and who’s consuming what. It’s absolutely amazing.”

“You see humanity’s global footprint laid out in front of you. Infrared satellite images show the lights from everywhere on Earth, including ships at sea, while time-lapse photography shows the disappearance of the Aral Sea and a coal mine being dug to the size of a city in the space of a few years. It becomes difficult to reconcile the position in, say, climate change debates, that posit humans don’t affect the planet.” (243)

Advanced satellites provide a wealth of data about these continually developing networks and help gaze into the future like never before. Mankind from Space provides an unprecedented view from beyond the earth’s atmosphere, peeling back the networks layer by layer to reveal the globally connected society that many take for granted in their daily lives (244).

Plastic pollution problem

The Ocean Cleanup Organisation has released a report on plastic garbage in our oceans. It is creating a major pollution crisis that endangers marine life – a major food source for humanity.

           Fig.1, depicts major areas of the ocean impacted by the accumulation of plastic garbage.

                                     Fig 1 - Map depicts plastic garbage accumulation areas  

About 8 million tons of plastic enters the ocean each year (Jambeck et al., 2015). Part of this accumulates in five areas, 01 to 05, as depicted in Fig1,  where currents converge: the gyres.
At least 5.25 trillion pieces of plastic are currently in the oceans (Eriksen et al., 2014), a third of which is concentrated in the infamous Great Pacific Garbage Patch (Cózar et al., 2014). The  damage due to the plastic and its imapact in the years to come, is detailed in the extracts below;

Dr Julia Reisser, Lead Oceanographer at The Ocean Cleanup  said,

“I’ve studied plastic in all the world’s oceans, but never seen any area as polluted as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. With every trawl we completed, thousands of miles from land, we just found lots and lots of plastic.”

The fleet of close to 30 vessels sampled the concentration of plastic during its month-long voyage through the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. “Using a series of measurement techniques, including trawls and aerial surveys, this is in preparation for the large-scale cleanup of the area, set to begin in 2020. The following is what they founded;

Thanks to these expeditions we have been able to get a complete transect of the vertical plastic distribution in the North Atlantic from the US east coast all the way to the Azores. At the last expedition of June 26th-July 13th, the ‘Sea Dragon’ managed to cross the so-called North Atlantic Garbage Patch. Francesco Ferrari, one of our researchers, shares his experience: During these last two expeditions we have collected a total of 512 samples, able to trawl in a lot of different wind and sea conditions. At each trawling session we took samples every 50 centimetres, from the water surface to a depth of five meters. We found plastic particles in every sample, with most of the plastic concentrated at the interface airwater.

The Mega expedition’s primary goal is to accurately determine how much plastic is floating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. This was the first time large pieces of plastic, such as ghost nets and Japanese tsunami debris, have been quantified. This is by far the executing the largest ocean research expedition in history” (245).

The following, is part of a summary of a study on plastic waste, littering the world,

The inexpensive, durable material called plastic was invent less than 60 years ago. The now most items that people use are everywhere in the planet a partly or wholly made by plastics. Plastics have invaded every areas in this planet: from soils to lake beds, from remote Antarctic island shores to tropical sea beds. “Although quantities vary between countries, approximately 10 per cent of solid waste is plastic. Up to 80 per cent or sometimes more of the waste that accumulates on land, shorelines, the ocean surface or seabed is plastic… Fouled by organisms and sediment, plastics can sink and form an even higher proportion of human waste reaching the seabed, and quantities in excess of tens of thousands of items per square kilometer have been reported…. From the first reports in the 1970s, it was only a few years before the widespread finding of plastic including reports of microscopic fragments (20 µm in diameter)… It has also been suggested that plastic waste is deliberately being shredded into fragments to conceal and discard at sea. Plastics of all sizes are now reaching the most remote and deepest parts of the planet, and although we have a much better knowledge of their sources, quantities and distribution, we still understand little about their longevity and effects on organisms… However, our sustained demand for plastic means that contamination of the environment by micro-plastic pieces seems set to increase.” (246)

The adverse impact of plastics on human beings, are summarized below

“Evidence is mounting that the chemical building blocks that make plastics so versatile are the same components that might harm people and the environment. And its production and disposal, contributes to an array of environmental problem, too. For example:

-Chemicals added to plastics are absorbed by human bodies. Some of these compounds have been found to alter hormones or have other potential human health effects.

-Plastics debris, laced with chemicals and often ingested by marine animals, can injure or poison wildlife.

-Floating plastic waste, which can survive for thousand years in water, serves as mini transportation devices for invasive species, disrupting habitats.

-Plastics buried deep in landfills can leach harmful chemicals that spread into ground water.

-Around 4 per cent of world’s oil production is used as a feedstock to make plastics, and a similar amount is consumed as energy in the process.

People are exposed to chemicals from plastic multiple times per day through air, dust, water, food and use of consumer products.” (247)

“Groups such as Clean Up Australia have long campaigned for plastic bags to be banned
‘forever,’ and in March last year hopes were buoyed when federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt said he was prepared to use the ‘bully pulpit’ of government to ‘get rid of’ plastic bags.”

"Conservatively, we can identify at least 56,000 tonnes of plastic entering our environment every year, [including] beverage litter, tyre dust, synthetic fibres, production waste, microbeads and plastic bags," Boomerang Alliance national policy director Dave West said.

Dr Jennifer Lavers, a research fellow at the Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania said with 30 per cent of marine fish in the world's oceans considered to have plastic in their stomachs, there  was no doubt we are eating residual plastic contamination (248).

Greening of the planet

Greening of the planet is another valuable tool in decarbonising the atmosphere, thereby reducing pollution. Many resarch projects have been launched to arrest desertification on many continents like Asia and Africa.

A Yale University-led research study team, led by Thomas Crowther a Postdoc Associate School of Forestry and Environment Studies, reported: “The first ground-based mapping of global tree density has revealed that the planet has more than three trillion trees, about eight times as many as a 2008 tally of 400 billion…  The new analysis combined information with tree density measurements from about 430,000 forest plots in 50 countries, covering every continent but Antarctica.  The finding, was published in the journal Nature. The report proved two important points, first, mathematical, satellite, internet methods and other technologies combined could make a huge difference (to) efficacy and credibility. Second, this is fairly good news which mitigates environment and global warming concerns thereby providing a valuable tool for overall world environmental condition assessment.” (249)

China's Green Great Wall—formally known as the ‘Three-North Shelter Forest Programme’— is regarded by some experts as the largest ecological engineering project on the planet. Since 1978, at least 100,000 square miles of forests have been planted by Chinese citizens across the arid north, in an effort to hold back the creeping Gobi Desert. Once the project is completed in 2050, a massive belt of trees will stretch from northwestern China's Xinjiang through several northern region countries [Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Russia and North Korea] to the country's northeastern part, Heilongjiang province (250).

A pan-African proposal to ‘green’ the continent from west to east in order to battle desertification aims at tackling poverty and the degradation of soils in the Sahel-Saharan region. It is focusing on a strip of land of 15 km (9 mi) wide and 7,100 km (4,400 mi) long from Dakar to Djibouti.

The vision evolved into an integrated ecosystem management approach in January 2007, when the African Union adopted declaration 137 VIII, approving the ‘Decision on the Implementation of the Green Wall for the Sahara Initiative.’ In June 2010, Burkina Faso, Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal and Sudan signed a convention in Ndjamena, Chad, to create the Great Green Wall (GGW) Agency and nominate a secretary to further develop the initiative (251).

China installed 14GW of solar energy in 2014 and its medium-term plans calls for 70GW of installed capacity by 2017. As the longer term potential, outlined by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), it will be the most ambitious to be achieved on an international scale (252).

In the US producing renewable energy, at costs less than coal and oil, has been a dream is dawning. Several companies have signed contracts, known as power purchase agreements, for solar or wind, at prices below that of natural gas and coal. A study of the investment, has revealed the following, after excluding rebates;

1) Solar energy-7.2 cents per KWH

2) Wind Energy – 3.7 cents per KWH –Low End Price

3) Coal    Energy – 6.6 cents per KWH (253)         

Peaceable coexistence, in harmony with nature, is the passport to cost effective survival. This is supported by Charles Darwin, when he stated “loving of all living creatures is the most-noble attribute of man.” (254)

China’s lessons from mistreating the environment

China paid a high price of financially and environmentally for its past neglect of the environment.

The Beijing smog and creeping desertification by the Gobi Desert affected the health of the economy and public health.

There is no excuse for failing to harvest the benefits of living in harmony with nature.

The question is can we harness innovation to secure an alternative option which is cost effective and in harmony with the environment?

The answer is yes if we take serious action to address the very environmental issues confronting us globally.

Decarbonising the atmosphere and utilising clean energy

In practice, the invention of clean energy production and use of recycling of all used materials is insufficient at present. Decarbonising the atmosphere is a powerful solution to the environmental problem confronting humanity. One option documented in the New Scientist is pumping sulphates into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight. “(Geophysical Research Letters, However this would risk cooling the tropics more than it would cool the poles. Other options would be to suck all the excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or build huge barriers between warming waters and glaciers,” (255)

Environment, population and security issues cannot be separate considerations

There are two other major factors adversely affecting the atmosphere – population growth and security. To achieve a sustainable standard of living, we must limit the world population to let’s say around six billion via effective family planning.

The current world population is estimated at 7.4 billion. By the year 2030, it is estimated to reach 8.6 billion. Failure to implement effective family planning, will result in humanity being plunged into an irreversible crisis. When handling the dilemma of population growth, we should avoid falling into the trap of unrestrained growth. Can natural law and its restraints, as dictated to by evolution be breached without penalty?.

“Exploring three approaches in which the estimated probability of extinction shows a power-law relationship with geographical range size, we predict, on the basis of mid-range climate-warming scenarios for 2050, that 15–37% of species in our sample of regions and taxa will be ‘committed to extinction’. When the average of the three methods and two dispersal scenarios is taken, minimal climate-warming scenarios produce lower projections of species committed to extinction ( 18%) than mid-range ( 24%) and maximum-change ( 35%) scenarios. These estimates show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.” (256)

Once a human being is born he or she should be entitled to the same benefits and rights that our generation in developed nations enjoy.

Quality planning of technological infrastructure, town planning and family planning should be systematic interlinked, in order to prevent lurching from one problem to another as at present.

Once a new vision and trust are established, courage will grow, hand in hand with confidence, leading to a safer, sustainable world.

It is clear that planning and designing, are essential prerequisites, for the implementation of a new world, embedded in a coherent ecological system. 

Chapter 9. The world over-population issue

Is there a looming of world over population crisis? 

This issue has plagued many demographers, economists, politicians and scientists in the last few decades, resulting in conflicting conclusions. After analysing different findings on the subject, evidence based observations show the world is lacked of effective systematic, family planning. Many poor, developing nations are undergoing rapid increases in population and have little or no effective ‘plan’ to check the growth rate. Most experts and people who are interested in the issue have neglected or ignored, related to the contributing political, social and cultural values and beliefs of different societies.

At the same time many developed nations’ population growth has shrunk below the replacement rate. This in turn could affect their social and economic development. What’s more an ageing population problem could lend further to a below zero population growth in these nations.

Meanwhile the burden of over population in developing nations will badly affect to the Cyber Kids Generation, where very few people are concerned about.

Indeed, the overpopulation issue, as we have come to realise, must be confronted with action, not just words. In order to solve the current imbalance and prevent future insurmountable problems arising, we must let go of our own narrow, political and ideological agendas. The issue poses little effort to the people directly involved. It does not seriously concern or prejudice them. They perhaps might have a hidden agenda, to the expense of world’s appropriate way of development.

The population issue is about action not rhetoric or compromise. It is more important to the next generation than to the current generation for it is the next generation who will be the victims and have to bear the blunt of the negative impact of an over population burden.

Human beings live in the most technologically advanced era ever. We have access to an enormous knowledge base and rich experience that should be more than enough to help us solve many difficult problems. But we fail to do so. One of our failures is overcoming the population problem.

By the 21st century our perception of human rights, once a child is born, is that they should have a decent living environment and assurance of six basic human necessities - food, water, shelter, medicine, clothing and education. This is the basic standard humans aim to achieve and must achieve and are capable of achieving, no matter what.

Current world population trends

At the beginning of 2014, the world’s population was estimated at 7.2 billion, with another approximately 82 million born every year. Roughly a quarter of this growth is occurring in the least developed countries (257).

“The United Nations (UN) projects that the global population will zoom from approximately 7.1 billion people today to 9.6 billion people by 2050. The World Bank and US Census Bureau expect it to reach 9.4 billion. Other models suggest anywhere from 8.3 billion to 10.9 billion souls on the planet by 2050.” (258)

India and China already have difficulties finding enough water and producing enough food for their people. Both nations are struggling to get their population out from poverty so they can live as well as people in developed countries.

Are world population projections of just under 11 billion on the planet by 2100 a concern?

A study by UNICEF, the UN children’s agency points out that, by 2100, on current birth rates, Africa would have 4.2 billion people compared to 1.1 billion Africans today. Nigeria could have 910 million compare to today’s 180 million, on a land size similar to Pakistan or Venezuela (259).

The latest analysis of the causes behind such fast population increase on the African continent show:

“In Africa, where women give birth on an average to 4.7 children, the population is rising nearly three times faster than the rest of civilisation. The continent where our species arose faces a worrisome future. Fertility – the number of live births over a woman’s lifetimeremains high in most of Africa’s 54 countries. Africans have long valued large families as a matter of status and as a way to create family workers for farmland and to counteract high death rates for young children. And more babies than ever are surviving to become parents themselves[this  point is crucial, because it is depend on how longer a mother baring child age is extend with the available of modern medicine, in which was not available to the past generation mothers]. More than half the continent’s nearly 1.2 billion people are children or teenagers, a ratio that is building powerful momentum for years of expansion at a pace humanity has never known. By the end of this century, demographers now project, Africa’s inhabitants will triple or quadruple… The United Nations now forecasts six billion to 6.1 billion people -staggering numbers…. Despite perceptions to the contrary, national economic growth alone does not push fertility down powerfully.” (260)

“A significant fertility decline can be achieved only if women are empowered educationally, economically, socially and politically. They must also be given easy and affordable access to contraceptives. Following this integrated strategy, Mauritius has lowered its fertility rate from six to 1.5 children; Tunisia's rate dropped from seven to two.”

“Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.”

“For such efforts to succeed ultimately, government leaders must encourage public and policy conversations about slower population growth.” (261)

Let’s see what the latest available population statistics show about what exact number of world’s population and where they are belong.

In 2013, according to the OECD statistics report; the world total population stood at,

7,162,120,000.  The 34 developed nations under the OECD, had a total population of 1,257,114,000, with the rest of 5,905,006,000 being the developing nations’ total population (262).

At it stands, this means the vast majority of the worlds’ population, all in the developing nations, has already been overwhelmingly effected by negative issues they are unable to solve. These include:

Global poverty

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about 795 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2014-2016. Almost all the hungry people, 780 million, live in developing countries, representing 12.9 percent, or one in eight, of the population of developing counties. There are 11 million people undernourished in developed countries (FAO 2015; for individual country estimates, see Annex 1.

For other valuable sources, especially if interested in particular countries or regions, see IFPRI 2016 and Rosen et. al. 2016) (263).

The population issue is directly related to women’s right, poverty, violence and war.  According to the UN report of 26 October - “When women have equal rights and opportunities in their societies and when girls are educated and healthy, fertility rates fall ... the empowerment of women is not simply an end in itself, but also a step towards eradicating poverty." (264)

Global deaths from hunger or malnourishment

Here are 15 world hunger statistics (only 6 points are showing here).

1. Approximately 842 million people suffer from hunger worldwide. That’s almost 12 percent of the world’s population of 7.1 billion people.

2. Ninety-eight percent of those who suffer from hunger live in developing countries. 553 million live in the Asian and Pacific regions, while 227 million live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Latin America and the Caribbean account for 47 million.

3. India has the highest population of hungry people. In 2014, over 190.7 million people were undernourished in India.

4. Approximately 9 million people die of world hunger each year according to world hunger statistics; more than the death toll for malaria, AIDs and tuberculosis combined in 2012.

5. Over 60 percent of the world hungry are women, who have limited access to resources because of the patriarchal societies in which they live.

6. Because of the prevalence of hunger in women in developing countries, malnutrition is a leading cause of death for children. Approximately 3.1 million children die of hunger each year, and in 2011 poor nutrition accounted for 45 percent of deaths for children under five (265).

“In recent decades, scientists have increasingly warned of the potential to reach the upper limits of the planet’s productive, absorptive, and recuperative capacities.” (266)

Global unemployment

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) 2015 report reveals that 1.8 billion young people aged between 10 and 24 are living in the world today, 90 per cent of those live in the developing countries, up from 721 million young people in 1950.

The report warns that many young people remain out of work and says the ‘global youth employment crisis’ is worsening. Globally, 73.4 million youths between 15 and 24 were unemployed in 2013 (267).

Nearly 142 million girls will be married before their 18th birthday by 2020. Every day 39,000 girls under 18 years will become child brides, while 36 per cent of women worldwide have experienced sexual violence, according to the 2014 State of the World Population report (268).

Other important factors have not been taken into account; the UN global life expectancy at birth recorded from 1950-1955 was 46 to 65 years. Today it is 75 years and is expected to reach 82 years in 2050.

An ageing world population is a creeping problem. A recent UN’s population study shows that due to high birth and low death rates, the world population has doubled from 891 million in 2013 to over 2 billion in 2050. The UN report predicts that by 2047, the aging population number will surpass youth for the first time in human history.

World population forecasts have all pointed to the fact that the poorest nations will face a high growth in population, that they are unable to control. However many of the world’s experts and institutions involved in the issue just look on and pretend nothing serious is happening even though the problems are before their eyes.

Advances in food production, modern medicine and healthcare, better education and the slow speed of industrialisation have all played a part in exacerbating the high population growth in developing nations.

The impact of world over population

Experts on world population agree that relying on knowledge of science and technology alone to solve food and resource issues with the millions of people being born is unwise. The world needs to balance population levels with the resources to provide for the entire world population.

It is true that individual consumption is a significant factor that depletes natural resources. However, population increase is the crucial factor. Every birth creates a chain of life-long consumption [consume all things not just food].

Developed and developing nations have opposite problems they need to address. In the developed nations the population is shrinking, while in the developing nations the population keeps growing.

The poorer a nation; the faster the population growth. Can we tackle this problem?. For the first time a writer for The Economist has come up with a more factual and down to earth report on what is really behind and the population grow, the   tendency of population explosion in Africa (and some other developing nations).

“Alarmingly, population growth in Africa is not slowing as quickly as demographers had expected. In 2004 the UN predicted that the continent’s population would grow from a little over 900m at the time, to about 2.3 billion in 2100. At the same time it put the world’s total population in 2100 at 9.1 billion, up from 7.3 billion today. But the UN’s latest estimates, published earlier this year, have global population in 2100 at 11.2 billion—and Africa is where almost all the newly added people will be. The UN now thinks that by 2100 the continent will be home to 4.4 billion people, an increase of more than 2 billion compared with its previous estimate.”

The same report also have not address specific problem on culture, tradition, the length of better economic grow before it reach specific point and level of improve economic, to a specific faster and higher grow level of other developing nations, as did by Scientific American report. What about Asia, North Africa and developing nations in other regions?

Then, at this point, all so-called world population experts must take notice (269).

Can the people of OECD 34 developed nations who live in a ‘mini paradise’ in advanced societies, deny the people of developing nations their own ‘mini paradise’?

The Brookings Institution estimates that there are 1.8 billion people who are middle class.  This will grow to 3.2 billion by the end of the decade. Asia is almost entirely responsible for this growth. Its middle class is forecast to triple to 1.7 billion by 2020.

Can the developing nations stem their desire to live in abundance like the developed nations do?

Politicians in the developed nations are desperate to fix the national debt. They take inequality issue lightly and look to the easy target of the age pension. They race to increase the qualifying age of the pension with no clear understanding of the issue and it consequences. Let us take 65 as the pension age in the developed nations as an acceptable/appropriate age rank according to the UN. Both 50 or70 year pension age ranks are too extreme. Instead governments should look into inheritance tax, wealth tax, tax havens, tax loopholes, money laundering and other criminal financial business.

The consequence of attacking the pension could set off a chain reaction – a type of job musical chairs. The pensioner or would-be pensioner would need to take the jobs of middle aged workers, middle aged workers would take young people’s job, leading to young people being out of work in droves. What would be left for the future of the CKG?

The Economist about the special report on ‘The new old’ longevity has come up with the future world aging population problems and how to deal with it, it is a heap of positive, useful information, idea and prediction.

“When Otto von Bismarck brought in the first formal pensions in the 1880s, payable from age 70 (later reduced to 65), life expectancy in Prussia was 45. Today in the rich world 90% of the population live to celebrate their 65th birthday, mostly in good health, yet that date is still seen as the starting point of old age.”

“Estimates of life expectancy over recent decades have regularly proved too conservative. Some demographers already think that children born in the rich world today will routinely make it to 100.

With vast sums being pumped into fields such as stem-cell research, regenerative medicine, biomedical technology and genomes, human lives could stretch well beyond that…” (270)

The negative point of the report is, does not included around 6 billion out of over 1 billion world population’s future: report only cover rich world developed nations one.

Central to all beings is reproduction - a successful reproduction rate equates with successful evolution. Insects have the highest rate - twice of all the other species put together.  The human reproduction rate is very high and by their innovations and adaptive ways humankind has been extraordinary successful. We have surpassed all the other species with our capacity and ability to adapt and change. Humankind even poses a threat to all other species and severe damage to natural world (271).

There are obvious predictable consequences that could have a huge negative impact on the world, foremost the environment. Also human degradation, indignity and suffering have become a way of life with the negative consequences affecting the coming generations badly. Indeed, the uncontrollable increase in world population could pose a threat to world survival. Over population and an unhealthy unbalanced modern lifestyle also combine to cause mental illness.

What should we do now?

The population issue is not the Thomas Malthus population explosion issue any more. It is the issue of an over populated world that causes natural resource depletion. The natural environment and all beings are thrown out of balance. It creates unmanageable, unsustainable, unsolvable expected and unexpected negative effects, conflicts and problems.

Past UN and other world population growth studies share much the same perception and that is that, overall, the world fertility rate will decrease fast enough to balance the replacement level. This means there should be nothing to be alarmed or concerned about. We must rethink this notion.

India and China have no need to have over one billion people each. They cannot reverse the situation however.  It is already a tragedy and suffering cannot be avoided. How could we let similar mistakes be repeated again in other parts of the world?.  It is not fun or funny matter. Let see the results of what experts in rich nations advocate. They do not seem to know what they are talking about.

For example: A new study—conducted by UNICEF—offers evidence of a steady and widespread fall in malnutrition. But the picture is still worrying. Judged by measures such as the prevalence of ‘stunting’ (when children are unusually short for their age) and ‘wasting’ (when they weigh too little for their height), India is still vastly hungrier than Africa.

As the Rapid Survey On Children (RSOC) reports, shows gains at both national and state levels. But not enough to repel a ‘crisis’ and turn the tide. While UNICEF’s nutrition adviser for South Asia, Victor Aguayo, says India’s overall gains have been ‘unprecedented.’ A decade ago 42.5% of all children under five were underweight. Now the reported rate is just below 30%. The problem is that while the RSOC suggests that the proportion of children who are wasted has fallen from nearly 20% to 15%, and the rate of children who are stunted is down from 48% to nearly 39%, more than half of children in Uttar Pradesh, a massive northern state, are below normal height.

Interestingly, even among the wealthiest fifth of Indian households, more than a quarter of children are stunted. Sexism is a factor. Mothers and girls get less food, health care and education than males. Over half of all girls aged 15-18 had a low body-mass index, meaning they would likelier to produce undernourished babies. A deworming campaign has achieved little: not even 28% of under-fives had been given a recent dose. And though many women gave birth in institutions, but fewer than half of babies were breastfed within an hour of birth recommends by WHO.

India’s habit of defecating in the open makes matters worse. Even the proportion of Indians who do this has fallen from 55% a decade ago to 45%, but that is more than enough to help spread disease, worms and other parasites that make it more difficult to absorb nutrients even when food is abundant.

Poor public hygiene may account for much of India’s failure to make faster improvements in nutrition. There is a clear correlation between open defecation and hunger (see chart). In African countries, the proportion of children who are underweight is 21%—well below India’s level. For India to match that, more states will have to act like Maharashtra. Growth alone is not enough. Politicians also need to make women and other vulnerable groups get the food, medicine and toilets they need (272).

In South Asia, “Among the richest quintile in Delhi (it is a similar story in Dhaka and elsewhere), women can enjoy maternal and other care close to first-world standards. By contrast the poorest quintile in the same cities, especially in slums, endure conditions as bad—or worse—than in far poorer villages: in Delhi only 19% of such women have someone skilled present when they give birth. Barely half of their children have had a measles jab and nearly three-fifths are stunted.” (273)

Without effective family planning being enforced in recent decades both India and China would already have more than 300 million to 400 million people suffering malnutrition. This population cannot be a productive force building a prosperous and happy society. It is a burden for a ‘poor developing’ nation to nurture, care and carry sick or partially abnormal people. Could any wise guy give the wise answer to deal with this problem? If so please stand up?

What is worrying is that after the Hindu Nationalist Party (BJP) lead by Mr. Narendra Modi won the national election in 2014, population has become a hot topic of debate. One of his government MPs advocated “…every Hindu woman should have at least four children to protect the Hindu religion.” A party colleague further called for up to five children per Hindu woman (274).

If the idea becomes an enforced policy and there are around 300 million fertile Indian Hindu couples complying, this will translate into 600 million extra children based on an average two more children for each couple. Within ten years India could become a nation with a population of 1.8 billion. All together India could have over 2 billion people in the next decade or decades. Unthinkable and what for?

So, all this should be blamed on careless world population institutions and politicians with unrealistic beliefs. Ignorance, extremists and conservative faith groups also play a part. Thus irresponsible actions are advocated, poor and misguided reports released – all offering what people want to hear and feel good about. They set out to win a shallow argument and do nothing at all to help overcome global overpopulation.

Imagine, if China did not introduce family planning decades back. China could have nearly 2 billion people by now or in the near future. Who would be responsible for this? Who can guarantee that the populations of India or China will not surge to two billion each in the decade or decades to come simply because they fail to enforce effective family planning, abandon painful coercive population control policies or fail to find a new, better way? In fact, even at a time both nations are becoming industrialised, they still have to treat the issue seriously.

Trying to win an argument but only making things worse is not civilised or wise. It does not help to point to how South Korea, Singapore or Taiwan have avoided population explosions without taking any social, political or economic steps. Their different circumstance mean the ‘do nothing’ argument does not stack up.

India, China, Nigeria and most of the tropical poor nations in the world do not have the ability to industrialise their economies and societies fast enough to prevent a population explosion. These nations, due to historic, geographic, or climate factors have yet to industrialise. They are too hot or too cold, landlocked, arid or too far away from industrilisation nation's neighborhood or else to make rapid progress. Advances in medicine, food production technology and knowledge are lacking. Economic improvement from the bottom to the beginning of industrialised process (critical and effective of family planning to controlling birth rate is taking too long. Their people are too poor and too many illiterate. It may be that families require labour or want large families for cultural, traditional and political reasons. It could be compounded and created temporary imbalance of high surviving rate via advance of medicine and health care. But the chance to stabilise their population will never be possible before they become over populated or before they industrialise).

However, there are exceptions. Dr Mechai Viravaidya, a Thai Senator and founder and Chairman of the Population and Community Development Association (PDA), for example.  The local daily, the Nation reports how he became a hero when he launched, with great fanfare, the Population and Community Development Association (PDA), a private non-profit organisation.

“His imagination fuelled the family planning efforts in its early stages, raising it from a progressive program to an inspired celebration of contraceptive information. Mechai established a high profile public education campaign, staging such events as a condom balloon-blowing contests featuring village headmen competing for condom-inflating glory. Mechai and other PDA workers could be found handing out condoms at movie theatres and traffic jams – anywhere where there was a crowd.”

“Mechai played an instrumental role in curbing Thailand’s population growth, from 3% in 1974 to 0.6% in 2005, with the average number of children per family falling from seven to under two.” (275)

“The PDA also successfully mobilised significant support from the corporate sector for rural development activities through its Thai Business Initiative in Rural Development (TBIRD).

Virayaidya received the United Nations Population Award in 1997, and was appointed UNAIDS Ambassador in October 1999.” (276)

On the other hand how can developed nations cope with falling birth rates and ageing populations? One way is for business to adapt to an older workforce. In 2007 the German carmaker BMW redesigned a gearbox production line to fit the older profile of its workers. BMW introduced wooden floors and special shoes to ease joint strain; flexible magnifying glasses for working with small parts; and larger typefaces on computer screens. The changes brought the productivity of older workers up to that of younger workers at minimal cost and have since been applied across the company.

Indeed, several studies have found that older workers are as, and often more, productive than their younger colleagues. As the Bundesbank’s Mr Weidmann notes,

“The young can run faster, but the old know the shortcuts.” (277)

Sir David Attenborough is right “We cannot continue to deny the problem. People have pushed aside the question of population sustainability and not considered it because it is too awkward, embarrassing and difficult. But we have to talk about it.” (278)

Actually, we must not just seriously talk about it, any institution, any entity keeping silent and failing to come up with concrete and realistic action must be condemned. Self-fulfilling narrow interests do not comply with the evolutionary principle. Such a mindset is irresponsible in this world, especially to the next generation.

World need a medium and long term plan to oversee and handle the world’s population issue. We need to set target and the safety level, appropriate and balancing bottom line for how future world’s population size supposed to be. World institution like new UN should study and set a long term world population planning plan: by setting target of the appropriate current and future population number, base on world affordable natural resource, environmental sustainable evolving, 21 century humanity advance quality, and a set of advance world's level living standard. This could translate and calculate into for example: World maximum population of 6 billion fix target. At this point of calculation, world need to step by step reduce it population, for example start from today: 2050; 8 billion, 2100; 9 billion, 2150; 8.5 billion, 2200; 8 billion (this estimate number is based on practical and possibility we human currently could manage). And from 2250; 8 billion, 2300; 7 billion, 2350; 6 billion. Then, all along China and India at year 2350 should successfully reduced their population to around 500 million each. The US might can increased their population to a maximum of 500 million. Nigeria end up with 300 million, so on and so forth. This also highlight that, world need a capability organisation or body to impose short term, medium term and long term governing task. An advance highly intelligence, far sight peace lover of One World governance system of course.

The world’s responsible entities must come up with a world scale family planning plan. Let us say we were the first to set a global population target that our natural resources could comfortably support. It should also be a target that will sustain our environmental health and provide the entire world population a lifelong guarantee of decent living conditions.

The population issue is directly linked to poverty - to people dying of hunger, disease, conflict and war. Refugees can be the world’s common security issue. The question is how civilised can humans claim to be if they choose to ignore the problem.

Seriously speaking, the population issue is directly related to both environmental and global security issues.

Chapter 10. Global security

Peaceful coexistence between nations is the recipe for global security on the planet.

“Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), is a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the total destruction of both the attacker and the defender, becoming thus a war that has no victory nor any armistice but only destruction. It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the same weapons. The strategy is effectively a form of Nash equilibrium in which neither side, once armed, has any incentive to disarm” (279).

MAD is a logical oddity, which is supposed to denote a global disaster precipitated, typically, by the US and the USSR declaring war, in a Cold War era. This would assure total annihilation and global extinction. Since the appearance of MAD in the international political lexicon, it has served as a deterrent, with qualified success. However, it is pertinent to note that reliance on the bizarre logic of MAD, is not a passport to a peaceful nights slumber.

In Europe, the US and the allies rely on the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), to deliver on the security required in a Cold War environment. It implies, the drawing of a redline, which, if crossed, could results in war or nuclear war. In the prevailing tense atmosphere, a minor breach of protocol or misjudgement, or accident could trigger a nuclear war.

The US and the USSR armed forces encountered each other across many European borders, when the USSR was undergoing political and economic reform. During this period, former president Mikhail Gorbachev faced provocations from hardliners who opposed the Perestroika (‘openness’) policy, in Russia as well as sophisticated manipulations initiated by the Reagan doctrine. For example NATO drew closer to the Russian border, where NATO, especially the US, had promised during Gorbachev era before the USSR collapse, it would not (280).

This is the American Wild West mentality. But these days it goes beyond the American Indian, it is against Russia and any nation that does not submit. How could it be in 21st century and a Cyber Kids Era.

The move to clear to destabilise and to control the Russia had the opposite consequence.

Actually, it’s propelled Russia nationalist sentiment to the highest. The US actions gave Russian president Vladimir Putin and his government a good incentive to mobilise and unite their people and reform.

MOSCOW — As the Soviet Union was breaking up 25 years ago, Mikhail Gorbachev expected the United States and its Western allies to provide vital aid. The former Soviet president thinks their failure to offer significant help wasted a chance to build a safer world and resulted from short-sighted gloating at a Cold War rival's demise (281).

Then come the Ukraine crisis. “Internal divisions have haunted Ukraine ever since its independence. The east and south, which are primarily Russian-speaking and prone to Soviet nostalgia, tend to favor closer ties with Russia. Ukraine’s west, parts of which belonged to Poland until the Second World War, is mostly Ukrainian-speaking and inclined towards integration with the European Union.

Ukrainian politicians long exploited these divides for electoral gains. In 2014, the Kremlin played on them to ignite separatist rebellions in Donetsk and Luhansk, two of Ukraine’s eastern most provinces. The separatists there declared ‘people’s republics’ and waged open war with Moscow’s support. Though a ceasefire was agreed in Minsk in February, fighting continues all along the front lines.” (282)

In the above situation, Putin was facing NATO and the Pentagon strategists,

In Europe, Russia seized Crimea, waged proxy warfare in eastern Ukraine, and threatened NATO allies on Russia’s periphery. Further demonstrating its newfound assertiveness, Russia has dispatched forces to Syria and strengthened its nuclear arsenal. After a failed attempt to ‘reset’ relations with Moscow, US President Barack Obama has issued stern warnings and imposed economic sanctions, but these have done little to deter Putin (90) (283).

Russia has its own logic of international affairs.

Russia has rejected the US and ally logic of world order under the US led. Instead, suggesting the authority of UN.

Since the end of last century, the world order is based on balance of power, respect for sovereignty, non-interference in other states. And the UN under Security Council’s has the authority power of approval of using military force. (284)

When adversaries plagued by problems, confront each other, it only requires a minor indiscretion to trigger an irreversible ‘nuclear war threat’ crisis. The radical Ukrainians and some NATO members were making provocative moves and remarks. This does not help prevent war and is painting themselves into a corner. It could trigger Article 5 of the NATO treaty that demands collective defence. An attack against one ally is considered as an attack against all allies. This could escalate into nuclear war.

The consequences of such action, in a nuclear context can be globally devastating.

Fortunately, in this case the US retaliated but its response was measured and it played down the crisis by refusing to provide the more powerful weapons requested by the Ukrainian President Peter Poroshenko in September 2014.

The reality is that when the US has a confrontation with a nuclear armed opponent, more circumspect, diplomatic methods are employed, since the penalty for naked aggression, could mean mutual extinction.

This scenario could be reenacted in all other theatres where the US is involved, from the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa. In Eastern Europe the three Baltic nations, such as Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia, are of particular significance. This could lead to a Cuban missile crisis in reverse. In fact, the NATO treaty, is at the crux of global security. Then there is East Asia and the South China Sea to contend with.

World leaders alone cannot find a solution to the global nuclear crisis we confront in the numerous theatres of conflict. It can only be resolved when the world comes to realise we need a new form of administration implemented globally. The only way out of this hostage situation is to come to world scale settlement by pressure from below and above.

Albert Einstein once said, "Mankind's desire for peace can be realised, only by the creation of a world government." (285)

This will not mean world’s peace lovers campaigning hard for world peace are no longer necessary. Instead their efforts should be encouraged and gain highest respect ever. It is one of the many ways of universal struggle to ensure a lasting commitment to world peace.

Nuclear war

The threat of nuclear war increases with time. Joan Rohlfing president of the nuclear threat initiative said;

Joan Rohlfing is president and chief operating officer of the Nuclear Threat Initiative said, “Whether or not we are in a new arms race may be the wrong question… What I propose we think about is: are the risks of nuclear use increasing or are they decreasing? And I believe we are in a period where the risks of nuclear use is increasing. Nuclear risk is a function of more than just whether or not we are in an arms race. It's also a function of whether we have leaders who understand those risks. We have a new crop of leaders, who, in many cases, don't have the understanding of the tools that were developed through the Cold War and that is a very troubling situation.”

“I am a child of the ‘60s and 70s’ and I remember even as a child, going to bed at night and thinking, ‘I wonder if I'll wake up the next morning’ knowing there was the possibility that a nuclear weapon could be detonated over my hometown”. “I think with the current generation of children, the good news is they don't live with that palpable threat. The bad news is that because they and their parents don't live with that threat we've really lost all sense of how dangerous these weapons are and therefore we aren't managing it properly.” (286)

The US has dictated NATO policy. Since the time of Putin took over from Boris Yeltsin. This is a mistake. In Putin, the US had initially a pro-Western successor, who has now transformed into assertive Russian leader, who is convinced that the Western world is conspiring to frustrate, humiliate Russia. The West made the mistake of treating Russia as the ‘eternal enemy’. It has used the Ukraine as a tool that must be compelled to decouple itself from Moscow and pivot towards Brussels economically, militarily and politically. In this respect, the US and the West failed to accommodate Putin as an iron willed successor to Yeltsin.

This was a policy failure. Instead of pursuing convergence, the US has lurched from crisis to crisis, creating an image of NATO aggression on the borders of the Russia.

This is not a policy which could generate enduring peace which both the US and Europe desire, as major stakeholders. These views are endorsed by Professor Richard Sakwa, a Russian expert, quoted in the Nick Miller book, entitled ’Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands’;

University of Kent's Professor Richard Sakwa: “The intention in Moscow [in 1986] was to ...

...  achieve a progressive convergence with the EU,” There could have been huge benefits to Europe in such convergence, but the process was deliberately sabotaged by US intelligence agencies, working from the hypothesis that a tie-up between the EU and a democratic Russia would pose a major threat to American long-term economic interests...

Over the last decade Russia became increasingly alienated. Vladimir Putin took power as a ‘new realist’ seeking to engage with and accommodate the West. But after 2007 he and Russia became more assertive, buoyed by the country's economic recovery and unable to form genuine partnerships with the EU. Putin began to attack the US for trying to establish a ‘unipolar world . . . in which there is one master, one sovereign’, and called the enlargement of NATO ‘a serious provocation’. (288)

NATO and Russia tensions over Ukraine escalated into very dangerous territory. Neither side willing to back down.

“They have put Europe and Russia into a destructive, escalating cycle of mistrust and aggression in which neither side is entirely to blame, yet both consider themselves blameless.”

Russia, as a sovereign state, has its own methods of addressing international affairs, compatible with Russian sovereignty, culture and national requirements. It is essential that the West respect these preconditions when dealing with Russia.

These clearer views are reflected in the extract from the magazine, Foreign Affairs:

But in Moscow’s view, “no genuine world order existed at the end of the twentieth century, and attempts to impose US hegemony has slowly eroded the principles of the previous world order, which was based on balance of power, respect for sovereignty, non-interference in other states’ internal affairs, and the need to obtain the UN Security Council’s approval before using military force”. (289)

“Even if the allegations about Russian involvement in the US election are true, they are hardly surprising. After all, great powers often try to influence events in other nations, including other great powers. Indeed, Washington has been using NGOs, the CIA and the National Endowment for Democracy to interfere in Russian politics for years, a strategy that Putin sees ultimately aimed at toppling his regime” (290).

Below is a summary of countries which are nuclear armed as at January 2015.

All estimates are approximate.

Country  Year of first nuclear test Deployed warheads Other warheads Total Inventory

United States  1945  2080  5180  7260
Russia  1949  1780  5720  7500
United Kingdom  1952  150  65  215
France  1960  290  10  300
China  1964  ..  260  260
India  1974  ..  90–110  90–110
Pakistan  1998  ..  100–120  100–120
Israel  ..  ..  80  80
North Korea  2006  ..  ..  6-8
Total    4300  11 545  15 850

Source: SIPRI Yearbook 2015 (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2015).

a ‘Deployed’ means warheads placed on missiles or located on bases with operational forces (291).

International arms sales are a good barometer of the rising tensions in the world.

According to the latest figures from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), over the past five years the volume of transfers of major weapons systems was up some 14% over 2006-11.

There are growing tensions in Asia, prompted by China's rise as a regional power.

The Middle East is in a state of total melt-down with Iraq and Syria in chaos; Saudi Arabia at war in Yemen; and with those countries not engaged directly in conflict all eager to bolster their defence.

Even in Europe, which perhaps enjoyed something of a ‘peace dividend’ in the wake of the ending of the Cold War, Russia's behavior has prompted a slow rise in military spending, although this latter phenomenon has perhaps been too recent to figure in Sipri's tables.

The United States remains the major global arms supplier by a significant margin, accounting for some 33% of sales; its major customers being Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey.

Russia is the second major supplier, with 25% of sales, its principal clients being India and China (292).

NATO, Article 5 and the Baltic States

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) which was signed in Washington D.C on 04.04.1949, binds all members of the NATO alliance which provides for Collective Defence. Article five of the treaty states:

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

“Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.” (293)

The NATO ideal of defending its members seems inappropriate for the 21st century world. Instead, it could become a trigger for nuclear war. We must examine the entire world new situation and form a new idea that can match the new reality.

In addition to the invoking collective defence, in accordance with Article 5, the maintenance of a permanent air and naval strike capability is a recipe for nuclear disaster, unless managed cautiously. Evidence of permanent Nuclear Strike capability, is documented in the NATO website.

The treaty needs to be cautiously interpreted and implemented. Failure to do so will result in a major nuclear conflagration that will consume the planet. The treaty has had been invoked, in diverse circumstances in the past.

A former NATO boss has warned Europe could be locked in nuclear war with Russia ‘within a year’ triggered by a Russian incursion into Baltic States; Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

The chilling warning comes from General Sir Richard Shirreff, who served as NATO’s Deputy Supreme Allied Commander:

”I have this awful vision of the Baltic States being seized, NATO unable to respond, Putin then blackmails using nuclear weapons what is called chillingly ‘nuclear de-escalation’ and NATO is unable to do anything about it,” the retired general said.

“The alliance collapses and at a stroke, Putin has destroyed … the organization perhaps he most fears the most, NATO. America is decoupled from Europe and the world is changed irrevocably.” (294)

Loren B .Thompson, writing in The National Interest, also sees the prospect of war between the US and Russia:

“The possibility of nuclear war between America and Russia not only still exists, but is probably growing. And the place where it is most likely to begin is in a future military confrontation over three small Baltic States -- Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.” (295)

Nuclear war threat must be taken very seriously

As long as great-power relations remain unstable, regional rivalries linger unresolved and rogue states continue to see nuclear weapons as a way of intimidating purportedly powerful adversaries, the incentive to hang on to nuclear weapons will outweigh other considerations, according to economist and strategist Professor Thomas Schelling. There is nothing stopping former nuclear powers restoring their nuclear capabilities very quickly.  Schelling concludes that such a world might have a dozen countries with “hair-trigger mobilization plans to rebuild nuclear weapons and mobilize or commandeer delivery systems.”

“Every crisis would be a nuclear crisis”, he warns. “Any war could become a nuclear war.” (296)

The importance militaristic clashes with emerging powers and consequence of crises, cannot be under estimated. China is one of those powers. Reviewing the possibility of a major crisis, arising out of a situation, comparable to the South China Sea freedom of navigation issue, has resulted in a drastic solution proposed below, by the International relations Theorist Robert Jervis;

“To avoid a violent militaristic clash with China, or another cold war rivalry, the United States should pursue a simple solution: give up its empire”. To stir tension and threaten China and other nations with all sort of reasons and excuses does not bode well with today’s world and is contrary to US interests.

International relations theorist Robert Jervis has written that ‘the pursuit of primacy was what great power politics was all about in the past’ but that, in a world of nuclear weapons with ‘low security threats and great common interests among the developed countries’, primacy does not have the strategic or economic benefits it once had (297).

Past over estimation of the importance of primacy triggered world wars and also led to the fall of numerous empires, such as those of Germany, Japan and Italy.

Whilst giving up ‘the US Empire’ by Robert Jervis, may not appear feasible, it can be achieved over a period of time, leading to alternatives which could lead to a salutary change.

There are certain preconditions that US foreign policy has to satisfy, in order, to achieve successful implementation across the world, inhabited by a variety of cultures and governments of diverse political hues. This observation is consistent with the reality made by Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of State:

“The challenge of China is a much subtler problem than that of the Soviet Union. The Soviet problem was largely strategic. This is a cultural issue: Can two civilizations that do not, at least as yet, think alike come to a coexistence formula that produces world order?.” (298)

“Chills ran down my spine while reading the sober explanations of [Henry] Kissinger and [Joseph] Kahn about the different scenarios of nuclear war and the tables, listing the numbers of the immediate dead, the mid-term dead, the dead from long-term sufferings, the injured, the contaminated, the survivors, the radiation effects and other devastating consequences of a nuclear war, are still engraved in my memory.” (299)

Nuclear war, nuclear winter

What will happen if we end up in a nuclear war? What does the so-called Nuclear Winter mean?

There were many assumptions, scientific tests, findings and debates among nuclear weapon scientists, biologists, ecologists, military experts and politicians on the consequences of a nuclear war:

Along with the NASA group Brian Toon, Thomas Ackerman, James Pollack and Carl Sagan, atmospheric scientist Richard Turco put together a comprehensive analysis, including computer models, of the ‘global consequences of multiple nuclear explosions’ The group, which soon become known as TTAPS (an acronym based on last names), discovered that the smoke from burning cities could have a devastating effect on the Earth’s climate.

The TTAPS group concluded that a global nuclear war would have a major impact on climate manifested by significant surface freezing land temperatures persisting for up to several months, large perturbations in global circulation patterns, and dramatic changes in local weather and precipitation rates-a harsh ‘nuclear winter’ in any season…

Biologists also presented their findings – “the possibility of the extinction of Homo sapiens cannot be excluded”.

Edward Teller, a chief architect of the hydrogen bomb, however attacked the reports, arguing that the studies were inconclusive and politically motivated.

“The only news Teller says, Is that Sagan has made a lot of propaganda about a very doubtful effect.”

What type of nuclear war might be fought? How many warheads, of what mega tonnage, would be exploded?. Does the war last a day, a week, months?

Other scientists predict the blasts would also raise tons of dusts into the stratosphere, where it can remain for years blocking sunlight, the smoke would disrupt the transfer of radiation from the sun that creates and maintains Earth’s equable climate.

The atomic bomb that the United States dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 had a yield of 16 kilotons, less than one per cent of the power of some of the smallest modern nuclear weapons, Andrew Revkin writes (300).

It necessary to remind us all that there is a bomb 3,000 times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima.  It is called the Tsar Bomba, made in USSR and tested in October 30, 1961 (301).

Gideon Rachman is a renounce British chief foreign affairs commentator of the Financial Times warned of the risks of the dissemination of nuclear weaponry, reaching the hands of those who could imperil the world and his words are prophetic.

“Thirty years on and the nuclear peace is still holding. But I am becoming a little less secure in my belief that nukes will never be used. There are three reasons for my anxiety. First, the spread of nuclear weapons to unstable countries such as Pakistan and North Korea. Second, the growing body of evidence about how close the world has come, at various times, to nuclear conflict. My third reason for worry is more immediate: a significant increase in threatening nuclear talk from Russia.” (302)

Professor Paul Dibb who has served as deputy secretary in Australia’s defence department and as director of military intelligence, we should be aware of the role played by tactical nuclear weapons, in the nuclear arena:

There is a growing realisation that Moscow’s new military strategy relies on the early recourse to tactical nuclear weapons in the event that it has defines as its sovereign territory against a superior conventional military force…. A tactical nuclear weapon is a smaller version of the city-destroying atomic bomb and is designed to be used on a land battle field or at sea to destroy enemy military concentrations….Russia now poses a serious threat to the existing European security order, which Moscow no longer recognises.… Russia sent a flotilla of Russian naval vessels to international waters northeast of Australia ahead of last year’s G20 summit in Brisbane… Little of this seems to be understood in Canberra, where we have seriously run down our Russian analytical capabilities (303).

In keeping with the mistaken thinking of some military strategists, the first disarming nuclear strike, is the way to victory. This not credible as indicated below, in an abstract on a working paper, by the University of Sydney, in 2009.

“It can never unequivocally be in the interest of a nuclear power to carry out a retaliatory deterrent threat against a nuclear-armed opponent, let alone even a highly ‘successful’ (disarming) first nuclear strike. Its point of departure is the new research and modelling work being done in the United States on nuclear winter which demonstrates that even a ‘small’ (100 warheads) regional nuclear war, such as between Pakistan and India and involving so-called ‘city exchanges’, would generate stratospheric soot sufficient to block enough sunlight to shut down a large fraction of the world’s agriculture for at least several years by drastic hemispheric and global cooling, with up to a billion starvation deaths to follow in the Third World and beyond. A massive nuclear exchange between big powers would entirely eliminate agricultural growing seasons for more than a decade and entail death on the scale of a medieval plague, at least--and possibly the end of a humanity of nations, quite apart from the well-known catastrophic effects of blast, firestorm, fallout and long-term radiation.” (304)

As President Donald Trump chilling message plus his reckless character increase risk, tension atmosphere play out. The appropriate measure to curb ‘one man show’ any adventurous act must be urgent implement.

Due to US President Donald Trump had said he aspires to be ‘unpredictable’ in how he might use nuclear weapons.

There were ‘two- person rule’ that can be check before one can launch the missiles being use since after WWII. In addition, anyone with nuclear weapons duties, in any branch of service, must pass the Pentagon mandated evaluation; a battery of tests that assesses person mental fitness, financial history, and physical and emotional well-being apply.

However, there is no any equal restrain treatment on the president. This must change. “We need to ensure at least some deliberation before the chief executive can act. And there are ways to do this without weakening our military responses or national security.”

Jeremy Stone president of the Federation of American scientists, proposed that the president should not be able to order a first strike without consulting with high-ranking members of Congress. And Democrat Party legislators recently introduced a law that require congressional consultation and support for president nuclear weapon attack decision making (305).

The horrible consequences of a nuclear war with both parties, armed to the teeth, with nuclear deterrents, are evident from the numerous reviews, currently available.

Nuclear war triggers

In the current geopolitical situation, there are numerous political situations, which can act as a nuclear war trigger. They are,

1) Political Instability in the Baltic States.

2) The Israeli and Palestinian conflict.

3) International Terrorism.

4) The problem created by Article five of the NATO Treaty.

5) The Russia – Ukraine confrontation.

6) Syrian civil war and refugee crisis.

7) India –Pakistan conflict.

8) North East and South East Asia maritime borders disputes.

9) North Korea acquired nuclear weapon and frequent nuclear bomb and high capacity missile testings.

These are just some of the major issues that remain unresolved and could lead to a flashpoint.

To avoid nuclear conflagration, in the event of a nuclear war, it is imperative that many of the global conflicts, similar to the nine listed above must be resolved or under controlled. Failure to do so could result in prolonged simmering tensions which trigger nuclear war.

A global debate and speedier resolution via international forums is vital, since communications are virtually instantaneous in the Digital Age and globalisation.

There is a need implement peace initiatives now.

As Paul Keating, a former Australian Prime Minister stated, the US and major powers should not engage in the single minded pursuit of primacy but should share it. As such the US should share and optimise the use of power, with China and other emerging powers with large populations and consequently escalating GDPS. He was also said ‘Australia does not have a foreign policy, that's the biggest problem.’ The words of Paul Keating, enshrined in his speech to the Australia Lowy Institute (306).

As this is unchartered territory, there is a need to take serious consideration of the calls to abolish nuclear weapons. This can be done gradually employing the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, which arrested the soaring increases to the mega tonnage in the stockpiles of the major powers.

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), is a global campaign,

ICAN is a coalition of non-governmental organizations in one hundred countries promoting adherence to and implementation of the United Nations nuclear weapon ban treaty (307).

Countries with the highest military expenditures

Across the globe, 15 countries with highest military spending accounted for 81% of total military.

India at $51.3 billion is in the first. According to the CIA,

Pakistan’s military expenditure is estimated at a mere seven billons dollar. The US is responsible for 39 % of the world total, distantly followed by the China (9.5%), Russia (5.2%), UK (3.5%) and Japan (3.4%).

Figures are calculated from spending figures in constant (2014) prices. Figures may not add up to displayed totals due to the conventions of rounding.

         Table 1

This paper was originally published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in April 2016 (308).

US Military bases

The Economist (13.08.2013) reported that the US has 800 bases over 70 countries – the largest number foreign bases (309).

The main sources of information on these military installations (e.g. C. Johnson, the NATO Watch Committee, and the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases)

“In total, there are 255,065 US military personnel deployed worldwide.” (310)

Despite its world military presence the Pentagon is unable to tell Americans their country is absolutely secure. Even after halving the number of military bases, the US could still have enough capacity to deter and confront the enemy and control the world. So, who pockets the excess?

Of course, military bases can be a tool of protection, but they also can be used for intimidation, control and aggression against both adversary and a friendly host nation. The argument for maintaining them lost its legitimacy after the Cold War ended. They should have no place in the globalised world of 21st century.

Today the major vehicles of global cooperation are typically the UN, G7, IMF, WB, WTO and ADB among others. These vehicles, crafted for corporation, have been dominated by the Washington Consensus ideology, and served the 20th Century, well. However, looking at the diverse demands of the 21st Century, they are totally inadequate and need an overhaul.

Star Wars and global security

Space is also becoming a theatre of war. Hostilities can be triggered by attacking satellites carrying weapons or using cyber war to cripple vital satellite communications.  Already some 60 countries are active in space. And for the modern military to operate without satellites, would be devastating. They form 80% of its communications (according to Peter Singer [a professor and is an Australian moral philosopher]). And this includes communications central to nuclear deterrence (311).

The Federation of American Scientists believe it is vital nations adhere to the PAROS Treaty:

“The Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) is a UN resolution that reaffirms the fundamental principles of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and advocates for a ban on the weaponization of space. In 1981, debate over the weaponization of outer space led the Conference on Disarmament (CD) established a committee on PAROS in 1985. But it was dissolved due to the US and few other countries vote against the solution in 1994. Since 2005, China and Russia have produced several working papers on PAROS, again in 2008 China and Russia submitted a draft treaty to the CD entitled “Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects” (PPWT). The PPWT reiterates the importance of a weapon-free outer space.” (312)

Global security could be compromised or threatened, if unreliable employees or spies within an organization leak vital security information to the world at large or to the enemy, as Edward Snowden well known NSA contractor did by leaking government surveillance programmes to journalists (313).

Star Wars is a mixture of sinister thought and fantasy, largely born out of Hollywood, but is deadly.

New arms race? 

President Barak Obama received Nobel Peace prize in 2009, for talking about how the world should eliminate nuclear weapons. But, he then decided to spend $1 trillion on up grade nuclear weapons over three decades (314).

What is going on?  No one can win a nuclear war (the simple answer is extinction). Albert Einstein said, “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.” (315)

In response Russia has increased its weapon capacity. China has also response to the arms race.

Dr Christopher P. Twomey is a tenured Associate Professor of National Security Affairs of the US said, Chinese leaders had similar apprehensions about growing numbers of antimissile interceptors on American warships in the Pacific as well as bases in California and Alaska.

Beijing views Washington’s nuclear modernization ‘with much trepidation.’ Specifically, he cited plans for a new guided bomb and the advanced cruise missile, as well as new delivery systems.
China has already re-engineered many of its long-range missiles to carry multiple warheads. Beijing for decades has known how to miniaturize warheads and put two or more atop a single missile.

Mark Gubrud, a nuclear weapons expert at the University of North Carolina, has lobbied for the negotiation of a global flight ban on the testing of hypersonic arms.

“The world has failed to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle,” Dr Gubrud said. “And new genies are now getting loose.” (316)

There is one pit fall in the US administration security strategy.

“In the US politics, producing an annual security strategy, has become an annual ritual, to give the illusion that something was being done to promote Global Security. According to the Goldwater – Nichols Act, the President was required the president to submit to Congress, to Congress a Strategy Report detailing the methods that should be adopted (primarily with Defence) in order to make the country safer for the populace. The report should have a wide focus, encompassing all that is possible rather than probable, since the penalty of oversight, is political oblivion.”

Let's see how credibility and irresponsible the US main stream media has on the issue from this extract interviewed…

The follow extract from Dr Daniel Ellsberg giving an interviewed to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ editor-in chief John Mecklin under the ‘Daniel Ellsberg on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists interviewed Dr Daniel Ellsberg on dismantling the doomsday machine’ heading, on 26 February 2018,

Daniel Ellsberg: Then, I wrote my book Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. Then, I turned to this book, essentially. Actually, finally, to cap that story off, this book was rejected by, I think it was 17 other publishers and finally seized on by Bloomsbury enthusiastically. That's how it came about now [PBS and other media follow].

John Mecklin: It's interesting. One wouldn't think that somebody as famous as you would have such a hard time getting this published.

Daniel Ellsberg: On this subject. Look, I had a very high-level agent at one point who said,

"Dan, I won't represent you on a nuclear book, period."

John Mecklin: Why do you think that is?

Daniel Ellsberg: Because a book with the word ‘nuclear’ in the title was thought to be poison. As far as I can tell, I'm getting a very good reception now. And coverage. I can't do better, really. I guess I have to thank Trump for that. He's focused people now on the possibility of nuclear war and the possible imminence of nuclear war. I think at this very moment, just by coincidence, in a way, the book has gotten attention.’

The US leaders has adopted ill-considered courses of action, at home and abroad bolstered by a Social Networking Data, as the following, extract from the book Delusions of Strategy shows:

“It leads Washington to sacrifice civil liberties, impose costly domestic security measures, and offer commitments to allies that it cannot easily reverse [the situation of the tails wagging the dog could possibly easily occur]. It encourages American leaders to respond aggressively to threats before the evidence is in, bringing those threats to fruition.” (317)

The high cost of conflict

The cost of conflict is staggering. The business case for peace is strong. However it has not been accepted for many centuries.

According to the statistics reported by the BBC;

“Conflicts around the world cost $14.3tn (£9.1tn) last year, 13% of world GDP, says a survey on global peace. That amount is equivalent to the combined economies of Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom,” the report by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) said.

“The most surprising finding, said IEP Chief Executive Steve Killelea, was the ‘inequality with peace’ around the world. He said some countries in Western Europe had now reached ‘quite historic levels of peace, enjoying the lowest levels of murder rates and money spent on security probably in the countries' history. But Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, South Sudan and the Central African Republic had all become more violent in the past year.”

“Conflict killed 180,000 people in 2014, compared with 49,000 in 2010. Deaths caused by terrorism increased by 61% in 2013, the report said, with the loss of almost 18,000 lives - mostly in just five countries, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and Syria. The IEP said the total costs of conflict amounted to 13.4% of world GDP.” (318)

The price of peace

The high cost of ‘keeping the peace’ is captured most eloquently, in the words of former US president Dwight. D. Eisenhower:

“The worst is atomic war. The best would be this: a life of perpetual fear and tension; a burden of arms draining the wealth and the labour of all peoples; a wasting of strength that defies the American system or the Soviet system or any system to achieve true abundance and happiness for the peoples of this earth.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.

It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.

It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway.

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.

This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.” (319)

And should reaffirm by introduce the US World War II war time president Franklin D. Roosevelt great idea of how to build a strong, happy and secure America, and leading the world toward prosperity together.

“We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living; The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment; The right to a good education. All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being. America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.”

(State of the Union Message to Congress, USA, Franklin D. Roosevelt, January 11, 1944).

In this day, it is inconceivable that anyone can win a nuclear war.  We will all lose. So, the only weapon left is the hearts and minds contest. Anyone who initiates a nuclear war against fellow humans are to be condemn for committing ‘species genocide’.

The world has successfully developed new ideas and practical concepts to secure peace and prosperity. The EU is an example of this. It is clearly a positive evolution. Most of all, the EU discourages confrontation, conflict and war in stark contrast to some world nations that are propelling us in the opposite direction.

The EU has increased the focus on security, peace and prosperity in the following ways:

1. Its spirit of continental cooperation, interdependence and prosperity by winning over each other hearts and minds and living in peace. It is an eagle to emulate and implement globally.

2. Increased networking, trading ties and partnerships in cooperation, generating increased revenues and adding to the GDP of world nations.

3. Compelling nations to carefully examine themselves and to avoid extreme action like war (Mankind from Space, DVD).

Humankind, especially Cyber Kids, understand more about the civilised way of living together and have learned to strive for equity, justice, fairness and reason. They understand how to appropriately interconnect and live in peace with mutual respect. They are at the forefront of our struggle for survival.

The following is the information about a good sign and a positive interaction between fellow humans around the globe. There is a huge and fast increase of seemingly self-appointed pioneers, like an army of cultural exchange and peace diplomats roaming every corners of the world.

Last year, travel accounted for about 10 per cent of global GDP, or $7.6 trillion. Only about a third of that is booked online. This share is expected to rise by a couple of percentage points next year, about the same pace as e-commerce more broadly. And as people become wealthier, they travel more; many in emerging markets are venturing abroad for the first time (320).

Under the well construct and formation of WSGN and WDWN, it has made the spread and speeding up of globalisation process faster, wider and much more sophisticate than any time in humankind history. The opportunity to meet and exchange cultures to know and to learn from each other is widest open. Especially the Cyber Kids and new middle class are relentlessly travelling the entire world, of beauty, wonderful, plenty and miracle advance, and the very poor and struggle to live, shorted of everything to support a decent daily living of people from difference nationality around this ‘tiny’ world.

Clearly, globalisation of WSGN and WDWN, these gigantic networks of system and systems have wrapped around our tiny world. Hardly any being can escape its embrace.

The economic, social, geopolitical and environmental have become closely intertwined as never before in the history of human evolution.

Space exploration means our vision of our world and ourselves differs from the past – the Earth is just a tiny object in a vast space with no boundaries, full of large and small objects. Why should we behave so shamefully by seemingly attempting to destroy it?

Indeed, in the 21st century world, winning hearts and minds, cooperation and working together should be our prime aim, not war. The EU spirit is the beacon for the world’s future. It is creating world citizens and the ideal is immortal, no matter what.

As Steven C. Combs writes “Warfare is analogous to persuasion, as a battle for hearts and minds.” (321)

Strategies for peace across the ages 

It is clear that pursuit of peace is the passport to growth and prosperity and survival.

Sun-tzu, a Chinese military general and strategist (544-496 BC), writing in his book. The Art of War, suggested, winning over your opponent and securing peace, without making war, is the preferred option.

Sun-Tzu writes, “To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting (2.2).” (322)

This still holds today. The best choice is to share geopolitical security. Military action is less necessary and, it has been proven, only makes things worse. It really cannot solve the problem.

Other security issues

In this day, security issues have increased and become more complicated. For us to survive and further evolve and have a better life we must share responsibility for regional, national and global security. Together we must overcome many old and new things, some extreme, some minor, some pressing and some simmering. Many of today’s security issues were unheard of a decade or decades ago – new technology, terrorism, computer hacking and digital spying and leaks. These all compound ongoing security issues of failed states, civil war, maritime territorial disputes, piracy, smuggling, human trafficking, illegal immigration, ethnic and tribal wars, religious conflicts and war.

Warfare can be political or economic or take place in outer space.  Science and technology can be misused. Propaganda wars and political interference or economic sanctions by other powers can breach the sovereignty, integrity and rights of nations. Market monopolisation can create famine in one quarter of the globe and obesity in another. Over population, under-population, extremely high and low reproduction rates throw the world out of balance. Climate change is bringing more frequent natural disasters – floods, drought, bushfires, super storms, heatwaves and pollution, adding to the ongoing calamity of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or asteroids from out space hitting Earth. All this, alongside nuclear war threatens our very existence.

At the same time the aging world institutions such as, G7, UN, WB, IMF, ADB cannot keep up with the 21st fast changing world conditions. Our future is dictated by the mother of all security issue: how can humankind survive through evolution?

Civil wars destroy food security

At least three million people in Somalia need humanitarian aid and the country is threatened with famine, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said…

Further, in September more than a million people in the war-ravaged Horn of Africa country were struggling to meet daily nutritional needs.

And, over three million Somalis are in need of humanitarian assistance and unfortunately that number is growing. He urge donors to step up contributions to avert another famine in Somalia.

In August, the UN humanitarian coordinator for Somalia Philippe Lazzarini said rapidly rising malnutrition and food shortages resembled the warning signs that preceded a 2011 famine in which about 260,000 people died.

War ravaged Somalia, hit by drought has become failed state (323).

Failure of food security and excessive financial speculation and manipulation

There are food security for a nation or entire world nation is depending on so many things to make it work. Such as; unrest or war, weather, technology, labour, subsidy, political interference, rule of trade and market.

In practice, short supply in one part of the world could lead to other part of the world food suppler gain advantage and increase their price and profit and make them stronger. Why and how a secure food security world could make them out of high profit business and losing monopoly edge?

Indeed, world hunger and die of hunger is partly the making of geopolitical power relation interaction. If the rich world stop subsidy their farmers, let developing and very poor nations to develop and design their own agriculture strategic direction and by making right way supportive help, not the many ways ideologist’s IMF, WB often doing now and then.

Failure of food security, in today’s world, has been aggravated by the addition of excessive financial speculation to the other causes such as drought, flood ravage, crop failure, subsidy, price control and manipulation by developed nation.

Also, ‘Excessive Financial Speculation’ transformed the agricultural food market from simple market based on physical availability dictated by supply and demand, to a market  manipulated by the ‘Agricultural Futures,’ ‘Short Selling’ etc. in the pursuit of profit maximisation with major banks and financial organisations. This market manipulation frequently, had little or nothing to do with physical availability and demanded regulation.  It cannot be denied that quite often, excessive food speculation could be a global or at least within developing nations could pose as food security threat.

One of the solutions to the problem of excessive speculation leading to volatility, is to implement mitigation employing surplus storage and release, as in Flood Mitigation with water.

One school of thought, is the retention by all nations of one year of staple food stock, in storage and release it on the market to stabilise soaring food prices. On release, soaring prices will be reduced. Alternately at times of surplus, when prices are low the storage is replenished and this interact within the market, is essential and does not fall into the classification ‘excessive speculation’ which is devastating effect.

It was not surprising therefore, when India, refused to sign a resolution backing the ban on food storage, in the Doha Round of trade talks, held in Bali in August 2016, as reported by the Wall Street Journal.

India had refused to sign off on the Bali pact unless the group comes to a faster accord on exempting food-subsidy and stockpiling programs like India's from current WTO rules that limit India (324).

India is the developing nation pursuing food price stabilization, not food price speculation.  In the poor developing nations, failure of food security due to soaring food prices, has resulted in food riots, as in 2008. As such it is vital that any responsible state in the poorer parts of the planet should insulate itself, against the ravages of food riots, by implementing food storage if they could or consult UN.

According to the FAO, Food Security is a right.

“Access to an adequate supply of food is the most basic of human needs and rights.     Ensuring that their people have enough to eat is not only the moral duty of governments, it is also in their economic and political interest.” (325)

Reducing food wastage and achieving improved food security

Reducing food wastage, is one of the important method of securing and improved food security.

Food shortage and the adequacy of food in all parts of the world has plagued people from time immemorial. Whilst addressing the issue of food, how it waste?, How large is food wastage? How to tackle waste? Has been shocking reported on by Tristram Stuart,

“The UK, US and Europe have nearly twice as much food as is required by the nutritional needs of their populations. Up to half the entire food supply is wasted between the farm and the fork. If crops wastefully fed to livestock are included, European countries have more than three times more food than they need, while the US has around four times more food than is needed, and up to three-quarters of the nutritional value is lost before it reaches people's mouths.”

“8.3 million hectares of land required to produce just the meat and dairy products wasted in
UK homes and in US homes, shops and restaurants. That is seven times the amount of Amazon rainforest destroyed in Brazil in one year, largely for cattle grazing and soy production to export for livestock feed.”

“2.3 million tonnes of fish discarded in the North Atlantic and the North Sea each year; 40% to 60% of all fish caught in Europe are discarded - either because they are the wrong size, species, or because of the ill-governed European quota system.”

“4600 kilocalories per day of food are harvested for every person on the planet; of these, only around 2000 on average are eaten - more than half of it is lost on the way.”

“All the world's nearly one billion hungry people could be lifted out of malnourishment on less than a quarter of the food that is wasted in the US, UK and Europe.” (326)

“A third of the world’s entire food supply could be saved by reducing waste – or enough to feed three billion people; and this would still leave enough surplus for countries to provide their populations with 130 per cent of their nutritional requirements. Tristram Stuart 2009, Waste: Uncovering the Global Food Scandal”

“The FAO estimates that every year, the production of food that is wasted generates ‘3.3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases and uses up to 1.4 billion hectares of land – 28 per cent of the world’s agricultural area.’ Moreover, globally, the blue water footprint for the agricultural production of total food waste in 2007 is about 250km3=, which is more than 38 times the blue water footprint of USA households. FAO 2013, Food Wastage Footprint: Impacts on Natural Resources.” (327)

“There is an estimated 15 million tonnes of food wasted in Britain from the plough to the plate. Tristram Stuart 2009, Waste: Uncovering the Global Food Scandal.”

“In 2010, 925 million people were undernourished. Moreover, recent volatility in food prices has led to food price spikes, and during these periods the number undernourished is even higher – in 2009, for instance, 1.023 billion people were undernourished. FAO 2010, Global hunger declining, but still unacceptably high.” (328)

What about many others wasteful goods and products or over consumption and over production of goods and service in the wealthy nation?

In developed nations, food waste occurs and is not a security issue, but food waste in developing nations, it certainly is.

Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) and improved food security

One of the many methods of ensuring food security is to create genetically plants exhibiting characteristics such as; increased drought and flood resistance, increased salinity, improve yield, improved the ability to withstand fungal and insect attack, improve quality of food, reduce or stop using pesticide all together and other. Genetically Modified Organism (food) (GMO or GM) strains of food can be developed with above characteristics, thereby achieving improved food security and mitigating global food shorted threats which often could escalate into civil disturbances or war.  But, again there also need to strictly regulate and making a strict standard test, monitor, that pass the test GM product does not being monopolise and exploit consumer, farmer, scientific must guard against what deem cannot control or being misuse invention.

People have been using genetically modifying plants and animals since ancient time. This is referred to as across breeding has been effected between plants/animals, in order to produce a new generation, incorporating the best features of the breeding plant/animals.  Today it is possible to identify particular features/characteristics and transfer them between living organisms. The desired feature/characteristic and quality, normally encoded a gene can be copied into the cells of another organism. This has resulted in strains of rice that display high resistance to bacterial attack, survive to flooding, vitamin A enrichment, and resistance to salinity.

GM rice is in extensive use in India, China, Vietnam and many other countries. But there has been objection to the introduction of ‘Golden Rice,’ a vitamin A enriched version of rice. In certain nations on safety ground.

Successful grafting is a form of genetic engineering, which has been performed for ages with the assistance of mother-nature restriction. This has been confirmed by Ralph Bock of the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology In Potsdam, Germany, when he also further said (refer P14);

“We have been accidentally genetically engineering plants and eating GMOs- for thousand year. That is the implication of a series of studies showing the ancient practice of grafting allows even distantly related plants to swap all three kinds of their genomes’ (Grafting also occurs naturally, when branches press each other). It’s genetic engineering done by mother nature,” (329)

The interview of Australian Greens Party leader Senator Richard Di Natale is significant in the assessment of GM product,

Senator Richard Di Natale, the Australian Greens Party leader told the Australian newspaper, he did not have an ideological or philosophical objection to the use of the technology and did not believe eating foods produced from genetically modified crops posed a risk to human health.

He further said as a doctor, he had seen the benefits delivered by using genetic-modification technology to produce life-giving medicines and compounds such as insulin in large quantities, and could not object to the use of the same technology to deliver benefits for agriculture. “It would be hypocritical for him to do so, and he had no problems with the science.” (330)

The White House office of Science and Technology Policy and the US Patent and Trade mark Office (USUPTO) have announced the Patents and Humanity Award for 2015 , for the Golden Rice Project which covers the Vitamin A enriched GM Rice. The GM Rice has been recognised in battling blindness arising from Vitamin A deficiency.

When introducing GM modified foods it is imperative, that the unmodified plants should be allowed to grow with it and retained in the wild, thereby preventing the GM modified plant wiping out the unmodified plant. The reason, is that there may a new Pandemic covered by the genes in the unmodified plant, capable of resisting a new disease.

“When farmers start growing genetically modified crops, they stop growing the old varieties. These old varieties are important sources of diverse genes that give plants other desirable characteristics. For example, a new pest or disease could come along and destroy the genetically modified rice. If one of the old rice varieties has a gene that makes it resistant, it could be cross-bred to make the saltwater rice resistant as well. If we lose the old varieties, we also lose their useful genes.” (331)

Environmental issue is closer link to world security issue

“Global warming is the term used to describe a gradual increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere and its oceans, a change that is believed to be permanently changing the earth’s climate. There is great debate among many people, and sometimes in the news, on whether global warming is real (some call it a hoax). But climate scientists looking at the data and facts agree the planet is warming. While many view the effects of global warming to be more substantial and more rapidly occurring than others do, the scientific consensus on climatic changes related to global warming is that the average temperature of the Earth has risen between 0.4 and 0.8 °C over the past 100 years. The increased volumes of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released by the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, agriculture, and other human activities, are believed to be the primary sources of the global warming that has occurred over the past 50 years. Scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate carrying out global warming research have recently predicted that average global temperatures could increase between 1.4 and 5.8 °C by the year 2100. Changes resulting from global warming may include rising sea levels due to the melting of the polar ice caps, as well as an increase in occurrence and severity of storms and other severe weather events.” (see chapter 7, Environment, p 103) (332).

The Infectious diseases is one of humankind eternal security threat

“The contagion infective virus and diseases spread over are the treat of human surviving.

This included; Tuberculosis (TB), malaria, cholera, Human Immunodeficiency Virus HIV/AIDS, Ebola, swine flu, avian Influenza, polio, diarrhoea, hepatitis c, a, et al. In this day, human never know when new disease could be appear and spread. Some unpredictable and resistant to drug and human intervene disease and illness are often founded.”

Professor Hugh Pennington, emeritus professor of bacteriology of University of Aberdeen said “May be the next pandemic will be caused by a much more virulent virus. Nobody knows” (333)

In Ebola contagion case, “There’s little doubt that the current epidemic can be stopped, but no one knows when or how it will be reined in. As Barack Obama said, speaking at a special session of the United Nations, Do not stand by, thinking that somehow, because of what we’ve done, that it’s taken care of. It’s not. Preventing the next eruption is an even more distant goal.” (334)

World Health Organisation (WHO) said,

”in the 21st century, health is a shared responsibility, involving equitable access to essential care and collective defence against transnational threats,” (335)

With powerful tools such as genetic engineering, treating international health as a shared responsibility will enable mankind battle with existent epidemics threats. Imagine, suppose world have no UNICEF and WHO organisation, what the world will be look like?

Over population is a hidden threat to the world

‘Over population’ is one of the factors which will trigger food shortages, looting, unstable political conditions possibly, It is a regional and global security issue. The issue is closely link with environment and security issues.

Population and environment issues are inter-linkage with security issue. In fact any extreme to one pole, side all create havoc and turn to be serious security issue.

Global water security

Water and health – the global context

Approximately 46% of deaths world-wide are attributed to unsafe water and poor sanitation.

Access to clean drinking water and sanitation is a key issue for rural and First Nations communities in Canada.

Water supplies may have natural contaminants (e.g. arsenic), or become contaminated through human, agricultural or industrial activities.

Some standards used to monitor drinking water quality are controversial, for example, medical evidence to support widely-adopted criteria for nitrates in drinking water is relatively limited, and standards for pesticides vary widely across countries.

Many infectious diseases such as cholera, malaria, dengue fever, schistosomiasis and lymphatic fluorosis, are transmitted through water. Globally, 200 million cases are associated with schistosomiasis and 25 million cases are associated with lymphatic filariasis.

Nutrient levels are increasing in rivers and lakes due to human activities, which can produce blue-green algae under certain conditions. These algae produce toxins capable of killing animals and harming human health. Climate change is likely to exacerbate this issue.

Flooding, drought and environmental degradation associated with climate change directly affect human health through death and disease. They may also have long term effects on mental health (336).

Violence extremism of all sort is a threat to global security

The threat to global security has been aggravated by religious/political extremism which has taken root in parts of the planet.

Growth of religious extremism e.g. Sectarian Islam – battles between Shiites, Sunnis and Alawites. Islamic State (IS), Al Qaeda, Wahhabis and other extremist religion sectarian world wide.

Extremist Christian, Buddhism, Hindu nationalism and other sectarian cult turn to be violence terrorist.

Growth of Neo-Nazism borrows elements from inclusive of ultranationalism, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and initiating the past German, Italy and Japan Nazi and Fascist ideology.

Middle Eastern religion influence terrorism is a threat to global security. It cannot be eradicated unless the Israeli –Palestinian issue is addressed and solved.

The former president Bill Clinton, was the closest to brokering a settlement of the Israeli – Palestinian conflict/crisis, at nearly the end of his last presidency term. Further he maintained cordial relations with all stake holders involved with the conflict, in addition to virtually unbroken peace brokerage role never stop. Even in which just escaped out of his reach due to more or less Yasser Arafat the Palestinian leader last minute hesitation.

“…Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak had made a reasonable offer. Barak endorsed the idea of East Jerusalem serving as the capital of the Palestinian territories. At one of their last meetings, Yasser Arafat complimented Clinton, telling him that he was a great man. Clinton replied, I am not a great man. I am a failure, and you have made me one”. (337) 

Later, at first, President Barak Obama was eagerly followed his predecessor attempt to solve the issue. Unfortunately, he was confronted by a very conservative Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, where he had ending all moratorium on settlement activity, and rapidly closing the window of Palestinian statehood negotiation when he came to power.

Further, the two state, Palestine and Israel solution and the window available for a solution, was rapidly closing. The Israeli government relied on the US –Jewish Lobby in order to kill off any plan to arrest settlement activity and a return to 1967 borders.

The situation was worsened by the Iran/Hamas issue.

The Israel government relied much on the US Jewish lobby and cooperated with conservative politicians in the US to resist all such attempts.

After President Obama had many displeasure engagements with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mainly over Israel and Palestinian peace settlement process and later Iran issue.

“It was on May 2011, when Netanyahu irritated by Obama’s call for an Israel Palestinian deal based on the 1967 lines, decided to use an Oval Office photo opportunity to publicly lecture Obama on Middle East History.” (338)

Finally, in his second term, Obama seem to given up all his attempted for the issue.

Indeed, many people in the western nations are not quite realised or understand or rejection that, without resolve Israel and Palestinian issue, the world’s scale and Middle East terrorist problem will never go away. And will constant persist and could getting worse. It is very possible that, if the issue successful address or at least significant move forward. The extremist terrorists will be much weaken and gradually abandon terror act by moderate and inner close kinship pressure. In short, the Middle East or extremist terrorist act is only can be end by the Israel-Palestinian issue find a settlement. No other way around.

Difference civilizations interaction issue is the most worry and unpredictable to the world. It is also turn to be vital issue argued by Samuel P. Huntington called the Crash of Civilisation. Because human’s civilizations, politics and governance are largely borne out of religion and believe. In which it’s forming human culture, tradition, norm, value and character. In this day, one of the most ‘civilization’ conflict on display today is between Christian and Muslim. Rather both Christian, Judah side and Islamic side should bury/by pass ‘crusade’ religion conflict long history. But it fail to do so and becomes today most dreadful, violent tragedy threaten to world security.

Samuel Huntingdon, commenting on the growth of groups based on religion, is of the view that the clashes between monarchists and republicans is a thing of the past, as the clash was driven by a thirst for political rights and privileges. The new trend will be clash of civilisations based on culture and religion. His observations are contained in the extract below;

“My view is that relations between countries in the coming decades are most likely to reflect their cultural commitments, their cultural ties and antagonism with other countries rather than other factors.” “I think that statement by Hamartia Sen is totally wrong. I never argued about that, and I realise that people have multiple identities. What I argue in my book, as I indicated earlier, is that the basis of association and antagonism among countries has changed over time. In the coming decades, questions of identity, meaning cultural heritage, language and religion, will play a central role in politics. I first elaborated this idea over 10 years ago, and much of what I said has been validated during that time.” (339)

Displaced person and global security

Millions of Mexican and South American people especially hundreds of thousands children from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador travel in small groups or alone have been illegally crossing borders into America to seek a better life. Many of them become complicated humanitarian and security issues. These people are escape from war ravage, gangsters violent, minority oppression, religion conflict/persecution, and many also are economic migrants as to seeking a better life. They are dreamt of instant bright future and prosperity is ensure at least effective safety net. For them, it is a secure man made ‘paradise’ and only available in the developed nations. It created the huge problem to developed nations either, social, politics, economic and security term extend to generations.

Natural disaster, conflict either politics, economics, religion, social and cultural, border or tribal war and civil war are threat to world security and peace and prosperity. The largest was end of Second World War, some ravage nations turn to human tragedy…refugees. The civil war, religion war, violent social disorder and famine in Africa and Middle East and Latin America causing wave after wave millions of refugees flee their countries to the safety and better life in developed nations, notable North America, Australia and EU’s nations.

The new figures, released Thursday by the United Nations refugee agency, paint a staggering picture of a world where new conflicts are erupting and old ones are refusing to subside, driving up the total number of displaced people to a record 59.5 million by the end of 2014, the most recent year tallied. Half of the displaced are children. Nearly 14 million people were newly displaced in 2014, according to the annual report by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (340).

Authorities estimate that more than 600,000 people sitting on the coast of Africa, waiting for a chance to cross to Europe. The Refugee Council of Australia’s figures for 2006 to 2011 show Italy had 152,821 irregular maritime arrivals. 27,000 have landed in Italy alone in the first six months of 2014 (341).

Criminal organisation as a world wide security threat

“According to UN Comtrade database, in the period of highest Somali pirates’ activity the volume of bilateral trade transiting via the Gulf of Aden fell significantly in comparison with trade through other routes. The magnitude of this decline went from -0.7% to -0.4% in the period 2000-2010, when pirates’ attacks increased by an average of 48.1% per year, causing an annual reduction of 1.9% in trade passing through the Gulf. Between 2006 and 2007, when Somali piracy reached its acme, attacks grew by 134%, and this led to a 5.4% decrease in international trade. It was estimated that from 2000 to 2010 about 1.3 trillion US dollars in trade goods passed through pirate-infested waters per year, therefore the trade loss amounted to approximately 25 billion US dollars per year.” (342)

More sophisticated crimes, like the peddling of ‘ice’ methamphetamine, heroine have substantial returns on Investment, far exceeding legitimate businesses. However, with severe criminal penalties, it is hoped to curb the threat to social and political stability, posed by drug peddling activities.

“In the US alone, as at 2011, there were 33,000 gangs engaged in organised crime. The Total number of members was 1.4 Million. Drug-selling gangs are diversifying into prostitution, human trafficking and the smuggling of migrants. Gangs are ‘rife’ in many public schools, the The National Gang Intelligence Centre (NGIC) says. The Gangs to Grace Ministry sees these trends in the neighbourhood. Perhaps 80% of pupils in local high schools are in a gang, the volunteers suggest. The head of New Life Covenant Church, Wilfredo De Jesus, acknowledges that some local gang members might make $3,000 a week dealing drugs. I tell them they are going to have to take a cut in pay to live right.” (343)

Drug trafficking is one of an example of the misuse of science and technology. A nuclear weapon is an example of another. A nuclear power station, is an example of the proper harnessing of nuclear energy for power generation, even though, is not perfect alternative. Artificial Intelligence (AI), is further example where technology can be used for good and for evil purposes.

For a concern of un-controllable, can be misuse science and technology for the negative purpose. “Professor Stephen Hawkins warned that the artificial intelligence of machines could threaten the future of mankind by progressing faster than biological evolution. Then, again he added, the march of technology could destroy us, but it might just be the making of us.” (344)

Addressing major issues in time and making technology the servant of society, is essential in securing global security and peaceful coexistence, which are the principle ingredients of good governance and word order.

National border dispute cause conflict

South China Sea maritime conflict, 

China and her maritime neighbour nations have a hot contested sovereignty claim over the South China Sea.

“China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei all have competing claims. The Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands are un- inhabited and may be rich in natural resources. The mineral wealth is extrapolated from data available regarding neighbouring areas.”

“The South China Sea is a major shipping route and considered prolific fishing grounds by all nations living in the neighbourhood.”

“Vietnam had been engaged in military crashes and Philippine standoff with China military in the past years.”

“The Philippines has sought international arbitration instead. In 2013, it announced it would take China to an arbitration tribunal under the auspices of the UN Convention on the Laws of the Sea, to challenge its claims.”

“In July 2016, the tribunal backed the Philippines' case, saying China had violated the Philippines' sovereign rights.”

“China prefers bilateral negotiations with the other parties. But many of its neighbors argue that China's relative size and clout give it an unfair advantage.”

“Some countries have argued that China should negotiate with ASEAN (the Association of South East Asian Nations), a 10-member regional grouping that consists of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Brunei, Laos, Vietnam, Myanmar and Cambodia.”

“However, China is opposed to this, while ASEAN is also divided over how to resolve the dispute.” (345)

Japan and South Korea have claiming the group of islands in the Sea of Japan, so too does North Korea. The Island name by Korea as Dokdo, and Takeshima by Japan. The islands themselves consist of two main islands and about 30 smaller rocks. A South Korean coastguard detachment has been stationed there since 1954 (346).

“China (include Taiwan) and Japan have been strained by a territorial dispute over a group of islands, known as the Senkaku islands in Japan and the Diaoyu islands in China. Both nations has claim sovereignty right upon. The center of the dispute are eight uninhabited islands and rocks in the East China Sea. They have a total area of about 7 sq km and lie north-east of Taiwan, east of the Chinese mainland and south-west of Japan's southern-most prefecture, Okinawa.” (347)

Hindu-Muslim conflict in India and Kashmir dispute

In India, the conflict flare up tension drawing Hindus and Muslims escalating to unpredictable magnitudes.

“…the relationship among Indian Hindu and Muslim is tense, where Hindu nationalist political party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won the election and run the country. “Last month Parliament was stalled by a stand-off over religious conversion. The BJP argues that the issue merely provided a handy pretext for Congress obstructionism, but its activists have made it a topic of debate. At issue is a law that would ban ‘forced’ religious conversion. Their passion stems from the notion that India-Hindustan-is in essence a Hindu country. It has become religiously diverse not through immigration (as have the United States and Europe), but through conversation. Hindu-nationalist historians argue that Hindus were lost through coercion or bribery. Conversion under the Mughals was at sword point, while Christians bought believes. And, ideologues argue with little evidence to back the claim, it is still going on. Bizarre claims are made about ‘love jihad’- a Muslim campaign to woo Hindu women into abandoning their birth right through marriage. And Christian missionaries still proselytise. So Hindu activists are arranging ‘reconversion’ ceremonies for Indian Muslims and Christians-though since traditionally you are born a Hindu rather than become one, and any proposed law would not meant to block Indians from returning to their supposed Hindu roots, it is called ghar wapsi or ‘home coming.’” (348)

Apart from India and Pakistan, India and China border territories disputes have not successfully settle.

“Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 50 years. Currently a boundary - the Line of Control - divides the region in two, with one part administered by India and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalise this status quo and make it the accepted international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both want greater control over the region.” (349)

Conflicts in this region between India and Pakistan could escalate into a nuclear war, as both countries have access to nuclear arms.

“The negotiations to stop the production of nuclear weapon and powerful ballistic missile by North Korea's nuclear and missile programme had been over decades long. Such diplomatic effort was conducted by a Six-Party Talks initiated which involved the US, China, Japan, North Korea, Russia and South Korea, the UN through the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The numerous on and off negotiations process finally had failed. In October 9, 2006: North Korea conducts first an underground nuclear test near the village of P’unggye. And later 2009, 2013 and in January and September 2016, and at the same time, in difference occasions North Korea also conducted numerous missiles testing.” (350)

The above conflicts and tension could escalated to even more dangerous level where situation getting more complicate and could lead to accident or miscalculation.

Negative inhumane or harm and damage to development and human wellbeing is a threat to security

Negative culture, tradition, value, believe and practice such as, inhumane harmful superstition, human sacrificed, stone to dead punishment, genital mutation, child labour, sex slave, modern slave labour, child force marriage, mobile cattle grazing, slash and burn mobile farming, poverty, homelessness, human rights violation and any reduction of opportunity to get and to gain modern knowledge, any making harmful to world harmony, stability and world peace, should be included as a security issue.

World is progress at speed of un-imagination fast and complex with science and technology and other activities are on the lead. But some part of human today is still creeping forward at the middle of last century speed/thought. So, we have a hard task as to catch up with the change. This is the worrying.

Certainly, one day in the future, many of mention issue and problem combine will be exceed current world ‘governance’ or ‘current world order’ administration instrument to handle; structure, idea, rule and standard, system, capacity to handle or solve all problems effective and successfully. So many old and new issues, problems are kept increasing and become world issues. It could come to the dead end if we are not all together making improve, adjust, adaptive and change to new situation/environment. Hence, our plight could doom. That meant we will be far often conflict and crash with fellow humans, environment, beings and all natural things around us and no way out. In this 21st century, we need to sort out what really positive and negative to humankind (mean entire humankind), by more care to solve the problem by put positive before negative or turn negative into positive.

Near earth objects and global security

In the previous paragraphs, man’s activities and his follies, including his greed, has been looked upon as the prescription for disaster. However there are other sources of global disaster, where man has had no hand, but with the potential for annihilating the human species. These are the asteroids and meteorites lurching in outer space. These celestial objects could plunge towards earth and extinguish humanity, as happened with the dinosaurs.

To ensure global security and guard against this possibility, scientists are employing the latest technologies to scan the skies, so that man can find these hazardous near earth objects before they find us.

Prowling around in the darkness lurks a potential end to life on Earth. It’s not nuclear war, a deadly virus, or an alien invasion, and has already extinguished the lives of mighty giants…prehistory living creature dinosaurs. Near-earth objects—comets and asteroids— continue to pose a threat to humankind and the only natural disaster that could wipe out all life on the planet in one direct impact. Yet, as we go about our daily routines with this known threat literally hanging over our heads, scientists and astronomers are applying the latest technologies in hopes of spotting a major collision in the making (351).

Don Yeomans and his team work with six other astronomers. They have to work in 24 hour to keep tracking space objects included 600,000 asteroids behaviour. If need will alert the authority to prevent or stop it making direct hit and harm to earth. The threat from outer space objects large or small to hit the earth is real and dangerous. The small one could make harm to life and things it hit. The large one could create many nuclear bombs size explosion of damage that had caused dinosaurs on earth to extinct in the past. It is the world common security issue. The demand for international cooperation on the issue is greater than ever.

(Near Earth Object Program Office in Pasadena, California, report by Don Yeomans).

“Yeomans concludes with a variety of feasible ways scientists have suggested protecting the Earth from potential collisions, including deflections, nuclear detonations, and the slow-pull gravity tractor. Both timely and authoritative,” (352)

Qicheng Zhang, a physicist at the University of California, Santa Barbara has looked at the use of lasers and the nuclear option, target and arrest near objects in flight and minimize destruction. Interviewed by the BBC, his comments are listed below;

“A laser won't blow the asteroid up like a death star. Instead it would vaporize a small part of the surface. Then there's the ‘nuclear option.’ Any of these methods, however, might run into a final obstacle: politics. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans the use of nuclear weapons and their testing in space, and deploying a gigawatt laser in orbit might make some people nervous.” (353)

Other hazards are; a) 29,000 objects which are of size greater than ten cm (traceable), the number of debris between the sizes of one to ten cm around 670,000 and debris less than a centimeter can reach to tens of millions in number, 170 million of space debris in low earth orbit to be figurative (”

In low earth orbit missions, small objects are as much of a concern owing to high kinetic energies. A one cm object can penetrate through space craft shields at hyper speed. So, as important it is to remove the big traceable objects and dysfunctional satellites, it is also important to remove the smaller sized objects from Lower Earth Orbit as the threat posed by then is not less.
Satellite failures could give rise to debris fields and subsequent debris fields which could led to domino style and effecting satellite failure.

…and anti-satellite warfare systems tested by the USSR, the US, and China over the past 30 years. Such aggressive activities could set up a situation where a single satellite failure could lead to cascading failures of many satellites in a period much shorter than years (354).

Human need a consistence of space explorer plan

Space explorer is the most important to humankind ever. The reason is not just to learn to improve and making better humankind, planet, and entire natural world’s evolution only. It will very much help us to see the future. Such as space science make human understand communication, geography, ecology and our role and position in the universe, gravity, scientific experiment that cannot conduct on earth but outer space, satellite, space station, mining, agriculture, oceanic system of knowledge; fishing, bushfire, forest, weather forecast,  ecology and environment knowledge. Especially, It greatly offer the chance to find future migration to other planet as to spread out or to secure the chance of human to survive the known and unknown future threat of an extinction. It is a long into the future surviving insurance approach. In short, it is a strategic and complied to Evolution Primacy Objection. A lasting survival security.

Secure a firm command and control over Artificial Intelligent technology

There is disagreement between tech and innovative titan:

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says, “Artificial Intelligent (AI) represents a ‘fundamental risk to human civilization’ and that waiting for something bad to happen is not an option.“

Mark Zuckerberg said: “I have pretty strong opinions on this. I am optimistic. And I think people who are naysayers and try to drum up these doomsday scenarios – I just, I don’t understand it. It’s really negative and in some ways I actually think it is pretty irresponsible.” (355)

This is an important and necessary debate. Judging from both men have their own knowledge and practical merit point, and that can and cannot be simple answer to all aspects of AI technology and it effect. For instance, science and technology present themselves as neutral entity, the crucial point is, it is only when human can prove and make a right decision to use it that matter most. Therefore, global responsible science and technology watchdog and guard like must be establish, to monitor and control any deem too dangerous and could threaten to human survival or cannot be control. In short, AI that can be destructive to human existence and could not be able to control must be keep out. In the opposite point, any thing that can serving better humankind invention is equally important as to serve humanity progression and survival. Thereby, both great gentlemen may have both right and wrong at the same time in opposite side and or opposite position-direction.

World governance system and the need to build the new one

In this day, to increase G20 role and influence and responsibility will make greater contribution to the future world structure and better global governance to come. This should extend to cover more world pressing issues. It means more world nations come to closer sharing responsibility and figure out how to make world real secure and being a better place. This will be a greater hope and to secure the world security and lasting peace.

In geopolitics term, the nation that is in between or peripheral status or who want to be no part in any regional and world conflict, must increase their role play. It seems their role is more and more important ever as the holder of balance of power or effective mediator/commentator. The world need encourage neutrality nation as to counter the two or more extremist pole apart confrontation powers. This could help enhance peace rather to excise the conflict, and in turn make more room and condition for achieving a permanent peace… global security.

The possible leader nation could be for example, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark,
Finland, Austria, Germany, Benelux, Ireland, Lebanon, Ukraine, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia,
Turkmenistan, Armenia, Mongolia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Kenya, Ghana, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, North and South Korea and other, or EU develop into more independence entity could play the center role.

The most concern (worse thing) is, the tail is wagging the dog scenario. Where exacerbate tension and hatred, escalate conflict, blindly taking side by the third party. Instead of peaceful and well wish action. These could triggering war or nuclear war.

Nuclear disarmament achievement has a small step forward moving

Let’s  listen to the experts from two books suggestion(Barriers to Bioweapons: “The challenges of expertise and organisation for weapons development by Sonia Ben Ouagrham Gornley, and Unmaking the bomb: A fissile material approach to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation by Harold A. Feiveson, Alexander Glaser, Zia Mian and Frank N. von Hippel;  And review and remark by Rob Edwards, ‘…all these materials (about 1400 tonnes of highly enriched uranium and 500 tonnes of separated plutonium…) have to be eliminated using something like the Fissile Material Cut- off Treaty proposed by the UN in 1993.’ And International law should make working on nuclear or biological weapons a crime against humanity, thereby helping scientists and engineers exercise their consciences. And Rob Edwards summing up like. This is the moral force that succeeded in ridding the world of slavery in previous centuries. These authors remind us, however, that the nuclear dangers we face are immediate, and that time is not on the side of humanity.” (356)

Another highly praise decision initiated by President Barak Obama, has a likelihood of welcome from many peace lovers but skeptical by other. President Obama favored a proposal that “the US pledged never to use nuclear weapons first.” (357)

In fact, President Barak Obama move should strong applause as he show a Statesmanship like leadership. It is a small step to ‘force’ persuaded all nuclear arms nations to prepare for the next step. This is because only the US that have the ability and power to influence and force nations to get rid of nuclear weapon all together as at this stage. No other entity and force in the world that can fulfil such task. Pity all oppositions just never understand a bit of what it really mean. Be warn, the tail wagging the dog is extreme dangerous in this today world situation. And remember, the Law of Evolution tell us that adaptation for survival is the mother of all security. Foot stop.

World powers have come close to nuclear exchanges many times before – from the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis to the 1999 Kargil War between India and Pakistan, planning to drop a nuclear bomb. And every day, terrorists are working to build, buy or steal a nuclear weapon: in the last two decades there have been at least 25 instances of nuclear explosive materials being lost or stolen.
There have been other developments with IS and Al – Qaeda, driven by religious zeal and are unlikely to be subject to rational resolution.

“The number of instances of lost or stolen weapons-grade nuclear material – ‘nuclear diversions’ – will rise with the addition of each new nuclear country. Terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda have redefined terrorism from limited violence to mass destruction to achieve their ends, as seen in New York, Madrid, London and Mumbai. Whether as a crudely built uranium gun-type design or as a stolen warhead, one ‘small’ 10-kiloton nuclear bomb smuggled into a major city in an ordinary van and detonated could instantly kill hundreds of thousands. We’ve been lucky so far. We can't afford to keep rolling the dice.” (358)

Again, this is alarming, the former USSR president gave a serious warning,

“The current situation is too dangerous. More troops, tanks and armored personnel carriers are being brought to Europe. NATO and Russian forces and weapons that used to be deployed at a distance are now placed closer to each other, as if to shoot point-blank.”

“Today, however, the nuclear threat once again seems real. Relations between the great powers have been going from bad to worse for several years now. The advocates for arms build-up and the military-industrial complex are rubbing their hands.”

“Specifically, I propose that a Security Council meeting at the level of heads of state adopt a resolution stating that nuclear war is unacceptable and must never be fought.” (359)

The following proposal is to show that when humans decide to go for a highest common security step… One World, the preparation steps, or a first step of world’s effective governance system might need to be examine.

An aspiration prescription for global security

As early and later chapter is and will propose, comment and discuss, the topic of world new governance system in which we world’s citizens are sharing common interest and the situation propel us all to make… a decision. Where the very issue is the most important facing humankind ever.

The UN, EU and Sweden-Finland 3 models of administration, governance systems and their rich positive experience are more than enough to be a finest example to form a new world governance body and system. By select what is useful and workable ones and discard any useless. By combination the three with the new, modify and improve, and by new deem necessary addition component and function, together, this could be adequate to form a brand new world’s governance; structure and system. For current era world, it is utterly necessary, inevitable and the quicker human can achieve this goal the better. And it could be answer to today critical global security issue with all people in this planet benefit.

Set up a UN like world institution but have full mandate of power and authority: A, to in charge governance duty; elect and select world new qualify authority. B, to implement propose idea and proposal. C. to run the newest, most intelligent system ever (as world administration).

1. Declare humanity is one and should act as one in such direction: world new UN semifederation or EU like plan. There is no more an enemy mean, only rival and competitor.

2. Preserve and respect all current world nations’ sovereignty and right.

3. Set up organise body, arrange a global referendum of yes or no for the new world governing body to be build. Every world citizen age 15 are eligible to vote. Either two third of the majority of world’s nations or two third of the world population is counted.

4. The new world governance body/system are assigned full mandate and authority to carry their given task.

5. Declare governing base on secular framework and principle. Respect all rights of belief and practice that not contravene with the world‘s Law and the Law of Evolution.

6. All nuclear weapon must declare illegal and is immediately compound and under strict control. The step and time table to eliminate it should be immediately set and implement. On the universal consent of “The only genuine and lasting form of nuclear disarmament is, the disappearance of such weapon from planet earth. Foot stop.”

7. All nations especially G7 member, G20 and any world constitution member must be consult. Reform, re-organise, adjust, eliminate and forming a new structure and given mission and plan to consider and implement.

8. Demand frozen out all world conflicts spots and conflict party such as, the US and Russia, Russia and Ukraine, China and the US, India and Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran, Israel and Palestinian, North and South Korea so on and so forth. Then, declare universal coverage of amnesty, set term and time table and back up by new international law. As to lets world authority to sort out all the conflicts, issue as much possible can, and to pardon all mistake, minor crime, un intention wrong doing, and demand strict renew, reform, repent and acknowledgement exchange for an full amnesty.

9. Demand all conflicts party, nation, group must step back and reduce and stop create tension or fighting. All party must stop propaganda or demonise or interference against each other activity.

10. During this processing period, the right and wrong party will not be emphasis or be punish, call amnesty period. The length, time and detail should be further consult experts and discussion and set.

11. The world’s cooperation and complement rule and law must be clear. Base on positive and accept or acknowledge the existence of negative on the basis of based on logical, sensible to advance humanity course of practice.

12. From the start, any new violation, offender must be given clear warning, if not critical or criminal level should giving pending warning as punishment, if serious or ignore and further commit must be severe punishment. (The new governance authority have the full mandate and duty to take action, with all necessary one… even strip off the serious offender citizen right…emphasis).

The above is just elementary part, more detail proposal and recommendation is at chapter 20.
Indeed, for all of us, security is reign supreme, it is not because you like or dislike it. It is about natural ‘mandatory’ the Law of Evolution; positive and negative of innovation, adaptation to change and surviving together better and forever.

Global security issue must treated it as an entire humankind issue; It is a beyond race, believe, political ideological belonging, sex, age, rich or poor, developed or developing nation’s differential issue. It is a world citizen membership sharing issue, and the very effect will press upon us equally at everywhere on earth. It does not matter you are black or white, yellow or brown, left or right, above or below or else.

We must treat nuclear weapon as monstrous like absolutely worse than biological [and chemical] weapon as proposed by Rob Edwards (see above)?. And outlaw it now.

So, security mean, humans secure safe living, survive and survive better. To achieve that it mean we human have applied the Law of Evolution; scientific knowledge and experience better and better through space and time, since we exist and into the future. Therefore, the evolution’s of scientific knowledge and positive and negative wisdom and experience is the mother of all security as we known and unknown, and we should take utmost care about it.

As humans, we are the only species knowing positive is greater than negative

As a 78 year old man, Tadateru Konoe is president of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. He has express his concern and plea to the world at the UN’s international meeting on negotiations for a global treaty to prohibit the use and eliminate nuclear weapon in the early July 2017.

“Our world is not rational, and the risk of even one launch, one mistake, one accident is incomprehensible. There is a chance, though. A hope.”

“We urge all states to seize this opportunity. We understand the complexity involved in such negotiations, and the mistrust and political realities that are ever present.

The simple truth is that there will be no winner in a nuclear war. People would die in agony, alone. A civilisation would be erased. But we can choose a world that is free from this fear, where our children don’t have to face their fragile mortality in school gymnasiums or under their desks. We really have no other choice.” (360)

At the 21st century, cooperation and frequent interaction and trying all mean to solve any conflict by peaceful mean.

Many members of the EU felt that the US had not employed the highest security protocols in order to ensure the security of Europe. Indicative of this dissatisfaction, was the reduction in defence spending by all major members of the EU at the time of the Edward Snowden scandal, which was aggravated by the Crimean acquisition by the Russia. These views are encapsulated in the leading publication Foreign Affairs;

“Underlying this uncertainty is a sense among Europeans that their security is no longer central to US strategy, as it was during the Cold War. Europe, after all, is only one of many theaters in which Washington has interests, and it is probably not the most important one. US officials, for their part, increasingly fear that European countries will gradually lose their military capabilities and political will, abandoning their alliance with the United States in order to pacify the bully next door.

Americans were especially shocked, for example, to see that even in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Crimea, many European governments— including those of Germany and the United Kingdom—still chose to make further cuts to their military budgets. And a 2014 WIN/Gallup International survey only reinforced US doubts about European publics; just 29 percent of French citizens polled, 27 percent of British citizens, and 18 percent of German citizens said that they were willing to fight for their country.” (Sixty-eight percent of Italians said they would outright refuse) (361).

In fact, humankind in this century is more civilize, greater wisdom, and have been wider engage each other around the globe more than any time humankind history. Cyber Kids is tired of old stuff, propaganda, fake news and tension old idea create and being suffer. They wants a new world.

Make no mistake, the change of attitude by young generation about war conflict and confrontation is part of Cyber Kids evolutionary growing up and better quality of thought and consciousness mind set.

So, no doubt, the positive attitude will further evolving become wider spread universally. Is that so call survival instinct propel by adaptation, the law of evolution? Remember, their future is at stage if they are unable to force their consciousness against major or critical obstacles.

Human beings are the only species on the planet, capable of analysis, deductive logic and negotiation which is an essential component in the process of securing prosperity and surviving. However the failure of adaptation is also the passport to failure and could lead to extinction. The peaceful exploitation of science and technology will assist us in this objective. It is for this reason that the UN has essential and increasing role for global security. If not perfect.

“When Iran and the P5+1 reached a comprehensive nuclear deal on July 14, 2015, the UN Security Council endorsed the deal and put in place measures to lift UN sanctions that targeted Iran's nuclear program. The resolution, 2231, was passed on July 20, 2015 by a unanimous vote.” (362)

Humanity from space is a precious fact revealing film. Over 120s of cutting edge space satellites cameras networks to zoom and focus in and to magnify out the object, target, event, movement of humans daily activities, 24/7 on earth of every days and years. This result in a picture, statistic, the mapping of the hundreds of thousand value information that reveal how past centuries WSGN, a world scale political and economic web and networking in combination or integrate with current Digital Technology of Internet, smart phone and all digital gadget webs; WDWN webs and net-workings. As a result, world is a gigantic layers after layer, big or small, complicate sophisticate or simple of hundreds of thousands and millions of networking system on the working. And it has adding many new webs and working networks into the system or systems every minute or second never stop.

These apply and serving to all humans daily activities in the local, international and global scale as a highly necessity value tool and provide knowledge, information and mediums and changing agents: economic, transportation, information, arts, music, travelling, politics, all humans interaction, engaging with fellow humans, wider across entire natural world and outer space. With all of these clear evidence of how today humans has come to being.

Then, in case of nuclear war, all above mention creations, and entire humankind will not survive total destruction. This still have not put natural complex world’s system will also be destroy into account.

This is a concrete evidence that nuclear war cannot be fought, and humanity have a strong reason that nuclear weapon must be terminate. Whereas the danger of nuclear war is exist and increase day by day (363).

And can be proven to ourselves, we are seeing the real world, not imagination or fake one.

The doomsday clock is ticking

“The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists created the symbolic clock in 1947 to indicate the Cold
War threat. In 1991, when the threat of nuclear annihilation receded with the end of the Cold War, the clock stood at 17 minutes to midnight.”

“The move came as scientists sounded a warning about climate change for the second time in three years. The last move of the clock hands, from six minutes to five minutes to midnight, in 2012, was also because of climate change.”

“Professor Richard Somerville of the University of California in San Diego unveils the doomsday clock, which says the world is now ‘three minutes’ away from apocalypse.” (364)

In this day, the threat of nuclear weapon is clearly a far greater threat than any threat to humanity else we known. Because it is so critical that we could not calculated and could explode at any time, and no one can stop it.

As to be remind every second and minute that our world is a sharing property, sharing responsibility to global security, where the threat of nuclear war no one can be predict when or how and could be sudden, and seem has increased substantially, the above ‘doomsday clock’ is the all times excellence idea to remind all responsible parties of their obligation and responsibility for our ‘MAM’ world security. And to give every world’s citizens a vital sound alarm warning and make decision.

And this time the threat from nuclear war and other threats elaborate in this article combine is seem more critical than anticipate and known.

In 26 January 2018, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists today moved the hand of the iconic Doomsday Clock to 2 MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT. The last time the Clock was this close to midnight was in 1953.

Then, my dear, before going to bed to night, please ask your mum and dad, your kids and your love one. If it the curse or blessing, we humankind is in the first time proudly invent a tool that capable to destroy the entire earth or all of humanity?

Only time can tell what the next move of the Doomsday Clock will be.

Chapter 11. Globalisation

Globalisation: a grand and pressing evolution in the making

Globalisation brings both good and bad to humanity and world development. Like it or not, globalisation is ongoing and evolving. It is transforming the world in definite and universal ways. It is a lasting adaptation process humankind must be taken, govern by the Law of Evolution.

What does globalisation mean?

Globalisation can be classified and interpreted in different ways. It involves all beings and their synthesis of ‘space’ with ‘time’ over distinct stages and eras. Any one of such ‘engagements’ plays a crucial role in its own right as it interacts across regions and continents.

70,000 years ago humans evolved and migrated out of ancient Africa, then, advancing and expanding through Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt, which was then the centre of the world and the foundation of civilisation. The first concept of government came from Egypt 3,000 years ago.  It spread to Greece, Roman (Italy), China, India, Vikings (Scandinavia nation), Mongols (Mongolia), Austria, Ottoman Empire (Turkey). Develop into later form of governance Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Britain, France then the US and Japan, as they ‘globalised’ industrialise and colonised world regions.

As a form of globalisation, colonisation from early times and Middle Age led to the dissemination of faith - mainly Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism, along with their cultures, believe, value, languages and civilisation.

Then came migration, the slave trade and expansion arising from science, technology propel by industrialisation and modern knowledge.

In biology field, today globalisation made plant, insect, animal, diseases, virus, bacteria and all beings spread across the entire world wider faster than at any time in humankind history.

International law and political systems began borrowing and copying from each other, bit by bit, on a world scale. Later came the greater exchange and emulation of modern education, science and technology. Today apart from WSGN, we also have WDWN: interaction, interreaction, interrelate, interconnection, intertwine, interdependence, cooperation, integrate, slow of fast assimilation, competition, and conflict and complicate development the world over.

“Economic ‘globalisation’ is also a historical process, the result of human innovation and technological progress. It refers to the increasing integration of economies around the world, particularly through the movement of goods, services, and capital across borders. The term sometimes also refers to the movement of people (labour) and knowledge (sciencetechnology) across international borders. There are also broader cultural, political, and environmental dimensions of globalisation.” (365)

“All dimensions of globalisation - economic, political, cultural, and ecological – include a fifth dimension - the ideological dimension, comprising a range of norms, claims, beliefs, and narratives.” (366)

Manfred Steger, professor of Global Studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa argues that globalisation has four [actually six] main dimensions:

“Economic globalisation

Political globalisation

Military globalisation

Cultural globalisation

Ecological globalisation

Ideological globalization: market globalism, justice globalism, religious globalism”. (367)

In fact, there might needed to add other dimension,

Science and technology and all kind of knowledge globalisation.

Plant, insect, bacteria, virus, fungus and animal globalisation.

Past global invading by war or peaceful expansion, included the late era of force colonisation.

From Out of Africa: un-brokenly, human races are migrated spread across earth continents.

Globalisation is the synthetic processing of an ‘actual’ single human race through space and time.

It is also the interaction of humankind with nature and all beings through evolution.

Actually, by more depth and actual acknowledge, globalisation could mean;

“Globalisation, as a concept, refers both to the ‘shrinking’ of the world and the increased consciousness of the world as a whole. It is a term used to describe the changes in societies and the world economy that are the result of dramatically increased cross-border trade, investment, and cultural exchange. The processes and actions to which the concept of globalization now refers have been proceeding, with some interruptions, for many centuries, but only in relatively recent times has globalisation become a main focus of discussion. The current or recently-past epoch of globalisation has been dominated by the nation-state, national economies, and national cultural identities. The new form of globalisation is an interconnected world and global mass culture, often referred to as a ‘global village.’” “Globalisation carries multiple meanings, nuances, and applications. These include:

- The formation of a global village

- Globalisation Theory

- In political science and international relations

- In sociology and communications

- Economic globalisation

- The negative effects of for-profit multinational corporations

- The spread of capitalism

- The concept of globalisation

-The process by which the world becomes a single place” (368)

And by Professor Michael Hendrix,

“The first era of globalisation was born of empire and industry in the late 19th century. With cheaper transportation and mass production, goods no longer had to be made near to where they were consumed. Aided by these advances, the British Empire effectively became one massive free trade zone. The United States eventually inherited that globalized, battlescarred world soon after the Second World War and began to engineer what would become the second stage of globalisation.”

“…the second one came out of a new international order backed by the United States. New forms of communication allowed for production to be moved even farther away from market. Commerce could be conducted with a greater speed too than ever before. We have seen in this era globalisation the rise of transnational supply chains, the information revolution, and institutions such as the World Trade Organization.”

“A third era of globalisation is slowly coming into view some twelve years into the new century. It seems to involve the rise of regional powers throughout the world, commensurate with rapid growth in their respective economies (think of China, Nigeria, Brazil, Indonesia, and others). It is a healthier, wealthier, more interconnected world built on a foundation of high technology. As with any sort of global change, there will be disruption and confusion.” (369)

Contemporary globalisation has the most sophisticated, complex features of all types and forms of new knowledge. The world scale expansion of industrialisation is the centre of all development. It has provided globalisation the fastest, most dynamic and profound forms in all dimensions. Based on space and time, it has changed the world, leading nations to contact, engage, interact and imitate each other in all aspects of human life for good and for ill. It has created and increased knowledge, experience and material riches for better and for worse, propelling the world forward like never before in humankind history. The acceleration of globalisation has created more space, but less and shorter time to change and expand. Actually, industrialisation is accelerating globalisation, and inter globalisation is accelerating further industrialisation. Both interact, complement each other and interconnect. Both have positive and negative outcomes.

The positive side of globalisation

Modern knowledge, science and technology spread out through the internet of World Wide Web of digital communications, transporting and advancing education, impacting on work skills, training, exchange and transfer or WSGN and WDWN combined.

Today, the globalisation of science and technology, communication and transportation by land, sea and air impacts on the geopolitical, economic engagement, interconnection and interdependence of everything from art and culture to sports and hobbies. Tourism, site seeing, bush walking, fishing and adventurism are crisscrossing and blending worldwide.  There are no boundaries. These exchanges pan out like never before in human history.

Professor Ha Joon Chang, a Korean born Cambridge economist believes that “…in terms of the consequent economic and social changes, the internet revolution has (at least as yet) not been as important as the washing machine and other household appliances, which, by vastly reducing the amount of work needed for household chores, allowed women to enter the labour market and virtually largely abolished professions like domestic service.” (370)

While unevenly spread throughout the world, globalisation has built a pathway enabling huge betterment for humankind. The introduction of advanced medicine, healthcare and household appliances, like the washing machine, have advanced the quality of life as they spread around the world. The contraceptive pill has done more than most. It has led to better and longer lives, providing more ‘freedom’ of choice for people to plan for their future. The introduction of washing machine too has changed our concept of family, both revolutionising work and social political perceptions for women’s equality and rights never dreamed off before.

On the economic front, the globalisation of trade and investment now extends to all corners of the globe making access to goods and products, cheaper and available all year round and 24/7.

Globalisation offers a convenient spread of wealth and wellbeing both horizontally and vertically, but more on horizontal.

“Indeed, as the Chinese ambassador to the UK pointed out on my radio program, China is already the largest importer – yes, importer – for at least 70 countries, and accounts for about 10-11% of all imports globally. Despite its supposed economic challenges, China will likely be a bigger importer than the EU before this decade is over, and it will probably surpass the US soon thereafter.”

“Moreover, economic inequality among countries has declined sharply in the past 20 years, owing partly to China’s rise, as well as to economic development across Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere. In fact, by 2010, the United Nations had already achieved its Millennium Development Goal of halving poverty by 2015, and recent projections suggest that, by 2050, poverty will be eradicated everywhere except Africa. This will not happen without globalisation.”

It’s also the best cure for inequality by far (371).

The global production network and economy of scale as Professor Paul Krugman has elaborated, makes few corporations rich. As prices become cheaper, quality gets better, efficiencies increase and profit margins get smaller.

This is because globalisation also means opening business to world scale competition. Those who innovate, adjust and adapt better will survive, but the majority face bankruptcy. The number of corporations will drastically decline. The world’s consumers will get greater benefit via access to cheaper and better products with more produced to suit local needs. This process will eventually extend to all corners of the world, regardless of national boundaries. The result could see the world enter a new era called ‘post capitalism’ - a full blown social democratic system?.

One of the most positive aspects of globalisation is the spread of trade. Trade is colour blind.

Cultural and religious differences play no part. Trade does not discriminate between black, white and yellow skins. Business must be colour blind to makes the most gains. The cultural mix match arising from the globalisation of trade has improved relations among people. Engagement, interaction and interdependence help make for better understanding. People become more willing to respect differences in religious beliefs, culture, ethnicity, race and nationality. This will only increase, making for firmer engagement among people. The interdependence and interrelation of humankind will be greater than ever and that is only for the good.

Modern day economic globalisation no longer relies on military coercion in order to open up a nation for the market to enter or control a nation or human life, as was the case in the era of colonialism. World nations have formulated working mechanisms that make world trade and economics - largely based on innovation, quality, services and price competition - fairer and more peaceful. Even though, this world’s economic system still has not produced enough of a just, fair, equitable to the less developing nations.

However, the threat of deadly conflict has been much reduced. Conflict has become something that can more likely be solved in a civilized manner. That is not to say there is no longer foul play and injustice waiting to be addressed. It is just acted as a reduction, deter the tension, conflict and war mechanic.

In order to gain more market and profit, multinational corporations are being forced to follow local rules, laws and traditions. They trend to setting up R & D center for inventing product that more suit to the local market and also international taste. Gradually, they are virtually becoming localized. Eventually world capitalism will very much change form and meaning. With space and time. It will become almost unrecognizable.

Globalisation of the tourist industry today is among the fastest moving and expanding. It is developing on the back of globalisation. If Marco Polo could be classified as a world tourist, he was an exception for his time. He was just one of the few lucky people at that time to have the chance to travel so far into a fascinating unknown world and live to tell the story.  Today he would be one of many.

A report by the UNWTO suggests that one in 11 jobs globally is linked to tourism and that the industry is directly or indirectly responsible for as much as 9% of global GDP.

“More than 1 billion people worldwide travelled across borders in 2013 and five times that many travelled domestically, making tourism and related industries perhaps the single largest contributor to global GDP and employment,” it found.

“In the next decade, tourism and related industries could create some 70 million jobs — two-thirds of them in Asia — and ‘be a force for good in international relations,’ said Michael Frenzel, chairman of the World Travel and Tourism Council.” (372)

Tourism is increasingly a major, if not the main, source of growth, employment, income and revenue for many of the world’s developing countries. The sector is currently the first or second source of export earnings in 20 of the 48 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and is demonstrating steady growth in at least 10 others. As such, tourism has become one of the main engines of socioeconomic progress for many countries and a development priority for a majority of the LDCs (373).

International tourism has continued to grow in 2012, despite global economic uncertainty, to reach over one billion international tourist arrivals. The figure cements tourism’s position as one of the world’s largest economic sectors, accounting for 9% of global GDP (direct, indirect and induced impact), one in every 12 jobs and up to 8% of the total exports of the world’s Least Developed Countries (LDCs) (374).

The good news is, typically, they are globalist and multi-culturalist’s world vision than their past generations.

In 2016, travel accounted for about 10 per cent of global GDP, equal to $7.6 trillion. And as people become richer, they travel more often, many from emerging markets, many are travelled abroad for the first time. (375)

Millennial is and will be one of the largest group of people that travelling the world. They are not just become largest middle class species human ever known in number and have their own mind set and way of life, it is a positive one.

“Clint Johnston It's a pretty typical schedule for the 33-year-old who founded website
Triphackr, a travel company built for the millennial generation.”

“The millennial … - spends around $200bn (£153bn) on travel each year, according to market research firm FutureCast.

And overall, they have more cash to splash than any previous generation, with around $6tn in disposable income, according to market research firm Asia Insight. The following are their behavior,

…rather than saving to buy a house, but that tendency to spend is good news for tourism.

…millennial buzz words - connected, experiential, authentic - in the hope of snaring younger customers.

Accommodation providers are concentrating on shared spaces, faster internet and high-tech toys.“

“Katrina Leung, executive director of travel trade group ITB Asia, believes, business must design for,

"If it focuses on more perks and the ambiance as a whole, partners with key hip hotels or works with local guides, those things might help attract millennials," she says.

A survey by the Pacific Asia Travel Association found that 85% of Asian millennials wanted to ‘live like a local’ while on holiday. Food was also priority when visiting a new destination.

“They also travel more than older people. When millennials hit the road they want unique experiences, as well as cultural and authentic encounters.

Along the way millennials will share their experiences on social media and rely heavily on user reviews to make travel decisions. Brand loyalty is typically low.” (376)

Priceline a giant tourist industry company founded in 1997 report.

Last year, travel accounted for about 10 per cent of global GDP, or $US7.6 trillion. But only about a third of that is booked online. This share is expected to rise by a couple of percentage points a year over time, about the same pace as e-commerce more broadly. And as people become wealthier, they travel more; many in emerging markets are venturing abroad for the first time (377).

Globalisation has made possible the elimination of backwardness and ignorance. It has helped to narrow the progression gap between developed and developing countries.

Globalisation also spreads world civilization through science and the arts, entertainment, hobbies, customs, traditions and beliefs. Sport too, via the Olympics, has globalised the world. Games such as tennis, football, basketball, racing, skiing, golf among others are interchanging, becoming a mix mash and spreading throughout the world.

Once there was a relation’s gap between human beings. Modern networks of communications and transportation have broken this down. We could one day witness a mix of civilization that better enhances relationships; shares progress and makes the world more secure and peaceful.

Globalisation has made international multi-racial marriage and companionship possible. It provides new animals and plants, providing better food supply and security to all continents.

Through international institutions, globalisation offers the world more civilized, advanced, fairer and just international rule and laws for better interaction between nations.

Interestingly, globalisation is the consequence of the fast development and industrialisation of developed nations. Economic powers desired globalisation to satisfy their own ambitions to ‘colonise’ and become ‘superpowers’ by monopolising wealth. It gave them advantages by providing easier, larger resources, markets and profits. But along with globalisation has come greater competition and adaptation as emerging nations make inroads and obtain a fairer share of the market and profits via ‘divide and gain from below’.

With the ‘hollowing out’ of industry in developed nations, developing nations can catch up and spread out, employing the past powers of ‘old game’ divide and gain. They can make direct investment and inroads into the domain of the older economies. Today, the ones who open their arms to welcome globalisation are the emerging economies or developing nations. The one’s who cry loudest and lose confidence in globalisation are the developed nations. They are the ones resisting change by way of such things as tariffs and trade barriers and subsidies, to impose their rule and law call protectionism. Some persist with their own game rules in isolation with each other.

It is clear, however, that the power of globalisation is enormous. On the one hand, it propels the world’s nations to seek to protect themselves and retain a free and independent position. They strive to learn how to guard their territory, sovereignty and protect themselves against international interference, negative influence or domination. On the other hand, by necessity, they are propelled to come together in cooperation for the sake of the wellbeing of world citizens to create a better world.

Globalisation has made the world change so much that no expert or academic could have predicted the exact outcome. China’s ‘go out’ policy and many western nations’ ‘open door’ policy, which allows the global foreign direct investment florist we see today, could make the world even more economically interdependent as never before. It is the result of deeper and unfathomable evolution of globalisation.

As The Australian Financial Review's Workplace and Productivity Summit report states:

“Globalisation was a low-tech affair. It was enabled by communications technologies that seem Stone-Aged by today's standards – faxes, telexes and private computer networks, and ships. They helped corporations get basic goods such as clothing and electronics cheaply made in Asia and shipped to rich countries like Australia to be sold more profitably than locally made items. Workers, trade unions and many owners of local manufacturing plants threatened by it screamed blue murder. But once consumers had a taste of access to cheap foreign-made goods, they demanded it, and governments had to comply.”

“The current phase of globalisation is fuelled by technologies as different from those of the
1980s and early 1990s as a semi-autonomous Tesla P85D is from the T-model Ford of 110 years ago. Mobile Internet, cloud technology, automation and robotics, driverless cars, 3D printing, genomics storage and renewable energy are the new engines driving globalisation ever more deeply, widely and powerfully into modern economies and societies.”

“New and old worlds are colliding in this new digital global economy. This was best exemplified by the clash between the world view of Tim Fung, – co-founder of shortterm jobs market Air tasker, who breezily spoke of

“trying to reimagine the exchange of work… And that's not the only paradox. Consumers empowered by hyper connectivity and transparency are cracking the whip, demanding better performance and lower cost, offering less loyalty and less willingness to pay the costs of innovation, said Business Council of Australia president and Telstra chairman Catherine Livingstone.”

"Whether it's big pharma, a global resource company or a large telco, organisations have effectively outsourced their research to their supply chain, particularly to their SME suppliers. They have outsourced elements of production, and they are taking advantage of the fact that the market for labour and skills is now global,” (378)

Globalisation creates a situation whereby corporate and national competition is fierce.

Nations in different regions form wider political and security alliances and economic blocs.  This brings world nations closer, at the same time creating conflict and tension. They reach for co-operation in side blocs, but make alliance all over. The main concern is that through contact and competition who will gain or lose influence, power and control. This uncertainty makes us more vulnerable than at any time in human history.  We are living in a time of transition.

The negative side and what happening due to globalisation

Globalisation makes it easier to wipe out unwanted animals, insects and species, but this destroys the natural balance, making contagious diseases and virus spread faster across the globe, especially by human activity.

Globalisation induces competition, conflicts, nationalism, protectionism and isolationism both in developing and developed nations.

It makes travelling easier, as a flood of economic migrants (not to be confused with war and political refugees) flood from developing to developed nations.

Globalisation is lending the opportunity for criminal activity to spread into the wider world. It increases the explosive scale of human activities. It has created accidents and pollution.

The massive increase in consumption has a direct impact on the depletion of our natural resources, damaging our environment on a world wider scale. Among developed nations especially overconsumption of goods, services and products is rampant.

Globalisation makes corporate citizens in the developed nations (those in the one percent wealth bracket) find easier ways to avoid tax, by registering a shell subsidiary company in low tax havens like Panama, Singapore, Switzerland, Malaysia, Mauritius, Liberia or Luxembourg, Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands, among others.  Most of these countries have low or zero tax regimes. Wealthy governments are more or less biased towards corporate and wealthy privilege. Subsidiaries overcharge parent companies for goods and services, then, transfer profits offshore to low tax havens.

Most of the world’s biggest companies such as News Corporation, 21st Century Fox, Apple Inc., Google, Starbuck, Chevron and Shell are all heavily involved in tax avoidance. However the 99% of all people on modest incomes pay full tax.

The process of globalisation makes trade unions weak. Real wages do not grow.  Some even fall to save jobs. This situation is severe and mainly happening in the developed nations. It increases inequality and erodes democracy.

What, if anything, is enduring and unchanging? 

President Donald Trump has form and implement protectionism and isolationism political and economic policies, aim to improve America position in the globalise world. However, the practice could actually be seen as against globalisation based on his view of US is losing more than gain, unlike the past globalisation-expansions. Practically, this will make the US adjust and adapt better to the world change, he reckon. However, to correct some problem with a short term policy might be working in some extend, but in the medium and long term, the negative will be far more than positive. This is because all forms of globalisation cannot be stop, only slow down or speed up in some point in time. It is part of human development…adaptation. The focal point is, risk of left behind or extinction.

Globalisation is governed by the Law of Evolution…adaptation and change and cannot be avoid. It will go on indefinitely.

Globalisation also means (gradual or fast) change, adjustment and adaptation.  Look around - in your kitchen, garden, park and places you go. Ask yourself how much of what you see is native or local produce? Very little.

Humans dislike change.  Any coming change always creates anxiety, tension, disruption or conflict, especially change that has no clarity or aim: change that is too complex, that creates scarcity or involves risk. Such change will be even harder, at times traumatic, for nations, race or tribes that do not welcome the speed of modernity and evolution. When the gap between old and new is too great it is harder to adjust. But all thing have to…no other way around.

With globalisation, however, comes world scale competition, increasing civilization and a commitment to international law and order. A much fairer and just interaction is compelling and gradually occurring. It will not resemble the 20th century, the age of colonisation or any past era. World nations will interconnect more. They will depend on each other like a gigantic social, economic community of multiple and complex networks. This process is not perfect and never will be. But at least it makes thing better. It will bring greater wellbeing and increase equality. Indeed, the world has been through huge change. It continues to positive adapting and will forever change.

Globalisation cannot be stopped, sorry to say, because it is part of the human evolving development. And because world is a vast single entity. But it can be slowed and guided on certain extend and levels, up to human knowledge and experience capacity and natural law. There can be some form of managing and planning, ensuring a balance of positive and negative outcomes. We can assure human rights and decent living standards, as world citizens share responsibility and treat each other and all beings as part of a natural world entity. Humankind and nature can be more caring, accommodating and respectful of each other. Then the necessary adaptation and change for humans to survive will be generated.

In today globalised world, time changes fast.

“With the advent of service outsourcing and now that China has entered the WTO and shifted the global balance of economic power, globalisation is more and more a two-way street. The global economy is flattening into an ever more level-playing field. There is thus no guarantee where US economic might will stand two or three decades hence, and what that might mean to the appeal of America's opportunity society. America's preeminent status in higher education is also coming under challenge by China and Europe. Even on the military front, Paul Kennedy has returned to his thesis of imperial overstretch, pointing out that, one year into the war, the US military has had to resort to a ‘covert draft’ of extended duty for the reserves and National Guard and pulling troops back from the North Asian hotspot, Korea.” (379)

Actually, humans have lived in a process of globalisation since we first came into existence. It is now much obvious as being part of our daily lives - with us every second of every day. Because humanity is one and part of the world, the world is one unit in a vast universe. Globalisation is in fact a natural development; whether fast, slow or stalled, it is up to humans to interact among themselves and with all beings, the world and universe. If people are careful and do not commit any serious negative activity and make more positive contributions to the world, we will move forward.

Indeed, like it or not, any individual, community or nation has to adapt and change to changing circumstances, conditions and environments. All organism are governed by the Law of Evolution. They ignore this is at their own peril.

Professor Stephen Roach, “Sadly, the economics profession has failed to grasp the inherent problems with globalisation. In fixating on an antiquated theory, they have all but ignored the here and now of a mounting worker backlash. Yet the breadth and speed of globalisation 2.0 demand new approaches to cushion the blows of this disruption.” “The design of more enlightened policies must account for the powerful pressures now bearing down on a much broader array of workers. The hyper-speed of globalisation 2.0 suggests the need for quicker triggers and wider coverage for worker retraining, relocation allowances, job-search assistance, wage insurance for older workers, and longer-duration unemployment benefits.” (380)

So, on hard evidence, there is no doubt, that we as humans beings, among all other living things on earth, are gradually globalising and heading closer to the stage of smaller world - One World. Fast and slow.

Indeed, trying to stop globalisation is like trying to stop the sun rising and setting each day.

Chapter 12. Who wants to be a superpower?

In this 21st Century of fast advanced, complex, globalised world, who wants to be a superpower?  If so, any superpower or any nation dreaming of being a superpower should ask themselves three questions:

Who wants and has the capacity to shoulder world affairs, finances and man power, almost alone?

Who is capable of manipulating or monopolising and setting their very own world order?

And who approves of and is willing to let one or few nation to run the world in the superpower logic?

Since 1966, world nations at the UN voted against the old form of empire or colonization. The reason is that colonisation is inhumane and uncivilised. It denies human rights. All countries should have their own freedom and independence to live and choose their own direction without interference from others. Is this normal or right? This resulted in the old concept of empires ceasing and a new concept of ‘empires’ being born.  They are called the superpowers.

The world witnessed the US and the former USSR (the other superpower and their allies), confront each other through numerous proxy wars and political and economic contests, aiming to be the world’s lone ‘dominator’ or lone superpower. The result was in 1990s, the US won the Cold War and the USSR disintegrated.

It does not matter that the old empires or the new superpowers are born and behave in more or less different ways. Where they were ideologically different was the USSR held dear the ideals of world communism, of absolute equality and a society of central planning and force domination in other nation domestic affairs and ‘empire’ expansion. But the US governments held ideals of individualism, ‘privilege reigns supreme’, freedom, liberty and democracy, interference with other nation for political and economic gain. But there was one thing they shared in common. All empires and superpowers have the desire to dominate, dictate, command and control, which leads to setting one’s own world order. The very objective is to be free, to gain an advantage over the other and to access to the world’s natural resources, markets, labour and wealth on their own terms.

But as it happened, it is obvious that the empire (or alternative form the today superpower) still cannot escape from the practical reality that at some point in time, their military becomes overstretched and their economy declines. These are the constant threats facing powers whose ambitions and security requirements are greater than their resource base can provide for.  Or as Professor Paul Kennedy concludes: “all empires fail because of its’ imperial stretch’ over stretch.” (381)

This principle could also apply neatly to the fate of today’s superpower.

How does today’s superpower behave and confront problems?

As the only superpower in the world today, the US have developed a deeper, more complex orthodoxy leading to many cases of poor judgement. It has turned relatively positive things into negative. In principle, it does not respond well to the fast advancing and changing world...mean poorly adaptation.

For example, the US has failed to make a settlement on the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. The issue is getting more complicated and reaching breaking point. And this is one of the main reasons for Islam’s Jihadist religious-based terrorist extremism growing and spreading wider and faster than ever.

Instead of concentrating on dealing with international terrorism such as, Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups: Iranian Shia backed Shiite militias, including Hezbollah Brigades and others, Saudi Arabia’s Sunnis backed Sunni militias, including Salafist Wahhabi terrorists; Al Shibab, Taliban, JR, Islam State (IS) or Islam State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) among others, it would be wiser and more effective to develop a long-term strategy and short-term practical policy.

Instead the US chose to follow its orthodoxy ideal by invading and occupying Iraq. The result is harming Washington’s credibility and respectability. There is a loss of trust - damage that is immeasurable. The UN Secretary General at the time, Kofi Annan, condemned the invasion and occupation of Iraq as illegal. At one point, it drew over 10 million of angry protesters onto the streets around the world, the largest that ever occurred in world history. And in the end the result is not a democracy but a failed state, civil war, violent bloodbath, hundreds of thousands dead and injured and millions of refugees, unending until this day. Worse of all, it triggered Syria’s civil war and the formation of an Islamist state (IS) in Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Yemen with even worse violence and bloodshed.

The shocking sky-high cost of war is proven by academics, who calculated that the total cost of the Iraq war was over $3 trillion, almost five times more than officially reported (382).

It seems ridiculous to hold on to this pattern of activity in this era.

Henry Kissinger, the experienced former US Secretary of State, in his new book ‘World Order’, blames George W. Bush and his administration for pursuing idealistic crusades that ignored earthly realities.

“He asks Americans, in effect, to transfer their own democratic idealism from the crusading, missionary, democracy-promoting, ‘Mission Accomplished’ gambits of Woodrow Wilson and George W. Bush to a modest balance-of-power-sharing that neo-conservative and liberal interventionists reject, but that Kissinger believes is more effective and more moral in the end.” (383)

Superpower in this day and era are mainly formed by the following three factors:

Economic, scientific and technological advancements enable them to gain a monopoly or at least domination on a world scale. Secondly, hard power - a large, sophisticated, technologically advanced, strong military force to protect oneself, intimidate and coerce some, while offering protection and sharing the ‘spoils’ with others.  They offer natural resources, market access and a world order with allies.

Next comes soft power to make others like, respect, trust or admire them, often by offering unfair or attractive mutual benefits, selective foreign aid and favourable financial loans through powerful institutions. Culture, media, entertainment and diplomatic activities also come play a role.

As such, a superpower has a strong self-interest and aggressive behaviour, with the desire to take full advantage of world resources and market. The practice has the potential to develop into extremely unjust, unfair and narrow ‘self-interest’ tendencies.

The very aim of a superpower is to make others submit and comply. Superpower seek to take control and make absolute advantage gain.

Today, pressure looms large for developing nations to succumb to soft power tactics. For instance, developed nations appeal to the needs of developing nations through unfair disadvantage. Many of them include critical laws, which are unjust, unfair, out-dated and some is inhumane and should be declared null and void. These laws should be replaced with a more just legal system. Meanwhile all global treaties and agreements must be applied to all world nations appropriately, equally and practically without exception. All dealings with investment, trade and every aspect of interaction, rule and engagement with developing nations, must be based on fairness and mutual benefit, not narrow national self-interest. Put simply, it is sometimes misguided to present soft power as ‘gain’ smart power.

Instead of providing developing countries with fresh resources, the debt system has forced them to give priority to payments to creditors over the provision of basic social services. According to World Bank data, in 2010 alone, developing countries paid out $184 billion on debt service, about three times the annual resources required for the fulfillment of the MDGs (Millennium Development Goal). Even more troublesome, between 1985 and 2010 net public debt flows to developing countries, that is the difference between debt inflows and debt payments, reached $530 billion |4|. To place this number in context, this is the equivalent of five Marshall Plans.

Throughout this time, the IFI´s and creditor countries have used debt alike to push developing countries to adopt policies that, if anything, prevents them from securing minimum living conditions for their populations. From the privatization and downsizing of public services, to opening internal markets to imports that seriously undermine food sovereignty, the policies enforced upon developing countries have crippled their capacity to achieve their own internal development (384).

It is against human rights principle, and utterly inhumane.

Let’s take John Perkins, the US economic consultant working in the US government’s interest as a high-ranking go-between, with very inhumane ways. He told of his experience: “Economic Hit Men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign ‘aid’ organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, pay offs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of Globalisation. I should know; I was an EHM.” (385)

IMF and the World Bank have crippled poor nations through uncivilised methods: the US has used debt not to help developing nations, but rather to control these nations and force them to conform to US foreign policy. The purpose of this is for the US full spectrum dominance through military and economic means on every nation on earth. This includes land, sea, airspace, outer space, cyber space and the mainstream media. This attempt to dominate all nations has been going on for many decades and is called ‘The Washington Consensus’. Perkins further points out that the first attempt is to bribe the leaders of nations. If that does not work, then the leader is assassinated. If that does not work, then, the US invades, like in Iraq. (Extract quote from the conclusion by Report Post on John Perkins, ‘Confessions of Economic Hit Man book’) (386).

In fact, the real power and authority of the US nation is firmly on the orthodox politicians, manipulated by corporates who are ignorant and could not understand the limitations of what a 21st century ‘superpower’ nation can do. Nor do they understand the power and effect of globalisation and Darwinism’s human surviving principle.

Let’s take Barack Obama’s words of criticism over his hawkish critics; “Proponents of what I consider to be a disastrous decision to go into Iraq haven't really learned the lesson of the last decade, and they keep on just playing the same note over and over again.” (387)

After World War II, the US built up and retained the world’s largest military industry.

Understandably, this was due to the concern over the USSR threat. But the Cold War was over long ago. The world had changed so much. It is now a globalised world where interaction and cooperation in economic, trade, communication and transportation networks is high. The world tended towards peace and mutual respect and cooperation. But the US still retained, even increased military spending over past decades for little reason. Actually, just half of the current military capability should be enough to deter or defeat its adversaries on this planet easily - except for nuclear war.

The US had conveniently formed a loose alliance with China to oppose the USSR during the Cold War. Later, the two nations cooperated in economic development and both gained considerable benefit to their economic grow and prosperity. But it turned out that China had more to gain than the US China insisted on its own political and economic strategy and independence that made it successful on the economic front and it became an economic world power.

Ideologically, the US had tried and failed to rein China into an open, democratic nation that the US could manipulate. Then, the conflict became more tense and worrying.

Since World War II, the US has tried hard and spent much of its energy and resources on 'interference’, exporting ‘democracy’ and political ideology, and also on the economic front on the Washington Consensus to control world nations. But largely it has failed. This ideology has inflicted much damage on the US political and economic system. It is the main reason that the US has become a decaying and dysfunctional nation (388).

The US and allies made the mistake of treating Russia as an adversary, instead of treating them fairly as a hapless nation in need of help, friendship and cooperation. The result was that, Russia received adverse pressure and used it as a strong incentive to consolidate and readjust on its own terms, most of all independence. It had no other choice. This led to progress that was crucial to resettling the national political, economic and social systems, and mending a broken government system. But that became a less functional one.

The US system is built on a fragmented foundation. It can hardly manage properly and often runs out of control. This means that dysfunction causes crises and often causes carnage that spills over into the wider world. The world should prepare for it to come back again, but most of all should work to find a way to prevent this.

Many EU and of Scandinavian nations have good concepts for welfare states that work well. The social democrats turn out to be the leaders of world’s most successful political and economic systems. Then, the EU practically became the US’s competitor and ally at the same time.

By nature, the EU’s deep concern is peace and prosperity. But by letting the US use the EU as a buffer zone against perceived threats from Russia or elsewhere, eventually the US became a great ally but at the same time a troublemaker. This created an unacceptable burden on the security and future of the EU. Indeed, Europe would never want to see their homeland turned into a battlefield again after two world wars.

The old ally system and security logic does not fit today’s world. The US treats Japan as their faithful unequal and convenient ally. The Japanese have a history of isolation geographically politically and culturally. They have a specific culture, tradition, ideology and belief system.  Japan has not welcomed foreigners and finds it hard to build a truly trusting relationship with other nations. Its strict, hierarchical tradition and strong nationalistic character makes it out of step with the modern world, and is therefore an uneasy, troublesome ally for the US.

Since the end of the Cold War, the world has had fewer violent conflicts, civil wars and wars between nations. Violent conflict and war mainly happen in relation to issues of religion, tribal boundaries, national borders, territory disputes, and political factions. By intent or interference, stirring up tension often increases hostility and worsens conflicts, with unsuccessful policies perpetuating and fuelling more conflict and tension worldwide.

Since WWII, the world has become too big, too complex, too advanced for a nation state or a few self-interested states to take responsibility alone. That is why the US has called louder and louder for other nations to share responsibility for world affairs. But on the other hand, the US still cannot adjust its mindset due to reluctance to give away the baggage of ‘ideology’.  It struggles to be fairer and just, to share power, ‘authority’ and responsibility internationally. In practical terms, it’s just a matter of time for world nations to come to that tipping point . . . the new world order. Or in the Law of Evolution term, fail to appropriately adapting.

Therefore, the world is forming into three main close and loose alliances, mainly in the political, economic and security areas with some overlap. They are the US and its close allies, mainly the G7 nations; the EU based on an economic and NATO military alliance and finally an alliance between China, Russia and a lesser extent emerging nations based mainly on economics and security.

However, with globalisation and evolving foreign relations, the EU will seek a more independent position from the US, led by Germany, France, Italy, Spain and other. The more the US pushes Russia and China hard, the more Russia will form and alliance with China and others.

Is there a future for superpower?

In the past decades, the perceived end of the US as a ‘new world’ frontier society has faded  fast, largely thanks to the evolving of globalisation. But the Wild West mentality has not changed fast enough. For the US, it is still a baggage.

The world has changed so much that the US is no longer the so-called ‘new world’ as was meant hundreds of years ago. The globalised world has come to diminish such advantage fast. Human experience in the past few hundred years has spread throughout the whole world rapidly. Humans are learning and copying so efficiently that they create even greater inventions, which change power relations. Through globalisation and world advances, geographically the US is not far away from world trouble spots any more. The traditional innovative advantage is gradually spreading to other nations. The advantages it has over others have shrunk and are getting smaller day by day. Like it or not, the US has to adapt to global changes. As much as the US changed the world, the world is in turn pressing to change it. That is the Law of Evolutionary no any single thing in the world could escape from it. Yes, the rule and principle of so-called equilibrium of confluence is the premise for advancement and survival.

Slavery and colonialism are outlawed, apartheid is ceased and globally violent conflict has decreased. World communities are also opposed to the superpowers. Sooner or later, they will crumble and be gone forever (389).

In this day and age, economic influence and closer mutual benefit are more important and are at the centre of world engagement. Both actual soft power and military might are losing much of their effectiveness.

Today, economic aid, economic cooperation and foreign direct investment have intensified as effective tools to make friends and allies. These are some of the most effective ways to strengthen friendship, enhance international goodwill, increase power and world influence. It is a form of soft power, but also one of the most effective practices to win hearts and minds in today’s world.

Indeed, ‘divide and conquer’ divide and rule always worked effectively in the past for colonial expansion and today’s superpower. However, globalisation has given a gift to developing nations for their newfound advantage, called divide and ‘gain’ receiving. It is the great bargaining game of the developing nations of today’s world. It’s time to turn the tables. The practice of pitting the world’s political, military or economic powers to win the biggest concessions like an ‘auction’ or bidding ‘game’ contest is becoming common practice. Apart from more foreign aid, lower interest rates, bigger financial loans, longer terms and better conditions, developing nations are gaining more investment ownership rights and a fairer share. This has become the world standard and a norm. They are also bargain better on negotiating technology transfer, greater employment, education, management, training, research and development cooperation, better investment term and condition, corporate tax, a fairer profit and a more favourable market share. Very often this game is further extended to gain political, economic, security and other concessions.

The following is one interesting example:

In January 2012, the US and her close allies the G7, with 12 other wealthy nations through the UN, IMF and World Bank, finally reached a decision to settle debt relief and forgive the debts of the world’s poorest nations. After the campaign to cancel the debts of the poorest nations at the beginning of the last decade failed, one obvious obstacle was clear:  in July 8, 2005, the BBC reported that the Group of Eight (G8) agreed to relieve debts for 18 very poor and heavily indebted nations. But they must meet strict conditions such as:  privatising their public services and resources and liberalising their economies. The BBC criticised the proposal that “Forced privatisation and liberalisation can be even more crippling for a vulnerable economy than the burden of debt. Debt relief must be unconditional to be effective.” (390)

This is what happened - 34 of the 42 countries regarded as Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative are in Sub-Saharan Africa: 23 of these have received some debt relief. Since 1970 Africa has paid back in debt service slightly more than it has received in loans, but its current debt stock, $295 billion, is still about half of that total. Africa paid an average of $19 billion a year in debt service between 2000 and 2002; HIPC countries contributed $4.2 billion of this, and this is expected to rise to $6.2 billion a year for the next four years (391).

The issue has gained more and more prominence and successfully come under intense pressure by other entities uniting. For instance the G77, an organisation consisting the government representatives of developing nations together with an open letter campaign from 78 scientists from 22 countries worldwide advocated bankruptcy law implementation.  At the same time 58 UK community organisations signed a petition, exposing the harsh realities that put the blame on creditors as in John Perkins experience in ‘Confessions of Economic Hit Man’.  This also included well wishes from many other world bodies and debtors campaigns. They also used emerging nations’ [such as China, Brazil and India] simple and fast-tracked debt cancellation actions to press for wealthy creditor nations to yield (392).

“The joint IMF–World Bank comprehensive approach to debt reduction is designed to ensure that no poor country faces a debt burden it cannot manage. To date, debt reduction packages under the HIPC Initiative have been approved for 36 countries, 30 of them in Africa, providing $76 billion in debt-service relief over time. Three additional countries are eligible for HIPC Initiative assistance.”

“Another challenge is to ensure that eligible countries get full debt relief from all their creditors. Although the largest creditors (the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the IMF, the Inter-American Development Bank, and all Paris Club creditors) have provided their full share of debt relief under the HIPC Initiative, and even beyond, others are lagging behind. Smaller multilateral institutions, non-Paris Club official bilateral creditors, and commercial creditors, which together account for about 27 percent of total HIPC Initiative costs, have only delivered a small share of their expected relief so far.” (393)

Unfair, unqualified debts in developing nation owe to rich nation causes poverty, carnage and loss of human life. The defaulting party could be counting on: political motives, creditors making unqualified and insecure lending [rich nation corporates offer bribe, breaking the local law and manipulate the agreement], weather, currency fluctuation, corrupt rulers and ignorance. It is human rights issue in the 21st century standard.

In the past superpower was about how to control and manipulate opinion. Since world media is largely controlled by the strongest, the US and developed nations, what we call mainstream media is all about monopolising soft power. However this ‘soft propaganda’ soft power is less and less effective in today’s world.

The new attitude is ‘Suit the action to the word, the word to the action’ has gain stronger ground (394).

Commented on Edward Snowden disclosing secrets of the US spy activity and tapped close friends and ally nations’ emails, phones and leaders’ personal phones, “. . . the leaker changes the global balance of power.” It has eroded national security and its standing of trust, respect and compliance (395).

The Western alliance is losing the hearts and minds of friends and allies. It’s against the logic of ‘there is no such thing called absolute security’. All things in the world are made up of positive and negative forces and this serious and sensitive security issue is no exception. No wonder, at the end of 2013 a Gallup Poll of 65 nations worldwide, placed the US as the nation that is the most dangerous threat to world peace, with 28 points. Pakistan scored 8 points and China 6 points (396).

Loss of trust and respect is most damaging to national standing in today’s world. It also means losing the ‘winning hearts and minds’ contest after all.

Remember, for humanity, the zero sum game of winner takes all or the so-called social Darwinian ideology is dying fast. There will be no turning back to old ideology.
Slavery was rejected by the world long ago. On 14 December 1960, colonization was also outlawed by the United Nations (397).

World citizens from many advanced societies have introduced welfare systems to compensate for human competitive nature and its shortcomings. So, to further add human value, let’s set up new and better world laws and moral standards. Slavery, colonialism, hunger, starvation, ‘very low wage’ slave labour in developed nations should be made illegal. Questionable lobbying by business, special privileges, lack of safety nets, exploitation of the poorest nations and people should also be outlawed. This would make us a better people and a more humane society. Today, it is a human right issue.

The world is changing fast, to address a population of (at least) over two billion new, bettereducated middle class people, more than twice the number of the current population. What is needed is a new set of world structures, systems and orders, very different from the past British and other colonisers. Different also from the current US superpower. The new world structure and system of fairness, power of authority and responsible sharing in world affairs, is achievable. There should be much attitudinal change and adjustment: reconciliation, greater care, real workable human rights set, scientific development based on logic and reason, adaptation and yearning for peace not conflict and war. In this 21st Century world it is a more civilised way. Winning by war only brings failure. While it is beyond our imagination and goes against current thinking it is obtainable.

It was easier to enslave, suppress, conquer, exploit and take advantage in past eras, when people and society were less developed. It is much harder to conquer and exploit people who have a high level of education. Likewise it is harder to forever dictate, dominate, suppress and take advantage over other nations in this globalised world. Indeed it’s impossible.

There are more and more questionable ideals that are embodied in national and international activities. Principles and rules that enforce global institutions, nations and world order are being called into question. This is world reality.  For example, the Washington Consensus principle has to a large extent provided guidance to G7, WTO, IMF, WB, ADB, OECD and other laws/agreements and treaties. Today, in practical terms, this principle has gradually become obsolete. The US is forced to readjust, revamp, improve, terminate or formulate new ideas and adapting to today reality.

There are lessons to be learnt from past experience too.

George W. Bush led allied nations to venture into Iraq, but failed to put a stop to the violent bloodshed and resistance from the Iraqi people. He was forced to plea for UN help. This implies that he also accepted a multipolar world order notion against his own ‘Bushunilaterally doctrine’ notion. This is the very evidence that superpowers now have limited power capability.

Such behaviour by the US is a symptom of being driven by orthodox thinking. Neoconservative ideology started by Irving Kristol has this fingerprint all over its actions. It proves to be a mistake, notably on the ideological ground of ‘The end of history’ or absolute hegemony by Professor Francis Fukuyama.

First, history will not end simply via war or through pre-emptive strike and regime change.

Secondly, there is definitely no perfect political system in the real world, even among today’s so-called best performing democracies.

Thirdly, democracy for some is just an excuse to exercise a national agenda to manipulate or control others.

Fourth, in the real world, exported democracies do not work. Many developing nations may never have the required factors to enter into a democratic political system, as the western ideal perceives. Nor will they be able to implement such a system by themselves.

Fifth, human advancement is the collective and real driving force of all humankind.

Sixth, the true end of history will only mean one thing - people being able to manage positive and negative forces at play and advance themselves…to survival.

That’s why the G20 was called in to help resolve the 2008 economic crisis triggered by US system failures. And the role of the G20 in the world will certainly more outshine G7 in the future. So, to a large extent the superpower concept is dying, out dated. Sooner or later it will be ineffectual against ‘time’ in the 21st Century world.

Nations should not interfere with each other’s national affairs or attempt to ‘export democracy’.  A nation should be able to take another nation to the International Court for damage caused by attempts to impose ‘democracy’ their will on them. The victim nation should have the right to compensation for any damages done to them. But in a case of necessity, for any well-found reason, the UN should be the first and only institution that intervenes or interferes on the behalf of other sovereign nations. This should be based on logic, good will, with respect and consent and not governed by old politics.

Francis Fukuyama was right to welcome an end to American hegemony. He believes the world's new multi-polarity could create greater stability (398).

In his book, Ian Bremmer comes up with three choices the Americans should make on foreign policy,

-Independent America: America should no longer take responsibility for solving other people's problems. Instead, Americans should lead by example.

-Moneyball America: Washington can't meet every international challenge. The priorities must be to focus on opportunities and to defend US interests where they are threatened.

-Indispensable America: Only America can defend the values on which global stability increasingly depends. We will never live in a stable world while others are denied their most basic freedoms.

Bremmer criticised George Bush junior, Barak Obama and both 2016 presidential candidates, - Republican and Democrat - as either unrealistic or short sighted.  Their worldview was more harmful, than good to the nation and the world:

“I don’t believe these are the best options, because I don’t think support for either path can be maintained over time. Instead, my opinions are more closely aligned with what I call Independent America-a nation that declares its independence from the responsibility to fix the world.”

“It’s not simply that America can no longer police the world. It’s that it has no right to force those who disagree with us to see things our way. Americans like to believe that democracy is so undeniably attractive and our commitment to it so obvious that others should simply trust us to create it for them within their borders.” (399)

Bremmer came up with a poll by Surveymonkey; Eurasia Group of 1044 respondents conducted over 69 days in March 2015. It found 39% of voters 60 and over believe that indispensable is the best choice for American foreign policy, while 41% of voters 44 and below prefer the independent path.

Therefore, to become a 21st Century ‘superpower’ and world leader, one must have new ideas and new quality standards. But what are the standards and how to do to achieve them?. Is President Donald Trump’s ideal heading toward an Old American Great, or New America Great?

Practically, there will be more and more nations in the world seeking a ‘neutral’ position, by sitting on the fence before any of their national interests are compromised by the illegitimate rights concept of a world superpower of any kind.

During this transformation period, the world is quickly developing into a multi-polarised political structure. As economic and other forces globalising pans out further, it becomes even harder and harder for superpowers to exist.

It is not easy to be a superpower for good or for ill, ask the superpower. It will be even harder to remain one in the 21st Century.

So, to be more precise, today the world needs the superpower less and less. Sooner or later, superpower will become extinct.

History is the judge: Stone Age, slavery, serfdom, colonisation, and superpowers, the G7, EU and G20. The end of superpowers will be the end of history. This is humanity’s evolutionary past. Could it also be the evolution of the future? Every civilized human being should make his/her own judgement in answering this question.

This is the critical time to see if the world wants to be one single world or to be zero world. It is the human evolutionary ‘transition’ period, a critical and testing time. So, ask the world, who wants to be a superpower?

Chapter 13. The United States of America

The US began as the new world characterized by the ‘distinctive experiments’ brought by the humans’ struggle to adapt and survive better instinct of all those aboard, who landed in America in 1620. The later arrivals, were very individualistic, highly materialistic and religious. In US, almost all human activities can turned into commercialise, not even religion can be escape. These characteristics instrumental in modelling the typical American character, as we know it today. This character, incorporated many of the positive and negative features of European heritage. The major Achilles Heel of the US was it was incapable of rebalancing its stance of confrontation with the extreme opposing ideology of communism in the second half of the 20th century. This stance remains unchanged to this day. The US adopted orthodox capitalism and never turned back.

The US’s orthodoxy system leads to exceptional negative development

It will be demonstrated that the US capitalist system, in its current form will lead to destruction and negative developments. On the other hand fine tuning the machinery of capitalism will create numerous benefits, not only for the US, but for all nations which have suffered under the influence and the impact of the current US system.

Unfortunately, the US ideal of capitalism has gradually developed into a rigid ideology, which has led to accelerated economic fragmentation and out dated religious traditions that struggle to adapt to the new environment.

As it stands the US is incapable of forming the framework of a new socio-political system. The current socio-political system, has allowed the Congress to come under the control of powerful corporate based lobbyists, capable of adversely influencing the legitimately elected government. The elected government exercises a highly restricted role in most key areas of governmental - political, social, economics, defence, foreign affairs, judicial and related activities.

Congress has immense power that can block or vote down any government proposal or policy. Congress is formed by 50 states each assigned two senators. This system does not take into account of the fact that the population of each state varies in size. What past experience has proven is that the system causes gridlocks and paralysis in the administration.

The powerful corporate lobby groups are huge, but based on a select minority. This minority is composed of financial mega corporates, industrialists, the military industrial complex, the social elite, the super-rich, and other powerful factions. These groups are driven exclusively by self-interest.

Lobbying is a huge but ‘odd’ industry.  It is incapable of formulating long term plans for the future, as it is exclusively based on short term-plans driven by the two party democratic system which is highly polarized. Its stakeholders are utterly motived by almost profit alone.

With the passage of time, this mindset will slowly erode the citadel of freedom, destroy citizens’ rights, enhance inequality and fuel corruption.

Another major flaw in the existing system is the judiciary. Whilst the judiciary in the high courts in the UK and Australia are appointed, as in the House of Lords and the Supreme Court in Australia, in the US, the judiciary is voted in. This can lead to corrupt influence of the judiciary, by powerful business groups, as happened in the West Virginia Courts.

“West Virginia saw the integrity of its High Court questioned when it came to light that a coal company executive spent millions in 2004 to help elect a judge who subsequently voted to overturn a $50 million verdict against his company.” (400)

This serious indictment is obvious if we compare the US economy with that of its neighbour Canada.

The US and economic crises

“In the past 180 years, the US had 14 banking crises, Canada had two” (401)

From 1785 to 1927; the US’s economic system had been sparked 45 economic recessions and economic crisis (among these, the 1807, 1815, 1873 and 1920 crises were depressions). And since 1929 to 2007, the US economic plunged into recession 14 times (among these, the 1929 one was depression) (402).

In the light of these statistics, a brief analysis will reveal that the US economy is nothing more than a glorified casino. Its characteristics are those of the Wild West. It has a lawless, gun slinging cowboy like image. It lacks vital safety nets and accountability exhibited by many of the European Union nations. The US governmental instrumentalities are cowed by privileged elites and powerful political groups, without any proper, fair and just checks or balances. This is demonstrated by the Global financial Crisis (GFC) in 2007, triggered by the Subprime Mortgage Crisis in the US which was driven by uncontrolled power and fraud.

The US’s orthodoxy economics system could expect to continue to cause more frequent crises, common believe among some economists as business cycle. True, business cycle is part of the economic crisis trigger, but the other main cause is capitalism orthodoxy mix with Wild West tradition combination are over look, the result with always and also could have devastating impacts on the rest of the world. Crisis will be exported across the world, on the back of the US brand of globalisations.

The US corporate behaviour and its cowboy-like approach to global economics and international economic regulation is driven by the catch cry, ‘the less government the better.’ This has had many devastating consequences, as we have shown earlier. However some research and thought given to minor refinements could produce a more healthy economic system.

The extreme ideology of the US has been transformed in its practical implementation, to the so-called Washington Consensus. The ten principles of the Consensus, as originally set out by John Williamson in 1989, are essentially free market principles. The US adopted the Washington Consensus for implementation internationally. The Consensus is supported by most prominent American economists and utilized by international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), and Asian Development Bank (ADB). The central focus of the idea is; corporate deregulation, trade liberalisation, and enterprise privatisation (403).

Unlike the US, in most developed European nations, and relatively well-functioning developing nations, the government retains control and coordination of the nation’s economic interest, while appropriately regulating large corporations. Where this is a reality, people are clearly different and working better.

In short, first, orthodoxy has no place in the real world. Secondly, the functioning systems, are an indication that every nation is different. Every nation has its own way to formulate, manage and operate based on their own real local conditions function and made up.

Even when successful economic models are copied, the systems have to be fine-tuned to adapt to local conditions. There is no one size fits all formula like Washington Consensus wants. Ha Joon Chang argued: “…while state interventionism sometimes produces economic failures, it has a better record than unregulated free market economies which…very rarely succeeded in producing economic development.” (404)

Another major reason for the Washington Consensus, was the belief in extreme orthodox capitalist principles, which eschew the welfare state and social democracy. This has resulted in the many tragic failures in part and in full, of the Washington Consensus in the South American countries like Argentina, Chile, Peru and Mexico. The following extract is selfexplanatory;

“For Argentina, the proportion of the population living below two dollar per day in 1991, when the (Washington Consensus) reforms were introduced, was 0.62% and by 2002, when the economy had spectacularly collapsed, it had reached 9.84%.”

Although concrete data is difficult to attain, for the region as a whole poverty has steadily increased from 40.5% of the population in 1980 to 43.8% in 1999. Critics, such as economist Joseph Stiglitz, have discredited the Washington Consensus as a form of ‘market fundamentalism’ that is not necessarily rooted in economic theory, but rather in political doctrine that serves the interest of a narrow few (405).

It is pertinent to note that the success of the US in its infancy, was built on heavy subsidies, tariffs, government intervention and protectionist policies. All of these, when implemented correctly, make the economic machine function better. This system achieved and built the US we know today - the nation with the largest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the world.  Yet the US attempts to ‘prohibit’ other nations, especially developing ones following their example.

The US intervenes directly in other nations or via close allies setting up various institutions and enforcing the Washington Consensus on weaker nations. It is a powerful nation’s political and manipulative act to take advantage of developing or weaker nations, with the ultimate aim to dominate the world. This is unfair, unjust and foul play (406).

Naked government subsidies do not mete out equitable treatment, For instance, Solyndra is a clean energy, thin-film solar cell based panel producer. The solar cells are made of copper, indium gallium and selenide. It is advanced, new technology based. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on September 2011. In the previous year in 2010, the US federal government provided a loan guarantee of $535 million because the company was in financial difficulty. The problem is, “…government shouldn’t approve the use of taxpayer money without doing its due diligence first. A 2010 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the Department of Energy ‘treated applicants inconsistently, favoring some and disadvantaging others.’ Solyndra was not the only one that got fast-tracked. The GAO also found that in at least four other cases, the government agreed to back companies before obtaining final reports assessing their risk of failure.” (407)

In recent times the ultimate example of the negative effects arising from ideologically driven economic policy is the GFC.

In order to boost economic growth after the collapse of the USSR, the Reagan administration pushed for extreme measures to expedite economic expansion. This High-Growth strategy was pursued by governments of both Republican and Democrat persuasions. Interestingly, they were all based on the same ideology - an ‘extreme’ implementation of the Washington Consensus - deregulation, liberalisation and privatisation in full force. The consequence was the 2007-2008 ‘Great Recession’ subprime mortgage crisis or GFC. When the root course is flawed in the political system it needs reforming.

The 2008 economic crisis, revealed major mistakes in national economic policy which caused the GFC and created a US national budget deficit greater than at any time in US history;
Federal Debt Clock:

Today’s (February 2, 2016)  Federal Debt is about $19,091,885,773,000.

The amount is the gross outstanding federal debt issued by the United States Department of the Treasury since 1790.

But, it doesn’t include state and local debt. And, it doesn’t include so-called ‘agency debt.’

Nor does it include the so-called unfunded liabilities of entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Federal debt per person stands at about $58,510 (408).

Net-net, deleveraging simply is not happening as the $57 trillion global debt rises (by 40% from $142 trillion to $199 trillion) since 2007 or 230% since 2000 ($87 trillion to $199 trillion). (p10)

Government debt and false interest rates created real demand that created real supply.  It’s so important to realise the Fed’s abuse of low (and now zero) interest rate policy induced a massive US credit (debt), swelling demand, perhaps five to ten percent annually over the last five decades. This credit was spent like money and created real demand met by real supply increases the world over. And the Fed’s consistently lower rates induced corporations to play the same game…taking on massive debt with no intention of repaying the principal, only rolling existing debt to consistently lower servicing costs. (p12)

America, Japan, France, Italy, UK and Spain (and many more advanced nations) shared characteristics and problems that brought on the 2008/2009 bust and it is likely to get far more difficult over the coming decade. This isn’t simply an American issue, this is a global post WWII baby boom crisis. It is now a baby bust phenomenon, layered with bad assumptions and bad governance. And now as those nations most impacted by WWII are getting older, they tend to make more promises and tax themselves less for these promises, creating deep deficits and mountains of debt. (p14)

Without even lower rates (NIRP?) and far greater debt (particularly given the shrinking core populations), there will not be adequate demand for all the overbuilt industries of the world, let alone for anything new. That is a classic set up for one hell of a depression…all because the Fed thought it knew better and could avoid the cleansing effect of recessions by maintaining demand by interest rate trickery … so now a depression, magnitudes greater than the recessions we should have had, is the only means to cull all the overcapacity and debt. (p12) (409)

Today, the financial sector dominates and manipulates national economic strategy. This means a certain type of growth, where ‘unproductive industries’ as described by Adam Smith, have a big role to play in the US economy.

It is also a form of ‘structural dysfunction’ corrupted by chance and poor design.

The flourishing US stock market, is the biggest economic force we ‘perceive’ propelling national growth and prosperity. However, it also was one of the main causes of Great Depression of 1929, and the Great Recession of 2008 and, on a much smaller scale, past economic recessions as well.

The functioning of the stock market is largely based on derivatives trading. The stock market, generated the very healthy output figure of $596 trillion - $615 trillion (approximately) in the US market in the years 2007 and 2009. This was many times greater than the US GDP and entire world’s real wealth (source: Bank for International Settlements) (410).

Another factor which caused the GFC, was the transformation of the US economy from an economy driving the real world to a Casino economy. This is supported by the extract below.  “Another key dynamic of the globalised economy is the massive shift of capital from productive investment in the ‘real economy’ to speculative investment in the ‘casino economy.’” (411)

The US economy contributed little to the real economy and most Americans wellbeing. Its preoccupation with the Casino economy became detrimental to the real world economy. As Rana Foroohar, a famous US Time magazine commentator commented, ‘re financial institutions doing things that provide a clear, measurable benefit to the real economy? Sadly, the answer is often no.’ And she also quoted Adair Turner, a former British banking regulator, she ‘thinks that only about 15% of UK financial flows go to real economy; the rest stay within the financial system.…’ to mirror the US financial system (412).

The US government authority weaknesses have negative effects. These negative effects, have led to large financial corporations completing billion dollar financial settlements with the government, with the object of ‘disciplining’ with no convictions or assessment of criminal damage. There have been no cases of criminal punishment being meted out. What is the damage to the global economy which has been virtually limping for the past eight years from 2008 -2016? Do the fines equate to the damage done?  At the US Justice Department in August 2014, Bank of America paid $17 billion, Goldman Sachs $1.2 billion, Standard Charter $300 million fines.

There were similar legal settlements previously against Morgan Stanley, Citi Group, Credit Suisse, BNP Paribas, Toyota, Marubeni, Barclays, Rabobank, General Electric and others running into billions in penalties to count on. Is this just only the tip of iceberg?

Surprisingly, they are all ended up with legal settlements, guilty pleas and fines then the cases were closed. Strangely, all these cases have produced no details of the charges more have the term of settlements been disclosed to the public. No one has gone to jail either (413).

Alexis de Tocqueville, French political thinker and historian best known for his works Democracy in America and The Old Regime and the Revolution once said ‘that they mistook privilege for liberty.’ (414)

This US style democracy has also propelled the US government to apply ‘inhumane’ policies compromising human rights, this perhaps could interpreted as indirect denying the poor and helpless in the developing nations in particular have access to food, shelter, medicine, clothing, education and basic transportation. Strangely also, domestically, the US is perhaps the only developed nation in the world that sets out to punish instead of protect or nurture their poor - the so-called the ‘losers’.

Meanwhile measures such as heavy agricultural subsidies and raising tariff barriers, hurt poor developing nations economically. It must be emphasized, that the standards of a developed nation and a developing nation’s human rights, can never be measured by the same yardstick.

Heavy subsidies offered in the US and in the EU for their own agricultural industries, are effectively an abuse of human rights. Paying bribes and avoiding tax in developing nation should also be treated as a violation of ‘human rights’ or crime as such behaviour causes millions of people to die of poverty and hunger, owing to a failure to secure a market share.

The US and the growth of inequality

In a New York Times report in 2013, Janet Gornick of the Luxemburg Income Study Centre (LIS), found that: “The struggles of the poor in the United States are even starker than those of the middle class. A family at the 20th percentile of the income distribution in this country makes significantly less money than a similar family in Canada, Sweden, Norway, Finland and the Netherlands. Thirty five years ago, the reverse was true.” (415)

At the high point, after the Washington Consensus was implemented in the US in the 1980s, the homeless for the first time started to surface in mass. Their numbers went up and down, imitating economic conditions. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that “On a single night in January 2013, there were 610,042 people experiencing homelessness in the United States, including 394,698 people who were homeless in sheltered locations and 215,344 people who were living in unsheltered locations.” (416)

Homelessness is a serious problem in the United States:

“In the US more than 3.5 million people experience homelessness each year.

On a typical night in 2014, more than 578,000 Americans were homeless.

Nearly 2.5 million children in America experienced homelessness in 2013. That is one in 30 children.“

“People become homeless for a variety of reasons. Homelessness is primarily an economic problem, and is also affected by social and political factors. The number of people experiencing homelessness exploded in the 1980s, as federal funds were withdrawn from low-income housing, social assistance programs for low-income families and the mentally ill. Current federal spending on housing assistance programs targeted at low-income populations is less than 50% of 1976 spending levels.” (417)

“The United States, has seen an increasing concentration of wealth to the detriment of the middle class and the poor, with the younger generations being especially affected. What does a review of the incomes of the top and bottom earners reveal?”

“During a period in which the real incomes of even highly educated professionals, such as doctors, lawyers, professors, engineers, and scientists, were essentially flat, the real incomes of CEOS more than tripled. The pattern is even starker over a longer timeframe. In 1965, CEO pay at the largest 350 US companies was 20 times as high as the pay of the average worker; in 1989, it was 58 times as high; and in 2012, it was 273 times as high.” (418)

“In 2013, 45.3 million people were counted as poor in the United States under the official poverty measure—a number statistically unchanged from the 46.5 million people estimated as poor in 2012. The poverty rate, or percent of the population considered poor under the official definition, was reported at 14.5% in 2013.” (419)

The US has the largest prison population in the world: over 2,193,798 persons and equal to 737 per 100,000 (420).

The US military is the world's second largest, and has troops deployed around the globe. As of 31 December 2013, 1,369,532 people were on active duty in the armed forces, with an additional 850,880 people in the seven reserve components. It is an all-volunteer military, but conscription through the Selective Service System can be enacted at the president's request and the approval of Congress. All males in the age range ages 18 – 25, who are living in the United States are required to register with the Selective Service for a potential future draft (421).

A record 5.4 million workers and their dependents have signed up to collect federal disability checks since President Obama took office, according to the latest official government data. The problem is that discouraged workers who are unemployed are increasingly giving up looking for jobs and taking advantage of the federal disability program (422).

All the above figures could also be reclassified, with a potential revelation of unemployed persons. When combined with the official report on the homeless and unemployed populations. Plus a report of America’s male work crisis, an estimated of 7 million American men aged between 25 to 54 are jobless but no longer even looking for work. Over 20 million persons with a past felony conviction are jobless and no longer looking for work. By and large, they are dependent on other household members (wives, girlfriends, relatives) and by government support (423).

An estimated one million who have given up looking for a job indicates that the US will perhaps always have an unemployment rate higher than the EU.

By the same token, the US economic growth rate has always be lower than the EU, allowing for banking crises and frequent economic recessions, during the last 10-50 years.
With the hardships and accelerating increase in inequality, encountered in the last decade the American dream, to many, may never be realised.

Preliminary estimates show the (illegal immigrant) population was 11.3 million in 2013 (424).

Illegal Immigration has become a political football. The issue has been poorly addressed.

The hypocritical attitude of the typical US politician, is due to a desire to allay the concerns of the larger populace and wealthy power brokers, in addition to employers.

On the one hand, there is an acute need to solve the illegal immigrant problem for employment and security reasons. On the other hand the politicians, like employers require a pool of illegal migrants to undertake jobs Americans shun and in order ensure efficient exploitation. Politicians of both parties have never considered framing strict laws, supported by fines and jail terms, for employing illegal migrants, like in Australia and elsewhere. Further there has been no genuine effort to tighten Immigration laws with sound border protection.

Consequently, the US has one of the world’s lowest minimum wages amongst members of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) nations. This is because illegal workers have been forced to accept very low wages and poor treatment, taking jobs that Americans shun. In turn, this has suppressed national wages and led to ineffective trade unions. Neither wealthy Americans now employers will complain about the current situation, as they can gain advantage from ‘modern slave labour’ illegal cheap labour with little trouble from law.

The US and the lobbies entreprise

Similar drivers prevail in the domestic US economy, where large corporates have Congress lobbies capable of skewing government policy to benefit by bending laws where necessary.  This has resulted in the mass exploitation, without a whimper from a compliant populace.

America’s corporates have a long history of command high profit margins, and sustain long survival rate record. Microsoft is making double the profits it did when antitrust regulators targeted the software firm in 2000. Two-thirds of the economy’s 900-odd industries have become more concentrated since 1997. A tenth of the economy is at the mercy of a handful of firms—from dog food and batteries to airlines, telecoms and credit cards. A $10 trillion wave of mergers since 2008 has raised levels of concentration further.

This is one reason why the rate of small-company creation in America has been running at its lowest levels since the 1970s. The ability of large firms to enter new markets and take on lazy incumbents has been muted by an orthodoxy among institutional investors that companies should focus on one activity and keep margins high.

Warren Buffett, an investor, says he likes companies with ‘moats’ that protect them from competition. America Inc. has dug a giant defensive ditch around itself. These are the causes of US economic weaken health and people involve do not pay attention at (425).

The concentration of industries with the top four firms control between a third and two-thirds of the market, their share of revenues rise from 24% to 33%.

Other factors at play might include regulations that keep competitors out. Business spending on lobbying doubled over the period as incumbents sought to shape regulations in ways that suited them.

Among the difference industries, the weighted average share of the top four firms in each sector has risen from 26% to 32%. Roughly another quarter of abnormal profits comes from the health-care industry, where a cohort of pharmaceutical and medical-equipment firms make aggregate returns on capital of 20-50%.

And the industry is riddled with special interests and is governed by patent rules that allow firms temporary monopolies on innovative new drugs and inventions. And four of the largest, Anthem, Cigna, Aetna and Humana, are planning to merge into two larger firms.

Insurance firms have much controlled on healthcare purchasing matter (426).

Actually, lobbying is supposed to be a good thing where all people and different organisations and community groups, can present their problems and solution and good new ideas. Real life is closely related to the US constitution and the ideals of freedom, liberty, and free speech. But In the US, the powerful political lobbies are controlled by vested interests who are able to manipulate policy directions in the political sphere. They have full capable to turn positive into negative with a very consequence.

According to James Thurber, quoting Lee Fang maintains;

“While 2014 registered lobbyists group and company are at 12,281, but actual number of lobbyists was close to 100,000 and the industry brings in $9 billion annually.” (427)

“Although lobbying as a whole serves as a checks-and-balances safeguard on the legislative process, individual lobbyists are not necessarily equal. Unlike voters, who each get one vote, lobbyists vary in their degree of influence. The level of influence a lobbyist has over the legislative process is often proportional to the resources—time and money—the lobbyist can spend to achieve its legislative goal. Some people think lobbyists in general have too much power. During his 1912 campaign for president Woodrow Wilson remarked, ‘The government of the United States is a foster child of the special interests. It is not allowed to have a will of its own.’”

“Critics charge that the unceasing quest for campaign cash has distorted the political system. The only way to prevent lobbyists and the special interests they represent from dominating the legislative process is to establish the public financing of congressional campaigns. Once campaign contributions are no longer an issue, critics conclude, lobbyists will lose their last effective means of improperly influencing legislation.” (428)

Scheduled below, are the US’s top 20 lobbying spenders,

Rank  Organization Contributions Lobbying  Total Influence Hill Coverage

1 Goldman Sachs  16,532,620  21,440,000  37,972,620  46%

2 Bank of America  12,596,049  32,574,000  45,170,049  44%

3 AT&T Inc.  12,432,809  99,446,535  111,879,344  88%

4 Honeywell International  10,444,250  38,432,000  48,876,250  88%

5 JPMorgan Chase & Co 10,421,875  41,640,000  52,061,875  43%

6 Microsoft Corp  9,817,171  46,951,000  56,768,171  58%

7 Comcast Corp 9,786,857  81,311,323  91,098,180  76%

8 Deloitte LLP  9,070,686  15,080,000  24,150,686  64%

9 Lockheed Martin  8,558,992  84,138,853  92,697,845  80%

10 Morgan Stanley  8,476,333  16,890,000  25,366,333  37%

11 Boeing Co  8,220,790  95,474,000  103,694,790  72%

12 PricewaterhouseCoopers  7,788,514  15,930,584  23,719,098  52%

13 General Electric  7,560,533  151,530,000  159,090,533  75%

14 Verizon Communications  7,180,908  97,517,000  104,697,908  72%

15 Citigroup Inc 7,016,707  37,140,000  44,156,707  35%

16 United Parcel Service 6,939,790  31,446,668  38,386,458  87%

17 Northrop Grumman 6,821,080  93,342,879  100,163,959  55%

18 Blue Cross/Blue Shield  6,729,634  116,468,883  123,198,517  60%

19 Raytheon Co 6,629,940  41,720,139  48,350,079  58%

20 New York Life Insurance  6,449,157  32,290,000  38,739,157  46% (429)

The corporate America manipulating the federal government, Orthodox Capitalism ills

In the US, the lobby is becoming the rich and powerful people’s lucrative money making tool. Client Return On Investment (ROI), is very high, as demonstrated below,

Back in 2006, Bloomberg News rifled through data for the 20 largest federal contractors. Lobbying turned out to be a sound money-making strategy: “The nation’s largest federal contractor, Lockheed Martin Corp., received $39.8 billion in federal contracts in 2003-04. During the same period, the company spent $15.8 million on lobbying expenses and campaign donations. The ratio of contracts to expenditures was $2,517 to $1.” (430)

Lobbying, in the US, has caused a political orthodoxy and generated a form of incompetence, manifested by lose governance ability.

“America’s political institutions are suffering from profound decay. The political parties— especially the Republicans—have become so constrained by their activists and addicted to short-term one-upmanship that they are incapable of governing together. At the same time, the political power of the very wealthy and organised business interests has reached levels that undermine our legitimate expectations that the political system should be able to solve big problems and generate shared prosperity.”

“They also have a similar cause: more than three decades of disinvesting in government’s capacity to keep up with skyrocketing numbers of lobbyists and policy institutes, wellorganised partisans, and an increasingly complex social and legal context. Instead, policymakers have increasingly turned to the information and analytical capacity provided for them by those with the biggest material and ideological stakes in the outcome. This dependence has created a power asymmetry crisis that has been quietly building for almost four decades.”

The University of Pennsylvania, political scientist John Dilution, noted;

“…the number of federal bureaucrats declined about 10 percent between 1984 and 2012. At the same time, business lobbying, political polarisation, and wealth inequality all started their steady and unmitigated increases. Put simply, the pressures have increased. The ability of the government to deal with them has not.” (431)

In fact the US government has surrendered its right to regulate corporations, thereby becoming a victim being exploited by powerful corporate lobbies.

What about many dealings conducts by other industries this included bank, investment bank, hedge funds and derivative stock trading and others?

From research by Professor Menachem Brenner, Marti Subrahmanyam at NYU, Professor Patrick Augustin at McGill University from the data of 1996 to the end of 2012 found that “of the whole M&A deals; one in four is insider trading deals” (432).

This exercise in legislating ‘loop holes’ enables the formation of big cartels. By forming cartels price fixing is facilitated thereby destroying competition which is the bed rock of healthy capitalism. This estimate could raise 20% on top of the price; deterrence by authority is still too weak (433).

Drug Industry and manipulation of the federal government,

“As companies became more politically active and comfortable during the late 1980s and the 1990s, their lobbyists became more politically visionary. For example, pharmaceutical companies had long opposed the idea of government adding a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, on the theory that this would give government bargaining power through bulk purchasing, thereby reducing drug industry profits. But sometime around 2000, industry lobbyists dreamed up the bold idea of proposing and supporting what became Medicare Part D—a prescription drug benefit, but one which explicitly forbade bulk purchasing—an estimated $205 billion benefit to companies over a 10-year period.”

“What makes today so very different from the 1970s is that corporations now have the resources to play offense and defense simultaneously on almost any top-priority issue. When I surveyed corporate lobbyists on the reasons why their companies maintained a Washington office, the top reason was ‘to protect the company against changes in government policy.’ On a one-to-seven scale, lobbyists ranked this reason at 6.2 (on average). But closely behind, at 5.7, was the ‘Need to improve ability to compete by seeking favorable changes in government policy.’

Analysing the current volatile economic history of the world it is evident that reversing history is impossible. There are ways, however, to bring back some balance. A preferred strategy, is to invest in personnel, move into government executive positions or similar after having served in the private sector. This would be the passport to conquer democracy using lobbying as a tool.”

“Investing more in the government, especially Congress, would give leading policy makers’ resources to hire and retain the most experienced and expert staff, and reduce their reliance on lobbyists. Also, organisations that advocate for less well-resourced positions could use more support. If history teaches anything, it's that the world does not need to look as it does today.” (434)

Large and small powerful corporations are in effect manipulating or virtually running the country.
Whether it be Republican or Democrat political parties in power, both parties are forced to govern under a fixed structure, script, road map arrangement by powerful corporate groups.

Dwight Eisenhower once said,

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” (435)

Indeed, it is contrary to the wishes of the American founding fathers who designed the American Constitution, incorporating the requirements of a stable government, such as healthy national governance, the freedom of expression, equitability of treatment and many other factors.

The US government’s entire administration system and structural setting is based on out date design. Its major deficiency is its inability, keeping up with today’s fast moving changes.

The system is vulnerable to fraud, abuse, monopolizing or semi-monopolising, from corporates, bureaucrat, public servant and individuals.

It has been giving the rich and powerful enormous privileges. Therefore, this kind of constitutional leads to ambiguity and confusion where judgments are open to bias and legal loopholes, are the order of the day.

The US private charities

In charities, the US has the world’s largest and numerous private charity organisations in the world. These organisations, provide a form of quasi-state welfare to the poor. There are doubts, as to whether they want to help the government, by finding a solution to the social and economic ills of the country.

“Interestingly, the absence sectors are the large part of non-government organisation; anti- hunger, solution to the poverty and homelessness mass poor, entire hapless American consumers, small ordinary people’s charity organisations. The reason is lobbying needed huge sum of money to spend, lawyer and specific expertise. Concern often centers around whether some lobby groups can exert more influence than others by virtue of having more money and political connection. Paying government officials for voting or influencing laws is illegal, but the exchange of favors can be complex and a very gray area, and campaign contributions can be controversial in their own right. Some groups might lobby for changes that are detrimental or repugnant to other groups. Both are representing the views of citizens who have the right to petition the government, so it can appear to the less successful group that the other might only have won its case through spending more money. Since individuals can rarely afford to lobby, they often question whether corporations with much deeper pockets have vastly more political power than they should.” (436)

If they do find a solution, these charities would be destroying a valuable asset, which has generated a lucrative income over the years.

Owing to the above findings, charities, lose their image of healthy community organizations, engaged in the alleviation of human misery. Instead it appears that they are populated by the peddlers of questionable deals which are un-democratic and corrupt in practice. They also perpetuate or accelerate the growth of political, social and economic inequalities.

Amending the US Constitution question

Rand Paul, a star republican senator from Kentucky, a Libertarian winger called for a Constitutional Convention, to amend the Constitution. Mitch McConnell the Republican Senator said,

“The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.” (437)

Recently, a variety of issues have been hotly debated in the political arena, both Federal and State. They are;

Affordable Care Act Litigation, Medicare and Medicaid, putting children to work, balanced budget amendment, US Citizenship, Right to bear Arms and others.

The US Constitution is a written Constitution, written in 1776. This makes it 238 years old.

Parts of it, Due Process is based on English Common Law and the Magna Carta of 1215. The country has since then changed and advanced so far and so fast that some amendments are getting out date. Whilst maintaining to objectives of the Founding Fathers, by retaining the Written Constitution, there is a need for improvement. The French Constitution which is a written constitution, has been amended twenty four times (24) since. The most recent being 2008. The constitution of Luxembourg, another written constitution, was recently amended in 2009. By Comparison the last ratified amendment, to the US Constitution was the 27th Amendment and it took 202 years to complete ratification. At least, the constitution is not a written Holy Bible, cannot be touch.

As congressmen Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz a Republican from Texas, have advocated the reinterpretation of the US constitution. This is a sound reasonable beginning.

Healthcare systems in the US

The US has the most expensive and poor value service system when compared with other developed nations’ healthcare systems.

The system costs 17.9 % of GDP, against 8.7% in Australia, 11.3% and 9.6% in Canada and Sweden.

The principal problem is the health system created, is vulnerable to monopolistic and semi monopolistic and all sort of foul play by related actors for maximum exploitation.

The healthcare system, does not offer full universal coverage, as in other developed nations; it permits insurance companies to selectively choose their clients under their own terms and conditions, perhaps lesser this day but will never go away. The frauds and abuses of US healthcare system are wide ranging and includes a variety of stake holders, such as insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, doctors and patients. The lack of a unified system structure with the virtual absence of an effective management, supervision and law enforcement makes the US Healthcare System ineffectual weak and vulnerable to fraud and very expensive.

Under the system care afforded differs for the rich and poor. Quite often the poor are excluded altogether. The US Congressional Office, has predicted that Healthcare costs will rise to 60% of costs (438).

Other reports cite that the America Medical Expenditure, is the twice the size of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Britain combined. Is this an emergence of a kind of Black Hole on earth?. America will never get healthcare system right with current political-economic orthodoxy system.

For further detail see below.

Health spending by country  
Location 5

Health spending % of GDP  Private spending on health as % of all health spending  Per capita total
spending on health (PPP int. $)  Per capita government spending on health (PPP Doctors, per
10,000 population. $) 

Australia 8.7 32 3441 2340 29.91 Austria 11 22.5 4388 3401 48.53 Brazil 9 53 1028 483 17.64 Canada 11.3 29.5 4404 3104 19.8 France 11.9 22.2 4021 3130 34.47 Germany 11.6 22.9 4332 3339 36.01 Ireland 9.2 30.8 3704 2562 31.73 Israel 7.6 39.7 2186 1319 36.5 Italy 9.5 22.4 3022 2345 34.86 Japan 9.5 17.5 3204 2644 21.42 Sweden 9.6 18.9 3757 3047 37.7 United Kingdom 9.6 16.1 3480 2919 27.43 United States 17.9 46.9 8362 4437 24.22 (439)
Donald Berwick, a former head of the Centre for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Andrew Hackbarth of the RAND Corporation research has estimated the losses on the US health-care budget through swindling, in 2012 year alone was around $272 billion (440).

The world’s large pharmaceutical companies after the latest M&A activities, have reduced drug companies, to a certain number of giant firms. Most are owned by the US firms and a few by European firms. Their brand products’ pricing is sky high. Price fixing is rampant with   semi-monopolistic and monopolistic conducts. Sales activities promote doctors to overly prescriptions, thereby incurring superfluous patient over expenditure. This maximizes drug company profits, in addition to practitioner profits, through appropriate financial incentives.

The US drug makers are the world’s largest, the most powerful and most profitable. In 2001, generic drug maker Cipla brought the price of anti-retroviral down from $10-15,000 a year to $365, forcing Pfizer and others to slash their price as well. A similar story happened when Novartis charged for the cancer drug Glivic, $2,600 a month. By comparison the generic version Imanitib sells in India for just $175 a month (Sandhya Srinivasan, consulting editor of the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics).

From 2009 to 2012, the big US drug makers were each being fined by the US authorities. Firms like Glaxo Smith Klein $3 billion (fraud and failure to report safety data), Pfizer $2.3 billion (2009 largest healthcare fraud in history), Eli Lilly $1.4 billion (fraud), Abbott Labs $1.5 billion (off-label promotion of Depakote), and Merck $950 million (illegal marketing and false statements about safety of pain killer Vioxx) (441).

A new drug price hike scandal rocks America again, ‘former hedge fund manager, Martin Shkreli, founded a start-up company, Turing Pharmaceuticals, that bought the rights to a vital though decades-old drug, Daraprim, and jacked up the price by over 4000 per cent,’ ‘According to the Centre for Public Integrity, the pharmaceutical industry employs two lobbyists for each member of Congress and spends $100 million a year to keep many of those members of Congress on its side.’ ‘The pharmaceutical lobbyists wrote the bill,’ one disgusted Republican congressman, Walter Jones, told CBS in 2007. ‘The bill was over 1000 pages. And it got to the members of the House that morning, and we voted for it at about 3 in the morning.’ ‘As a result drug prices in the United States are the most expensive in the world.’ (442)

And malpractices such as; invented ingenious palliatives, nudges customers towards newer drugs that are still protected by patent, pay for the makers of generics not to compete by ‘pay for delay’ and reformulated with little change to brand and patent rights (443).

Actually, by theory, the US healthcare system ‘reform’ successfully introduced by President
Barak Obama should be a very welcoming move. But by practical term, bases on the US Orthodoxy and Wild West Syndrome. As a result, let’s see how the US healthcare system players blame each other for the messier the Obamacare is created and exposed the ill, and certainly at the end all culprits will get away with it.

“…the chief of Mylan NV, maker of the lifesaving EpiPen, who says her company is being tarred unfairly for a dysfunctional system in which wholesalers, pharmacies and pharmacybenefit managers take their own cut of each prescription.”

“Pharmacy-benefit managers, or PBMs, oversee drug-benefit plans for employers and health insurers. Their job is to hold down the cost of providing those benefits, which they do by choosing which drugs to cover and using that leverage to wrest lower prices from drugmakers through rebates. PBMs keep some of those savings but pass most of it on to their clients. [in this case PBM become ‘parasite’ middleman]. “Mr. (Everett) Neville said that PBMs profit from higher prices, but don’t cause them.

‘Absolutely, we benefit when prices rise,’ he said ‘The same way that guys who plow driveways in the Northeast makes money when it snows a lot. We don’t make it snow, though.’”

“Mylan Chief Executive Heather Bresch, lambasted for raising EpiPen prices, said that the ‘broken’ system of paying for drugs was to blame for price increases on the product, which counteracts severe allergic reactions.

‘The irony is that the system incentivizes higher prices,’ Ms. Bresch said on CNBC.” (444)

The ‘reform’ change is created entangle traps and messier condition and could be one of the biggest damage maker to the US administration foundation and system. In fact, the US healthcare system cannot be ‘reform’ successfully implement under current political system and condition. Why, in most European successful healthcare system, the governments are virtually firmed in-charged over drug-maker companies, distributer, insurance company, medical practitioner, lobbyist, regulator and law enforcement. In short, the answer is very simple, the universal coverage of healthcare system only working when the government have adequate control, it cannot let private sectors in charge. The only way is through welfare state, social-democracy system structure.  Unfortunately, an opposite is true in the US case, and virtually it will fail badly and painfully. Actually, this seem to be, asking a flock of fox to take care a chicken (hen) house.

The US government is just a ‘puppet’ institution that is being used to prop up the rich and powerful. As such President Abraham Lincoln’s words of a government of the people, by the people, for the people, is a forgotten dictum.

Financial crimes, the Panama Papers and their consequences

The devastation wrought by the GFC in the US and the failure of the justice system to jail top bankers (at CEO level) has been a matter of huge concern. The consequent wealth gap generated under its auspices has led to inequality and the polarization of American society. This is demonstrated by the following extract;

“The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap”

“…America’s wealth gap has corrupted the nation’s system of justice, fostering a ‘legal schizophrenia’ that harshly prosecutes the poor but practices selective leniency on Wall Street…the Obama Administration’s failure to jail top bankers…lives by a hypocritical double standard. Tory Marone serves 40 days in jail after cops find half a reefer in his pocket, but not a single executive of HSBC faces a criminal charges after the bank ‘admitted to laundering billions of dollar for drug cartels in Mexico and Columbia, washing money for terrorist connected organizations in the Middle East,’ ‘Every day on Wall Street money is stolen, embezzled, burgled and robbed. But the mechanisms of these thefts are often so arcane and idiosyncratic that they do not fit neatly into the criminal code, which is written for the dumb crimes committed by common stick-up artists and pick pockets’, or welfare applicants subjected to intrusive, humiliating searches of their homes, investigators poking into their closets, their dresser drawers, their underwear, jail terms face those lie … And go further, ‘…that the wealth-driven dichotomy in our legal system stems from our bending  the law to match our social attitudes.’ And the US’s top big media and commentators such as New York Time, Washington Post and other are highly praised the value of the book.” (445)

The US government is taken lightly on corporate tax, inheritance tax and tax avoidance and evasion. The government has failed to seriously deal with tax havens utilized by wealthy individuals and giant corporates, to avoid tax. Tax avoidance is the big malpractice and involves complicated dirty tricks and methods use by the large US corporations. The Economist reports that;

The US government, “But the American government has been nowhere near as energetic and effective as it claims. It has been slow to chase tax evaders exposed by data leakers; it has failed to follow promising leads on some of the biggest fish; it has pulled punches with the biggest banks, for fear of destabilising markets; it botched the most prominent prosecution of a Swiss banker to date; and it has treated whistleblowers shoddily” For example, “The tax-dodging exposed by Mr. Falciani was not factored in when America negotiated a $1.9 billion settlement with HSBC over allegations of facilitating moneylaundering. Loretta Lynch, the chief prosecutor on the case and now the attorney-general, has said she was not aware of the tax files at the time, even though the government had been in possession of them for two years. At best this looks like a regrettable lack of coordination.” (446)

Bloomberg reported that, “Big American companies have amassed more than $1.95 trillion in retail earnings off shore. And, It is impossible to identify exactly how much tax is being avoided, but the estimates are mind-boggling. Some $20 trillion in funds is parked in tax havens.” (447)

About $160 billion each year is stripped from developing nations thanks to tax avoidance by multinationals. A report by Christian Aid found multinationals comfortably make more out of poor countries than these nations receive in aid handed out by rich nations. Summarised below are  big corporate involvements;

Microsoft dodged $4.5 billion in tax in the US by shifting its intellectual property to Puerto Rico.

Google, meanwhile, funneled 80 % of its global pre-tax profits from international subsidiaries to Bermuda in 2011, which has no corporate tax rate.

That same year in Australia, Google paid $74,000 tax, rising to four million in the year after.

Apple paid $40 million of tax on sales of almost $6 billion in Australia in 2012-13.

Google's executive chairman Eric Schmidt has declared he is ‘very proud’ about his company's tax avoidance (448).

The major banks, Citi bank, JPMorgan, Bank of America and other European based banks; UBS, RBS, HSBC were facing allegations of manipulating the foreign currency market.  An improprieties in the $5.3 trillion a day foreign-exchange market. They are found breaking the law and being prosecuted by the US, UK and Switzerland’s authorities with fined a total of about $4.3 billion (449).

However, Elizabeth Warren, a senator from Massachusetts said. “If you break the law, you are not going to jail.”

“After the savings-and-loan crisis of the early 1990s, Ms. Warren pointed out, over 1,000 people were prosecuted, and more than 800 convicted. Yet since the financial crisis of 200708, which did far more damage to the economy, no senior banker has been convicted of any crime related to it.”

“America’s regulators and prosecutors, Ms. Warren complained, were not only failing to pursue those responsible; they were also declining to take the banks themselves to court. Instead, they were negotiating murky settlements, in which financial firms agree to pay big fines if prosecutors promise not to press charges.”

“Yet this is the way the Obama administration has handled all manner of alleged misdeeds at banks, from turning a blind eye to money-laundering to helping customers get round American sanctions. Even its campaign against banks that abet tax evasion, the one financial crime it is widely reckoned to have tackled with firmness and consistency, looks muddled on close scrutiny (see article).” (450)

On November 13, 2014, the  US Department of Treasury estimated that in 2011 the Caribbean Banking Centers, which include Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles and Panama, held almost two trillion dollars in United States debt. Of this, approximately US’s $1.4 trillion is estimated to be held in the Cayman Islands alone.

A new report by the US arm of the global anti-poverty group Oxfam said that the funds amassed by 50 top US companies offshore between 2008 and 2014 demonstrate the extent to which tax havens allow firms to avoid taxes.

Between them the companies made use of more than 1,600 subsidiaries in tax havens to store and move money around outside the reach of fiscal authorities.

Then, came the bomb shell, the leaking of Panama’s Mossack Fonseca offshore law firm’s secret files commonly called the Panama Papers, by International Consortium of Investigative Journalists led by German Suddeutsche Zeitung, the Guardian and others from years long secret work,

After the leakage of the Panama Papers, have revealed that ranging from Iceland to Israel to
Islamabad, billion dollars of loot and associated secrets are stashed away in the South American Vaults of Panama. The following is an extract from the Guardian;

“Thousands of companies, millions of documents and terabytes of data. The sprawling trail of secrets nestled within stretches from Reykjavik to Kiev and on to Islamabad by way of Baghdad. It has taken journalists in 80 countries months to tease it all out from the recordbreaking bulk of the Panama Papers. Each of these disparate stories matters in itself. But what has also broken out of the vaults of offshore legal specialists Mossack Fonseca is one over-riding sense. The sense that normal rules do not apply to the global elite. In a new gilded age, taxes would – once again – appear to be for the little people.”

“Slowly but surely, however, the world has learned that the banks that busted the global economy were also consumed with old-fashioned skulduggery: rigging rates, ripping off customers, and laundering Mexican drug money. Courtesy of the Lux tax leaks on sweetheart corporate deals, and the HSBC files, documenting Swiss lockers stacked with bricks of cash, the world learned much more, too, about the tax-dodging lengths that private wealth will go to in order to keep public coffers empty.”

“The evidence in the Panama Papers about secretive shell companies is damning on both the tax-dodging and the skulduggery fronts. Mossack Fonseca’s dealings with loot from the infamous 1983 Brinks-Mat heist is an arresting, if indirect, link between the plutocratic service industry, and naked criminality. The truly dramatic twist added by the papers, however, concerns a shift in the sort of secretive interests that are involved. No longer is this about faceless corporations and financiers, but about leading politicians and their circles, sometimes the same politicians who have been asking for all the sacrifices.”

“Policy can also be perverted when politicians, whether consciously or not, hold back on avoidance because of an instinctive affinity with kith and kin who benefit from their going easy. Another possibility, and – as the Panama Papers also suggest – a reasonable concern in the case of Conservative politics, is the overlap between party donors and offshore investors.” (451)

The latest report show, “A new report by the US arm of the global anti-poverty group Oxfam said that the funds amassed by 50 top US companies offshore between 2008 and 2014 demonstrate the extent to which tax havens allow firms to avoid taxes.”

“The report counted up the huge profits that major companies have reported they are holding offshore, in part because of the high taxes they say they would have to pay for repatriating the profits into the United States.”

“General Electric has $119 billion, Microsoft $108 billion, Pfizer $74 billion, and Google parent Alphabet $47 billion, for example.

Between them the companies made use of more than 1,600 subsidiaries in tax havens to store and move money around outside the reach of fiscal authorities.”

“When corporations don't pay their fair share of taxes, governments - rich and poor - are forced to cut services or make up the shortfall from working families and small businesses. Neither is acceptable, Oxfam American president Raymond Offenheiser in a statement. The report was released on the opening day of the Spring Meetings of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, where the Panama Papers and the issue of tax havens were in focus.”

“World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said tax evasion and other illicit transfers of money through tax havens undermine the fight against global poverty.” (452)

Further important points must not forgotten, What about Cayman Island, Isle of Man, Jersey, British Virgin Islands, Nevada, Delaware, Wyoming, Swiss Bank cartel, Monaco, Lichtenstein, Uruguay, Ras Al Khaimah UAE, Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand and others Papers?. And exactly, who should be the real culprit to blame for all this ‘illegal’ gray activity?,

In the wake of the Panama Papers scandal, Joseph Stiglitz (chairperson) and Mark Pieth was invited to run a Panama government initiated: Committee of Experts to evaluate and recommend for adoption measures to strengthen the transparency of its financial and legal system. And after recommendations were rejected by the host, they have no choice and resigned.

“International standards are changing rapidly—for the better—and our Committee was set to recommend that Panama would have to take big steps to keep abreast. Panama had been a laggard. To catch up to global standards it needed, for instance an effective Freedom of Information Act, which would have the dual effect of ensuring that the Committee’s Report would be in the public domain.

When the government couldn’t assure transparency, we had no choice but to resign.”

“Panama has been at the center of the registration of thousands of secretive corporations, which facilitate money laundering, corruption, tax evasion and other illicit activities. Fighting these activities requires creating a searchable registry of the ultimate beneficial owner of each corporation, available at a minimum to certain authorities. At our initial meeting, some Panamanians too showed resistance to this idea—one which would perhaps undermine the business model exposed by the Panama Papers.”

The committee concluded that,

“The key issue facing the international community today is what sanctions should be imposed on pariah and rogue states which violate international norms, and whose secrecy facilitates crime, corruption, tax evasion, and money laundering. These secrecy-havens only exist because the US and Europe allow it: they could not function were they cut off from our financial system. Panama has failed to do its part to ensure transparency. Now it is time for us to do ours.” (453)

Does the US and EU government mean to protect their own business, a bed fellow, a traveler man?.

Internationally, politicians are among the foremost responsible for the devastating extent of corruption which is estimated to be in the trillion dollar range.

There is an acute need for action, enforcing a common rule to tame the world elites and their associated ‘criminal’ network?

“The cause of fiscal crisis in the liberal state is to be attributed to rising income inequality, money power in politics and systemic tax avoidance by the super-rich and globalised corporations.”

Professor Joseph Stiglitz in his new white paper for the Roosevelt Institute at Columbia University has said (454).

The US finance industry, primarily the banks, have siphoned a considerable amount of the national wealth and invested it the field of Casino Banking, very quick and very high return investments, starving numerous real national infrastructure projects of vital funding. The fact that with the democracy US style drive, the US governments has neglected middle and long term national planning and development.

According to Aviva Shen, the associate editor of ‘Think Progress’, a leading Infrastructure Magazine, maintains;

The US have much repairing decrepit roads, bridges, tunnels, airports, rail roads, sea ports and transit systems. The American Society of Civil Engineers 2013 report estimated the US would need to spend $3.6 trillion on upgrades by 2020. For instance, “Last year was characterised by a slew of bridge collapses and train derailments that threw the urgency of the infrastructure crisis in stark relief. About 8,000 bridges are at risk of collapsing at any moment, according to the AP, yet continue to carry more than 29 million drivers a day.” (455)

These observations are also confirmed by The Economist.

A report showed that the US; “most air traffic control systems are less advanced than the technology found in smart phone” (456).

Higher education 

Dr Thomas Jessen Adams, an American Historian, writing in the daily newspaper, warned Australian Education Minister Christopher Pyne in his essay that, importing the US education model is ‘a recipe for disaster’ ‘it is broken and increasingly unfixable’. The Australian education system is very good even though is not the world’s best (457).

The creation of a US style Tertiary Education model, will not benefit Australia, as the US Ivy league system, was tailored to meet the idiosyncrasies of US society, at an inflated cost. This is demonstrated by the statistics below where US’s high school and tertiary educational practices are selective and promote extreme inequality.

“…This is more so with high school and university level. For example, ‘Princeton may be taking 7.3% of all comers, but it’s taking significantly more than 7.3% of so called legacies kids with parent or other relative who attended the school, and it’s taking significantly more than 7.3% of star athletes.”

The price of admission, is another tool for filtering and funneling the elite and privileged, into selected institutions. “Journalist Daniel Golden estimates that at elite schools, minorities make up 10% to 15% of students: recruited athletes, 10% to 25%; children of people who are likely to become generous donors, 2% to 5%; children of celebrities and politicians, 1% to 2%; and children of faculty, 1% to 3%. If you take the middle figure in each of those ranges, you’re looking at as many as 55% of students who were probably given special consideration at admissions.” (458)

There is a paucity of Science, Engineering, Technology and Mathematics (STEM) graduates or aspirants, amongst the poor in the US which is in stark contrast to comparable statistics from Canada and South Korea.

“…Most middle-class parents might research sports programs and summer camps for their 8- and 9-year-old children, but would rarely think of supplemental math unless their kid is struggling. ‘You have to know about these programs, live in a neighborhood that has these resources, or at least know where to look,’ says Sue Khim, a co-founder of And since many of the programs are private, they are well out of reach for the poor. (A semester in a math circle can cost about $300, a year at a Russian School up to $3,000, and four weeks in a residential math program perhaps twice that). National achievement data reflect this access gap in math instruction all too clearly. The ratio of rich math whizzes to poor ones is three to one in South Korea and 3.7 to one in Canada, to take two representative developed countries. In the US, it is 8 to one. And while the proportion of American students scoring at advanced levels in math is rising, those gains are almost entirely limited to the children of the highly educated, and largely exclude the children of the poor. By the end of high school, the percentage of low-income advanced-math learners rounds to zero.” (459)

It is evident, that in the US there is a system of restricted access, based on money, prestige, special interest connections which contradicts the American Dream-equal opportunity based on merit and hard work.

The American university system is in crisis, spiraling costs, disappointing outcomes and widespread resistance to change are pushing the system toward a reckoning;

“The statistics are pretty stark, says Phil Regier, dean of ASU Online at Arizona State University.”

“Roughly 50 % of people who start some tertiary education don’t finish. The US has flatlined in terms of adult degree attainment. In the past 40 years, the proportion of adults with bachelor degrees in the US has grown only from 27 % to 33 %.”

“The rest of the world has been accelerating much faster. We were number one in the world. Now I think we are 16th,’Reggie says. The result is a loss of confidence in the system.’ In particular, universities are ignoring the Online Revolution at their own peril.” (460)

Whilst it is admitted, that there is a poverty of technological skills from biotechnology to renewable energy in the political sphere, populated by Congress members, which is backed up by hired third party expertise when required, many specialists feel there is a communication barrier. The following comment in the publication, Foreign Policy group, is significant.

“Only 12% of Congress’s members have a background in science or technology, according to a 2011 study by the Employment Policies Institute. And based on my conversations with tech executives who regularly interact with Congress, just a handful of people on Capitol Hill truly understand the implications of the big data, cyber, and other technological revolutions. Turn the subject to how next-generation neuroscience and biotech developments will raise critical questions about how we deal with mental health, crime, extended life expectancy, bioethics, and health-care costs, and the number falls even further. ‘In many cases to zero,’ a professor at one of America’s leading schools of public health recently told me.” (461)

“The system as a whole is less merit-based: rather than coming from top schools, 45 % of recent new hires to the federal service are veterans, as mandated by Congress.” (462)

Miscellaneous pockets of ignorance crippling progress

There are miscellaneous pockets of ignorance in the US that are crippling progress particularly in the current age. Leading politicians are the contributors to this national hurdle. Many examples are detailed below.

In the 2008 presidential campaign, both John McCain and Barak Obama told Americans that vaccines might have caused spike autism. During the 2012 presidential race, Michele Bachmann claimed that vaccine for prevent the human papillomavirus, a cause of cervical cancer could cause mental retardation. With the outbreak of measles disease in the US first in California’s Disneyland, Chris Christie and Rand Paul the Republican rising star governor and senator and presidential candidates argued about to relax mandatory vaccines ‘most of them ought to be voluntary’. Despite measles kills 145,700 worldwide; most are kids under age of 5 with no vaccinate.  All above action and remark had been proven bungle and later regretful and had to make apologises for what how sad their health science ignorance. Most of all, in the US, specific religious or philosophical are often objected to certain mandatory vaccinate law, posing great risk to family member and public health (463).

These shocking revelations, indicate that while the US under Orthodox Capitalism, has produced a society which has produced the largest number of scientific technological inventions, it is governed by a very conservative forces. The fact is America society is divided by a huge gap between a small number of rational, logic leaning people and the overwhelmingly conservative population. 

Farm subsidies in the US cost the taxpayer over $20 billion a year. They are paid principally to the individual and corporate groups, Examples are; Henry Kravis, private-equity magnate, Alice, Jim & Rob Walton, Chuck Grassley senator, Penny Pritzker commerce secretary and billionaire, Jon Bon Jovi and Bruce Springsteen Rock star, Ted Turner founder of CNN.

According to the Government Accountability Office, between 2007 and 2011 some three million dollar in subsidies were paid to 2,300 farms where no crop of any sort was grown. Between 2008 and 2012, $10.6m was paid to farmers who had been dead for over a year (464).


Gun violence has thrived in the US, based on the fictitious notion that it has been duly anointed as a legitimate right, enshrined in the Constitution for eternity. The right to bear arms, is the 2nd Amendment to the US constitution and is an important part of American Constitutional history.  It is centuries old and symbolic of pioneer expansion into the lawless Wild West. Even the mentally ill or even a child of five years, can lawfully obtain a firearm. This is unthinkable amongst all rational people but is stoutly defended in the US with 472 shootings in 2015, as reported by the BBC. In the US firearm related murders are 60% of all annual murders, as against 31% in Canada and 10% in the UK where there is no written Constitutional or other right to bear arms.

The US film industry is the main soft power source which unintentionally exports gun violence, either real or fiction. It is powerful and effective, having a long history. Thus, the US film industry is responsible directly and indirectly, for the increase in gun violence culture in the world. It is addictive and hard to get away from.  It works by promoting an addiction through Hollywood, in the name of entertainment. The victims of addiction turn out to be the young, stunting the growth of a physically and mentally healthy future generation. This is not the ‘healthy’ positive soft power they intend it to be. In short, this is the export of ‘bad part’ violence of ‘soft power’ culture through Hollywood in the name of entertainment.  It leads to people wanting to copy or emulate Hollywood throughout the world, especially in developing nations. As such, it is a negative side of development.

The US is ignorance of the Law of Evolution

Professor Jon D. Miller, a political scientist at Michigan State University led a team that surveyed attitudes to human evolution 35 nations over 20 years (1985-2005) in North America and Europe. The survey asked ‘Human beings, as we know them, developed from an earlier species of animals. In the US, the result showed that “only 14% of adults thought that evolution was ‘definitely true’ with about a third firmly rejected the idea.’ ‘This compared to Denmark, Sweden and France where more than 80% of adults surveyed said they accepted the concept of evolution.’ From the survey, the US ranked second last next to Turkey.”

The main reason for this lies in the confluence of religion, politics and public understanding of biological science in the United States. Mean, people confused core ideas related to 20thand 21st-century biology, the survey concluded (465).

The US-style inequality in data

It is time for the US to make major changes to minimum wage and minimum income for its citizenry for the sake of survival. People cannot live on the low minimum wage allowed. The policy is unfair and unjust or inhumane.  It is a main cause of social and economic impoverishment and inequality. It is a pity that the richest corporates in America…one of the wealthiest nation on earth cannot appropriately or fairly pay their workforce. In fact, the US low wages policy could be classify as a form of modern slave labour practice.

Let’s compare the minimum hourly wage in the other nine top advanced nations;

Minimum Wages Around the World (2012, OECD) (466)

Country  PPP Exchange Rate  ($ per hour)  Ordinary Exchange Rate ($ per hour)

Luxembourg  10.37  13.35
France  10.17  11.73
Australia  9.77  16.00
Belgium  9.46  10.99
Netherlands  9.25  10.47
Ireland  8.97  10.93
United Kingdom  8.24  9.38
New Zealand  8.17  10.73
Canada  7.59  9.85
USA  7.10  7.10
Austria  6.50  7.23
Japan  6.29  9.24

This is taking into consideration that the US is one of the OECD’s lowest committed welfare state nation.

Simon Blackburn, a Professor of Philosophy, reinforced the adverse impact of the above statistics with high CEO salaries.

“From 1979 to 2009, he says, American productivity rose 80%. During that period, workers’ compensation rose just eight percent. Meanwhile, the top one percent of earners increased their share of the national income to more than 23%. Blackburn worries that young people may not understand what’s going on here.” (467)

By firmly clinging on to orthodox ‘out date’ rigid ideology, the US governments are trying hardest to make sure there will never be any ‘welfare state’ social democracy in the American system. They even go to the extreme of interference, sabotage or trying to destroy other nation successful welfare systems. But such efforts are just in vain. Largely all developed nations adhere and gain much from the welfare state-social democracy system, either direct name or difference name calling. In reality, as former President Dwight D. Eisenhower pointed out:

“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” (468)

Today, this logic is universal, govern over all modern developed nations.

Over-expenditure on the defence

The International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases reveals that the US operates and/or controls between 700 and 800 military bases worldwide.

In this regard, Hugh d’Andrade and Bob Wing’s 2002 Map one entitled US Military Troops and Bases around the World, The Cost of ‘Permanent War’, confirms the presence of US military personnel in 156 countries.

The US Military has bases in 63 countries. Brand new military bases have been built since September 11, 2001 in seven countries.

In total, there are 255,065 US military personnel deployed worldwide (469).

The late Dwight. D. Eisenhower, the 34th President of the US and WWII Supreme Allied Military Commander said:

“Arms alone can give the world no permanent peace, no confident security. Arms are solely for defence -- to protect from violent assault what we already have. They are only a costly insurance. They cannot add to human progress.” (470)

The siphoned funds into the ‘Cold War’ defence, should be rededicated to meet the needs of the real world, such as minimum wages, amongst other needs such as public health, education and inequality.

The US has a long history of stealing the bright and most productive people from other nation, worse of all, from developing nations.

The US and few other developed nations have a long history of luring migrants from other country. The practice is intended to target young healthy, bright, academic, skilled workers and the wealthy to uproot to the US, and by invite millionaire, outstanding high achiever in all fields and profession to migrate to the US: sport star, artist, scientist, technician specialist, by offering a high salary, good treatment and other highly attractive rewards. The practice has no boundary - worse it targets developing nations too. This is unjust and inhumane.

It is also an immoral poaching, bribing people to leave their own country, unacceptable practice and very damaging to the developing nations. It is unjust that poor and developing nations spend their very limited resources to train and invest in their young to be nation builders only to have them serve the wellbeing of rich nation. This has made it difficult for developing nations to solve their underdevelopment problems, with many developing nations failing to advance their development. It can lead to conflict, war, and refugees and should be stopped (471).

So, many mostly developing nations are the victims for too long.

The evolution of the US law

Dr Philip K. Howard note, “A decades-long obsession with writing excessively detailed laws had made it impossible for real people to get anything done.” For example, “Modern government is organized on ‘clear law,’ the false premise that by making laws detailed enough to take in all possible circumstances, we can avoid human error. And so over the last few decades, law has gotten ever more granular. But all that regulatory detail, like sediment in a harbor, makes it hard to get anywhere. The 1956 Interstate Highway Act was 29 pages and succeeded in getting 41,000 miles of roads built by 1970. The 2012 transportation bill was 584 pages, and years will pass before workers can start fixing many of those same roads. Health-care regulators have devised 140,000 reimbursement categories for Medicare— including 12 categories for bee stings and 21 categories for ‘spacecraft accidents.’ This is the tip of a bureaucratic iceberg—administration consumes 30% of health-care costs.”

“What’s the alternative? Put humans back in charge. Law should generally be an open framework, mainly principles and goals, leaving room for responsible people to make decisions and be held accountable for results. Law based on principles leaves room for the decision-maker always to act on this question: What’s the right thing to do here?.” (472)

The US free trade pacts, the export of Washington Consensus instrument

The US has promoted and negotiated the multi-continental scale of free trade rules and agreements. The very aim is to dominate trade and world economic direction, such as the, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The TTIP has a participation membership of; the US, Canada, Mexico and European Union.

Another prominent trade pact is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP intends membership includes; Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Singapore, United States, Australia, Peru, Vietnam, Malaysia, Mexico, Canada and Japan. The negotiation sessions started many years ago and are ongoing, to date. The idea originated with New Zealand plus Chile, and Singapore dated back to June 2005. The US plan is to extend the TPP again, covering a larger membership, under prevalent trade and economic conditions.

Negotiations are highly secretive. Consultations include current government politicians, big corporates but not the media or the public.

WikiLeaks and social networks, have led to high expectations and criticism of the TPP.  With a large number G7 nations as signatories, the US will try to impose the Washington Consensus, as it does with developing countries, especially in South America. There will be considerable litigation and resistance seeking equitable rights.

The US will assert their Washington Consensus ideal upon corporate and trade rule and law; financial services, intellectual property rights, copyright law, accounting, labor law and agricultural subsidies. It will attempt to base the TTP on American standards, rule and practice. The US will make a clear attempt to assert dominance through the Washington Consensus, with weak resistance at times.
Professor Paul Krugman, the US economist, observed;

“…I’ll be undismayed and even a bit relieved if the TPP just fades away. …there isn’t a compelling case for this deal, from either a global or a national point of view.” (473)

Another Columbia University Professor of Economics, Joseph Stiglitz warned that the TPP presented “grave risks” and it “serves the interest of the wealthiest.” (474)

Of course, if the US succeed in TPP implementation, the corporate American will fulfilled their dream of setting the world’s economics rule based on Washington Consensus. Either proceeding a controlling positon via Wild West mentality, or that “a business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders” the 1919 Michigan Supreme Court decision in Dodge v Ford national corporate law. Actually, the Wild West is a traditional American expansion spirit, the Dodge v Ford corporate law is the confirmation of American economics orthodoxy that overall produce negative more than positive consequence. Such as, stockholders above everything else; law, nation, community and humanity. The two are blend and turn out to be the US political doctrine (475).

Fortunately, the US’s Democrat Party lose the 2016 election, the new elect president Donald Trump is the strong opponent to the idea, and TPP plan is come to an end.

Many US politicians are strong idealists or extremists. Rational, balanced thinkers, are in a minority in the political spectrum. For instance Henry Kissinger, a renowned former US Secretary of the State, remarked ‘a foreign policy that is overly guided by moral impulses and crusading ideals were likely to be dangerous’, ‘…the most fundamental problem of politics, is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of right righteousness.’ Because he and Nixon failed to weave in the idealism that is ingrained in the American DNA, popular support for realist edifice was precarious, as if built of bricks without straw (476).

According to The Economist, the typical American voters, concluded Washington politicians are scoundrels with trust in Congress tumbling to seven percent (477).

This low opinion of the Washington politician and the US politicians in general, is reflected in the extract from Bloomberg, where it is not balanced rational thinking that drives policy. Instead it is polarisation and flawed ideology:

“Increasing polarisation -- an observable fact in the US -- obviously makes government more difficult in a system based on divided powers. So the theory is true in that trivial sense. The deeper question is, what's driving the increase in polarisation? Here, I think, the popular story may get things backwards. Ideology isn't driving polarisation; polarisation is driving ideology.“

“In the US progressives and conservatives are defined as much by culture as by politics -- by the kind of jobs they do, the kind of clothes they wear, the beer they drink, the music they listen to and the TV shows they watch. As the tribes coalesce, political differences are seized upon and exaggerated as badges of identity. The cultural sorting comes first, the political polarisation second. Intellectual in-breeding then drives the tribes farther apart.” (478)

Decline in start-ups

The socio–economic system in the US is adversely affected by the decline in the number of start-ups when reviewed, in approximately last four decades.

From 1977 to 2012, a series of reports from the Brooking Institution show, the ratio of new firms to all firms, or the ‘start- up rate,’ has been steadily decreasing.

In 1978, the cumulative one year (age) start-ups accounted for approximately 15 % of all US firms; by 2011, that figure had slipped to just eight percent.

For the first time in three decades, business deaths exceeded business births.

In 2011, the number of mature companies with a life of 16 years or more, were 23% of all firms. In 1992, this number increased to 34%.

Mature firms however, are averse to risk and only embark on innovation programmes which are incremental and creative and comprehensively disruptive. As the mature firms have more experience they are likely to offer stability and growth in a volatile market. This explains the larger market share occupied by the more mature firms, as against the smaller firms. This results in a continuous showdown in a volatile market (479).

High level corruption and influence peddling

From polls conducted, the US social, political and economic system is one of the most corrupt among the OECD nations and is a matter of concern in the US.

Surveys on Americans concern about corruption in the government always high, one showed 77% concern government corruption issue. Government’s ability to self-police corruption: A 52% majority of Americans think the government is actually doing a worse job at policing corruption in Washington DC in the past five years, while just 18% think the government is doing better. An equal number of Democrats say corruption has worsened (33%) as say it has improved (33%) during their party’s control of the White House (480).

Emergence of financial impotence

‘Financial Impotence’ is defined as the inability to provide approximately $400 emergency funding at ‘short notice.’ Financial impotence has other names such as financial insecurity, financial distress.

In a survey, conducted by Professor Gabbler, the responses received are depicted below.

“But the answer to one question was astonishing. The Fed asked respondents how they would pay for a $400 emergency. The answer: 47% of respondents said that either they would cover the expense by borrowing or selling something, or they would not be able to come up with the $400 at all. Four hundred dollars!”

“In the 1950s and 60s, economic growth democratised prosperity. In the 2010s, we have democratised financial insecurity.”

“Financial Impotence goes by other names: financial fragility, financial insecurity, and financial distress. But whatever you call it, the evidence strongly indicates that either a sizable minority or a slim majority of Americans are on thin ice financially.”

Perhaps this is ‘the just in time’ mentality, popular amongst project managers and financial analyst, taken to the extreme.

The Huntington post’s assessment of this social stratification, is different where it is called the ‘American Creed’. It has three core values summarised as egalitarianism, liberty and individualism.
Today the creed has lost its authority and virility. Particularly Individualism. Instead American society has been stratified into three strata. The upper class, working class and the lower class, with the working class trapped in the middle (481).

American political system stratification

The US is a land of extreme contradiction…orthodoxy. It seems, there is not one US, but two nations in one country. There is a very small nation that is very rich, well-educated and getting better day by day. Whilst the other is overwhelming large and made up of the fairly comfortable and the poor struggling to survive. There also a society of sizable advanced scientific, technician, engineer communities and relatively large backward communities, which make up the largest portion of the population. These people are living in a semimodern world full of superstition and illusion. The national window to the world is scientific rational, charming, colorful and attractive. But hiding behind the face of the nation is the negative side of the US. These very different people all resided in one country but live separate lives and share very different dreams and nightmares.

Extremists on all sides will lead to a stagnant, chaotic, out of control nation facing collapse, unless there is a qualitative change to a new stage and renewal - a completely new balanced working system. The negative force is very much stronger against positive one and gradually slide further. It is the critical time and progress hardly be achieve. The extreme obstructive, illusionist must be stopped. Like Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, “Extremes to the right and the left of any political dispute are always wrong.” (482)

The central truth of Trumpism as a phenomenon is that the entire American working class has legitimate reasons to be angry at the ruling class … the real family income of people in the bottom half of the income distribution hasn’t increased since the late 1960s (483).

There are many questions which Donald Trump/and Hillary Clinton have to find answer.

To discuss the US character, system and their behavior would not be complete without talking about her’s evolution history. It began with the land where almost everything was free for early pioneer and settlers, who decimated many of the Indian tribal nations. They ventured into the Wild West were adventurous and opportunistic. They had conquered, found wealth and survived. At the same time Americans unjustly incorporated huge tracts of Mexican land. The early settlers trusted in the vast, new territory, gun in hand. Their legacy is that cartels and mafia gangsters still lurk in today’s America. Violent, senseless killing has become entertainment. The ‘spiritual’ puritan refugee from Europe had full freedom to strictly practice what the Bible said. Government authority is weak and not widespread. It was everyone for oneself.  Individualism became the norm. The African slave story too has created tensions and lasting legacy.  Are modern day Americans bold enough to make change? Time is of the essence.

America’s  history has also colored the behavior and character of national corporate culture and power. Many believe that the weak and ‘losers’ have no place in America. This ideology has become part of the common norm. It has no positive or negative, short or long term strategic considerations. The only goal is to win fast, often at all cost, no matter what. Such character is found nowhere else in the world, especially compared to the EU and Scandinavia. Yet America continues to export this ‘Wild West‘cultural behavior to the wider world unabated. Unfortunately, this is 21st century, there is no Indian for subjugate anymore, so America looks further west across the Pacific Ocean.

In short, the US’s over all systems is the world most rent seeking nation on earth. As actual political and economic practicing show above are variety of rent seeking form and behaviors (Rent seeking idea and term by Gordon Tullock 1967, and Anne O. Krueger 1974). The mean and result; to gain wealth without creating new wealth, reduced economic efficiency, damage fair-healthy economic competition, public lost economic well-being and exacerbate the gap between rich and poor. It makes damage to national economic health (484).

Where Associate Professor David R. Henderson said, “…this is not what economists mean by ‘rent seeking.’ They use the term to describe people’s lobbying of government to give them special privileges. A much better term is ‘privilege seeking.’” (485)

Humanity is in a new age. In view of the deficiencies in the nation’s curent socio-economic fabric, the first step is to update the US constitution. As Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz, have said, amending and reinterpreting the constitution requires a Herculean effort. The Law of Evolution is applies to all beings. The US is no exception.  It must evolve...adapt if it is to survive.

What the 2016 US’s president election is telling us about America.

“Seldom in modern history have the American people felt so disillusioned with the major political parties and their candidates. Indeed, in 50 days, they will elect someone whom close to two-thirds of the country does not trust.”

About Donald Trump,

“Colin Powell reflected the prevailing mindset in leaked emails last week. According to the decorated war veteran and former secretary of state, Trump is a ‘racist’, a ‘national disgrace’ and ‘an international pariah’.”

“It's hard to disagree. Take the casino and real estate magnate, whose insults alone could amount to a book. Trump is, to put it mildly and politely, incapable of understatement. More serious, he peddles conspiracy theories and appeals to people's worst instincts”. (486)

An interview The New Yorker editor David Remnick by News night editor Ian Katz show,

Ian Katz: What you're saying is it's not that something radically different is happening in the country. It's just you had a politician who came along who was able to harness it?

David Remnick: He's a brilliant, I think pernicious, but brilliant demagogue, who was able to act as a demagogue - a successful demagogue - on the national level the likes of which you've never seen in the United States (487).

On Hillary Clinton,

“One obvious explanation is that his Democratic opponent is the most untrustworthy, unpopular and polarising presidential candidate in living memory – bar one (Trump).”

“In the 1990s, Clinton was associated with various scandals that dogged her husband's presidency. During her four-year stint as secretary of state, she maintained a private email server to hide official emails and lied about it to the American people. She mixed her State Department duties with the Clinton Foundation by doing favours for donors in office.“ (486)

 “The US election revealed a frightening decline in standards of discourse, with Obama saying ‘until recently, religious institutions, academia and media set out the parameters of acceptable discourse’. But this has changed with a ‘social permission’ for Trump’s aggressive language in relation to race, ethnicity and women. Trump was retaliating against the destructive and patronizing identity politics used by the Left. The upshot again is apparent: the language and debate around politics is being shaped not by the center but by the ideology of a polarising Left and Right.” (488)

As an interview The New Yorker editor David Remnick by News night editor Ian Katz further show,
Ian Katz: And in that piece that you wrote in light of the election, you said we're not heading for fascism because this country won't allow it. But the conditions are there, you said - this may be how this starts.

David Remnick: I think a lot of countries have had the circumstance of believing it could never happen here, and it happened slowly, slowly and then all at once. And part of my alarmism, if you want to call it that, was to, in my own small way, be part of a sounding of an alarm, and a self-awareness that we're not going to repeat history.

I don't think anybody thinks that a funny man is going to come out with a little moustache and an armband, with people marching in an odd way. No, we have a reality television billionaire who's adopted certain ideological and characterological things that are not for the better of this country, in my view. And taken to its logical conclusion, yeah I think it's a form of American authoritarianism at stake. And I think that's an alarm worth sounding (489).

To be fair, President Trump and his supporters have high hope, they can fulfill their aspiration ‘Make America Great Again’. But President Trump idea and practical policy many are saying otherwise. He is not a reformer. The thing he does, the policy he propose, in practical term, many are and will not addressing the real and critical America’s issues.

Donald Trump is a man of extreme ego and intolerant criticism of all sorts. He is a kind of  some American’s narcissism character. He obviously well represent and fit to the US long-standing chronic ill symptom ...The Wild Wild West Syndrome. That could make many of us feel more nerves.

The election result has confirm the negative part of America exceptionalism is real, could be alarming increase more under President Trump. Thereby, the very consequence of Trump presidency no doubt could be expect to produce ‘Trump way’ negative more than positive effect to America and the world in the years to come.

Now, as President Barack Obama frankly acknowledged, America is facing the enemy within.  The biggest threat to the US is the US itself (490).

The US has made enormous exceptional positive contribution to humankind advancement

The United States is the world’s second biggest resource-rich nation.

This gives it a great advantage. It’s total resource value is $45 trillion. Its oil reserves (value) may not put it in the top ten, but the US boasts 272.5 trillion cu. ft. ($3.1 trillion) in natural gas reserves and 750 million acres ($10.9 trillion) in timber reserves. It has 31.2% of the world’s proven coal reserves, worth an estimated $30 trillion. This is by far the most valuable supply of any nation on earth. Timber and coal combined are worth roughly 89% of the country’s total natural resource value. The US is in the top five nations globally for copper, gold and natural gas. It also has one of the most fertile, favorable climates in the world (491).

The US evolved out of European colonisation and migration. It has successfully exploited European national expertise and talent. Its founders were fleeing the old world, English Industrialisation and the carnage of both world wars. It is favorably located, far away from world trouble spots. As a new world, it could build new things, new cultures, make inventions that the old European world could not and would not allowed.

America has drawn from past ancient empires of Mesopotamia, Egypt, Rome (Italy), China, Persia (Iran), Greece, India, Mongolia, Austria and the Ottoman (Turkey) empire experience.

It has also learned from the colonisation of early capitalist empires like Spain, Portugal, Holland (Netherlands), Italy, England, France, Germany, Japan and the USSR. But there have been both positive and negative influences it has drawn from the ancient empires and civilisations.

The US is a highly innovative nation and has made significant contributions to the modern era, even though many inventions and new thoughts have been built on top of the previous foundations of engineering, medicine, applied science and technology. Typical examples of the magic of the sciences and technology are the invention of the car, aero plane, modern medicine, Internet, mobile phone and space technology.

All these factors contributed to the political and economic advances of the US. These opportunities never have made or presented themselves to any other nation in world history. In essence these contributions provided huge benefits for shared wealth and advancement to America and the world.

With the passage of time, the US has achieved the position of the nation with the largest GDP output. When the rest the world was racked by world wars, the US mainland enjoyed peace, enabling it to not only build national wealth at an unheard of exponential rate, but also contribute to global order.

The US contribution to international politics, science and technology and miscellaneous advancement

Yet statistics only tell a part of America’s story. Detailed below, is a timeline of its political and social evolution and its significant positive impact on the rest of the world:

1863: The Emancipation Proclamation by President Abraham Lincoln on January First, is the new beginning of America and world society.

1872: The Yellowstone National Park declared, making the US becomes the first nation in the world to advocate national parks. (This land is your land, National Geographic, by David Quambone, January 2016, p 30, viewed February 2, 2016).

1941:  the US enters WWII to stop the Nazi German and Fascist Italy and Japan aggression.

1945:  Drafting of the United Nations Charter in April–June. This charter took effect on 24th of October 1945 and initiated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It is a vital insight into the prevailing and future global institutions and their governance foundation and guidance.

1948: The Marshall Plan (official name the European Recovery Program, ERP) establish in April provided an economic support to help rebuild European economies after the end of WWII.

1990s: The US initiated the Digital Revolution and was the key driver which made WDWN with layered protocols a reality. This enabled a variety of peripheral equipment like website, mobile phone and TVs. to communicate with each other in global scale.

The Digital Revolution or ‘The Third Industrialisation Revolution’ has its roots in the 1950s1960s when government, military and other organizations made use of computer systems. By 1992, the World Wide Web (WWW) had been introduced, and by 1996 the Internet became a normal part of most business operations. ‘2010 and beyond

- By this decade, Internet makes up more than 25% of the world's population. Mobile communication has also become very important, as nearly 70% of the world's population owns a mobile phone. The connection between Internet websites and mobile gadgets has become a standard in communication.’ ‘It has making a largest, widest, most sophisticate, an enormous positive advancing to entire worldwide citizenry, never happen, never can be compare to in humankind history.’ (492).

Anti-colonisation, the US was playing the leader role and strong supporter of a declaration on the granting of independence to colonised countries and people adopted by UN’s the General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of December14, 1960.

During the Suez fiasco in 1956, under Dwight D. Eisenhower, the US at the UN had issued an ultimatum, threatening economic sanctions, against the Anglo-French-Israel pact of nations after they took aggressive action against Egypt, over the nationalisation of the Suez Canal.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the US established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1958 with a distinctly civilian (rather than military) orientation encouraging peaceful applications in space science. The US was also the first nation that put the first human being on the moon.

Arts, music, dance, entertainment, sport and travelling

The US have so many innovative inventions to its credit. It has successfully blended international arts, music, dance, painting, sculpture and other art forms out of Hollywood. We see; Elvis Presley created a ‘fusion’ of black and white American music. John Lennon and Yoko Ono produced the immortal lyrics of peace entitled ‘Imagine’. Bob Dylan reflected America’s real soul and a world of justice.

The roots of Hollywood drew from a variety of European arts influences and artists who migrated out of Europe - British, French, German, Austrian, Italian and Spanish. This artistic culture combined with Japanese cinematography, in addition to a pool of cultural wealth from Middle East, Latin America, Africa, India, Asia and elsewhere.

In the US, film and TV stars, artists, musicians, dancers and entertainers are well respected and command high income and social status. Nowhere else can artists compare in the world. It is also an important part of American export of ‘soft power’ and a way to reach out and influence the wider world.

American culture features fanciful, magnificent, gigantic, colorful, wonderful, high tech techniques and innovative products. Its dollar art, pigs can fly, fact distortion and some propaganda like products are just playing a part of the entire industry. The industry is also a manifestation of the American character, culture, and civilisation.

This evolution represents a global patchwork of civilisations, achieved an intermingling and coherence, unmatched anywhere else in the world. The US also is the place most advance, complex of fusion, synthetic action world’s civilisations, humankind has ever achieve.

All the advances in documentary film and technology have changed the world audience vision and their world viewed forever. Many is produced or cooperate by American,

The modern educational film or documentary is an essential video-based educational film which has become a powerful tool in High Intensity Education used extensively in engineering, medicine and a variety of applied sciences, in addition to replacing complex operational manuals. In the most important field of knowledge. Let’s just take two of the most valued documentary films into consideration:

Earth from Space and Humankind from Space (Mankind from Space). These films have given priceless value to fathomless understanding of how nature work. They provide answers to all being and humankind interaction, change and adaptation, process and the consequence. How world is a highly integrate network of WSGN and WDWN; intertwine, interrelate, interconnect, interdependence, inter-adaptation and adjustment in all aspects of nature and all species activities.

The films are very powerful, having enormous power to change a viewer’s actually real world view.

They provide understanding about human beings, organisms, social economic system and guidance to the future in the world we live in. As well telling how the world’s future should evolve. The films clearly match Cyber Kids’ philosophy and should be highly valued as International treasure.

What’s happening in the world we are able to record on film or DVD or digital tape and contribute to the world’s - in classrooms and in bedrooms. Plants and animals from the four corners of the world, creatures in landscapes and below deep-oceans, outer space and beyond. This can be viewed as entertainment, education, or leisure.  It is putting history, culture and evolution of accumulated knowledge to a new frontier without limits.

Sports play an important role in American society. They enjoy tremendous popularity but more important they are vehicles for transmitting such values as justice, fair play, and teamwork. Sports have contributed to racial and s

Football (Gridiron), Basketball, Baseball, ice hockey, Tennis, Soccer, Golf, Nascar, Martial Arts / Boxing are major popular playing sport in America.

The US hosted eight summer and winter Olympic Games since 2002. The US has participated with all world’s modern Olympic Games around the world, and was the top gold medal winner in all summer Olympic events. Sport in the US is also a gigantic business activity, the largest in scale and size in the world, producing many popular sports stars, through individual effort or through club, team, league, sport institution support. These and other related industry are commanding multi-million or billion dollar revenue. Individual sport stars are earning lavish incomes and enjoy high social status (494).

Other significant achievement

The US is the world leader in innovation. It has made great contributions to the world of science and technology. By record, the US is the strongest force behind globalisations. It has made a gigantic impact on the world’s order, world’s economic integration development, and a unique civilisation led to an evolutioning of shared civilisation.

The US is located far away from the world’s complex trouble spots. It has an advantage, in that it can nurture the benefits of isolation and protectionism. However, the power and impact of WSGN and WDWN networking and communication, will not permit such isolation. In the evolutionary context, globalisation cannot be stop and will bring all humanity forward together, because this is One World.

The US needs a political structural and system reform

The US constitution can be amended. This should aims at structure and system. It should do it sooner rather than later. The first is, to make independence, clear cut separation of the powers of the executive, judicial and legislative branches, not rest on politics. Second, improve, and add new amendments, that answers to today’s main issues and problems effectively: the role of government, address inequality issue. Third, curtail and control extremism on both sides of the political spectrum; extreme conservative and extreme radicalism. Reform should be left to the American voters, to formulate implement through the ballot box, with assistance from the different branches of government, without being corrupted by special interest lobby groups.

The US should stop trying to sell or forcibly about Washington Consensus ideology to other nations. Stop interference with other nation’s internal affairs. The US should leave reform of other nations to international forums (new establish) which have been created for the purpose such as the new UN where all nations could receive a ‘fair go’ and goodwill and consent cooperation.

As such the UN and its agencies, will be transformed into strong mandate as global institution, fit to the fast advance and complex world environment, with shared responsibility, which the UN able to displays but lack of at present.

“…the American political system is largely rooted in the pre-industrialisation era, and the need for political reform in the US is as strong as in China, if not more. The separation of powers within the political domain alone can no longer effectively address the major problems in American society today.” (495)

In ideology term…orthodoxy is oppose to advance forward. In the reality, in social and political and economic domain/realm. There is no such thing call ‘absolute’ equality. Ask USSR, but to reduce the gap of rich and poor inequality to the minimum that evolution could permitted is possible and necessary. For the US, sharp reduce or torn down the rich privilege and spread the wealth is urgent thing for all American.

The US should consider raising higher income tax of the rich, minimises benefits for the wealthy, moderate middle class tax subsidies. By limiting or weeding out the undesired derivative business and investment banks which are no more than paper betting for more paper.

Investment banks should be engaged in the financing activities in which generating real productive economy. And the government must address privilege and inequality problem.

“At the same time, reforms that political leaders promised would ensure prosperity for all – such as trade and financial liberalisation – have not delivered. Far from it. And those whose standard of living has stagnated or declined have reached a simple conclusion: America’s political leaders either didn’t know what they were talking about or were lying (or both).

President Trump wants to blame all of America’s problems on trade and immigration. He’s wrong.

The US would have faced some de-industrialisation even without freer trade: global employment in manufacturing has been declining, with productivity gains exceeding demand growth. The world nations are growing and forward evolve, that absolute fact is effecting other nations on earth one way or another.

There are two messages US political elites should be hearing. The simplistic neo-liberal market-fundamentalist theories that have shaped so much economic policy during the last four decades are badly misleading, with GDP growth coming at the price of soaring inequality. Trickle-down economics hasn’t and won’t work. Markets don’t exist in a vacuum. The Thatcher-Reagan ‘revolution,’ which rewrote the rules and restructured markets for the benefit of those at the top, succeeded all too well in increasing inequality, but utterly failed in its mission to increase growth.

This leads to the second message: we need to rewrite the rules of the economy once again, this time to ensure that ordinary citizens benefit. Politicians in the US and elsewhere who ignore this lesson will be held accountable. Change entails risk. But the Trump phenomenon – and more than a few similar political developments in Europe – has revealed the far greater risks entailed by failing to heed this message: societies divided, democracies undermined, and economies weakened.” (496)

Summary of major reforms

Internal reform

1) Examine and improve the national constitution, by people, expert and community organisations.

2) Re-define the balance of power and authority of parliament, executive and judiciary.

3) Introduce a social safety net based on major European models.

4) Refine and scrutinise lobbying influences. There should be no conflict of interests.  Politicians should confer with experts and community organisation before entering parliament for a final vote. In short, curtail and taking control all rent seeking either economics or politics activities.

5) Revamp anti-trust laws to stop ‘hidden’ semi-monopolies and insider activity.

6) Redefine Wall Street’s role in financial and national economic development.

7) Healthcare system reform: introduce a universal coverage system, based on the successful European model.

8) Military complex industry should be transform to productive industry.

9) School and college system reform: long term plan and funding technical and skill training school, curtail privilege few taking control of college and institution.

External reform

1) Define foreign policy and international relations as being based on good will and cooperation, with the aim of people living in peace and surviving together according to the Law of Evolution. The US should and could play the very important and leading role.

2) Nuclear disarmament is an urgent issue to tackle. The issue must by pass all barrier and obstacles such as, politics, beliefs and values, rich or poor, developed and developing nations, national security over humanity security.

3) Reform the UN by absorb other governance body successful experience. Assign a full or at least very high and appropriate level to UN, to have enough authority to conduct global governance. It would need a new structure and should be based on humankind successful experience and logical and wisdom.

4) The US, G7, G20, BRICS, MINT and others should contribute to the leading and practical solution of how to make ‘a new UN?’ one that can serve the 21st century and realise a new governing system. There should be a set plan with a time table so reform can be step by step with short, medium and long term goals until the UN reaches its target quality standard and goal.


Supporting healthy useful innovation, constructive should be promoted. Safeguard the positive and prevent the negative.

Mergers and acquisitions that lead to fairer market share, constructive can be close monitor should be consider positive.

Copyright and patent laws should be loosened to prevent incumbents milking old discoveries. Big tech platforms such as Google and Facebook need to be watched closely: they might not be top rent-extracting monopolies yet, but investors value them as if they will be one day in that role.

The role of giant fund managers with cross holdings in rival firms needs careful examination, too.
Facilitating life for start-ups and small firms would promote job creation and productivity in the engine room of healthy social-democracy, which is small business.

“A blast of competition would mean more disruption for some: firms in the S&P 500 employ about one in ten Americans. It would create new jobs, encourage more investment and help lower prices. Above all, it would bring about a fairer kind of capitalism. That would lift Americans’ spirits as well as their economy.” (497)

Essential social services, there is a need for the US to contribute effectively to essential social services, as a significant component of GDP. At the moment it is 7.8 % of GDP, goes into social services and is marginally ahead of Canada. However, productivity wise Canada is considered to be superior. A typical case is the project, entitled The Canadian city of Medicine Hat, intended to attack homelessness. The following extract is self-explanatory and indicative of its exemplary success.

“The Canadian city of Medicine Hat recently became the first city to end homelessness thanks to a surprisingly simple idea: giving every person living on the streets a home with no strings attached.”
“Unlike many other homelessness initiatives, the so-called ‘Housing First’ approach doesn't require homeless people to make steps towards solving other issues like alcoholism, mental health problems or drug addiction before they get accommodation.”

“Four experts talk to the BBC World Service Inquiry programme about how and why the approach works and some of its limitations. ‘Dr Sam Tsemberis is a clinical psychologist who founded Pathways to Housing in New York City in 1992, and developed the Housing First model.’ ‘We began to do something that no-one had really done before, which was to take people on the street and offer them a place to live, no conditions other than sign the lease and pay your rent.’”

“The other breakthrough was to offer normal housing. We rented housing from community landlords on the open market, and people lived in apartments with families, older people, younger people, students, people of all types, including some people who had just the day before been homeless, but were homeless no longer….”

“So you could spend up to $150,000 (£103,000) enabling a person to be homeless because you're not providing them with the solution. Or you could invest up to $25,000 (£17,000) and people would be in housing, stable, secure and safe [with] hardly any police interventions or utilization of emergency rooms. You didn't need to be Warren Buffet to figure out which of those was the better investment.”

“More than 1,000 communities got involved from around the United States, and we set the goal that we could end chronic homelessness - the homelessness of the most vulnerable, the most disabled, the most likely to die on the street. We could end that form of homelessness in our country in 10 years.” (498)

The US as the world’s policeman – Is there any alternative?

There is an alternative. The US could negotiate through a variety of organisations like the UN, EU, neutral third party nation or group of nation. Any world’s organisation that play new politics.
Adoption of a ‘soft power’ approach, like the above is far more productive and is in the best interests of all parties, including the US.

Nuclear Disarmament; world have the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Currently there are 191 countries who signatories and the US as a holder is also a signatories.

The US with is the only country in the world have the capacity and power and influence to initiate a successful world without nuclear weapon. Or could stray into the opposite direction?, being the main obstacle to such progress?. The US has a very hard decision to make.

The EU and Swedish-Finland noble ideal; should the US willing to emulate the idea of cooperation and prevent conflict and war.  In modify form, shape, scope, scale and in part, or in full?.

How to take back authority role from corporates and their lobby army. First, amend and improve constitution; taking all conflict against national interest within the constitution into public, expert and politicians for examination and make recommendation, Second, reform Wall Street, Third, support lobbying but should let social and community organisation scrutiny and make final recommendation and judgment.

The US has a healthy, admirable and respectful future ahead …only just…

Donald Trump election slogan is Make America Great Again, and he firmly stick to the notion. Practically by the Law of Evolution point of view, it is impossible illusion. What was great in the past might not great today or in the future; like old colonisation, new one as some what practice by superpower. In short, the old greatness the US achieve on the later part record was largely based on self-appointed Global Cop; apart from doing many good things as mention above, keeping a ‘relative necessary’ world structure ‘order’ system function. And on other hand, applying all dirty tricks, largely relying on brutal military force, combined with hidden or naked open interference to keep the world under control; combination of unfair, unjust ‘Washington Consensus’ winner take all economic led philosophy, are a mere more negative than positive in this 21 century era. Because world have making enormous evolving change, fast and effective progression never happen in humankind history. Where any world ‘great’ power cannot win hearts and minds on such ‘old way’ behaviour and engagement.

World should be optimistic over CKG role, America Cyber Kids could be cautious how to apply the right adaptation practice, and learn and guide by lesson of past and new experience. In solidarity with world’s Cyber Kids. Where CKG have and will learn lesson, exercise their rights and exert their authority over humankind future. Indeed, Cyber Kids desire is today humanity desire; cooperation, tackle privilege inequality, share common prosperity, security, fair and just, globalise world order-governance and a peaceful world.

Therefore, in contrary to new generation Cyber Kids logic and philosophical belief, in believing and rely largely in brute force led of previous Great and not so Great America; one is by increase unnecessary defence spending is the negative and wrong direction move, instead of ‘adaptation’ cooperation to common forward progression as soft power, to win over the US and world population hearts and minds, the only practical way if the US want to be ‘new greatness’ great again. For example,

externally, the urgent thing in today is to lead the world to reach agreement on dismantle MAD (mutual Assurance Destruction) perspective (perception) on nuclear disarmament; get rid of nuclear weapon, and work toward eliminate major problem and conflicts the old Greatness America cannot and never can possible achieve. Toward love of humanity of a mere world family, through increase all necessary positive factor, and to enhance the mother of all security … the Law of Evolution. Humans, as is the most develop species on earth, adaptation also could mean we can invent new consciousness of making humankind greatness via develop and growing new consciousness ‘gene’ mind, a big positive stride of adaptation move to change humans’ perception on nuclear war threat, from MAD to MAM (Mutual Assurance Mutation). Ask Cyber Kids of how this could be done.

This mean past greatness might be great and more positive for the dominator’s role of certain space and time past. In turn, the similar method and mindset use in the 20 century and attempt to apply in the 21 century obviously will not work, is much on negative quality and will making negative effect for the US and the world; time and circumstance is change.

To make a secure, prosperity, positive led based on Cyber Kids’ philosophy, a ‘modern globalism’ new way of life, all world nations need and could be part of including the US of a new greatness…to build a new world together.

The strong, healthy, and prosperity and world leadership future ahead demands the right choice, steely courage and new political will in reform…adaptation.

What so ever the negative all US have done is just a chapter of a natural of Evolution path, develop to the peak and then decline through the space and time and into the much changing 21st century world. Let see it as a necessary evolutionary journey. It had happened to entire humans past records. The US role in the humanity evolving still most important. Let’s carefully examine the cause and effect past and present of human successful and failure, we should remind ourselves of what all things are relative and never ending to and adaptation and changes.

Can president Trump find the right remedy to cure the US’s economic ill.

President Donald Trump strong supporter group who voted him in are large number of white middle and lower middle class who lack university degree. Who is the hardest hit by globalisation and increase of industrial automation impacted. They lost their jobs or reduce income more than any other group of American. President Trump campaigned and make high appeal to their plight. This is understandable and is a good US president should do and gain high credit.

”Like most voters, the president’s supporters do not really know what they want from him.

They do, however, have a strong sense that he takes their side against those groups of Americas who are against them. That gives Mr Trump a lot of leeway on what he can do without losing their support.” (499)

This is an advantage and is a crucial opportunity he has, and should be using correctly to make the big correction to the US malfunction system.

Indeed, the US will expect to make positive contribution more than negative one to humankind, no matter the old form of world system/structure be dismantle, and how the world under further evolving or a new governing system and order being create.

Indeed, the world is in the transition, the US is at the crossroads, in the vanguard? Human beings are about to turn a new page embodying great innovation and restructuring.

Then, when would the US will turn around, responsive to changes and become a strong positive leaning, rebalance and be a great nation as it ought to be…through 21st Century Evolution?


1. The Economist. Science’s unsolved mysteries; Life, the multiverse and everything. p 14. [Online] August 8, 2015. [Cited: November 1, 2015.]

2. Dr Bruce Railsback. What is Science? p 1. [Online] University of Georgia. [Cited: July 5, 2015.]

3. Jennifer Marohasy. Bob Carter: a “rationalist” critic of climate change. p 8. [Online] January 23, 2016 . [Cited: February 12, 2016.]

4. Karehka Ramey. What Is Technology – Meaning of Technology and Its Use. [Online] December 12, 2013. [Cited: July 13, 2014.] .

5. The Economist. Economics: A far from dismal outcome . p 67. [Online] March 5, 2016,. [Cited: March 25, 2016.]

6. Brian Cox and Andrew Cohen. Human Universe, on What is Our future? p 233. [Online] [Cited: January 12, 2015.]

7. Ian Tattersall. New Twist Added to the Role of Culture in Human Evolution. Volume 311, Issue 3. [Online] September 12, 2014. [Cited: October 13, 2014.]

8. Outline of Science. [Online] Wikipedia, 2015. [Cited: April 9, 2016.]

9. New Scientist. Don’t believe in belief; we need evidence and argument, as well as conviction. P 5. [Online] New Scientist, April 4, 2015 . [Cited: April 15, 2015.]

10. The Economist. Science and Technology. [Online] November 22, 2014. [Cited: December 14, 2014.] .

11. Ha-Joon Chang. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism book. p 31. [Online] Penguin publishing, October 2011. [Cited: July 12, 2014.]

12. The Economist, Special report. The return of the machinery question. p 3. [Online] June 25, 2016 . [Cited: June 29, 2016.]

13. Brainy Quote. knowledge quote. [Online] 2015. [Cited: February 1, 2015.]

14. L. Hunter Lovins. State of the world 2008, Rethinking Production. Chapter 3, p 43. [Online] [Cited: May 13, 2017.]

15. Daniel W. Graham. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [Online] A Peer Reviewed Academic Resource, IEP, 2015. [Cited: March 2, 2015.]

16. Dr Stephen T. Chang. Introduction to Taoism: Philosophy, Religion and science (cont). [Online] San Rafael, CA 94915-0813, USA, since 2004. [Cited: March 12, 2014.]

17. Jim Lucas. Equal & Opposite Reactions: Newton’s Third Law of Motion. [Online] June 26, 2014 . [Cited: July 30, 2014.] .

18. Kim O'Connor. Dialectic. [Online] University of Chicago, Winter 2003. [Cited: January 23, 2015.]

19. Adrian Overdijk. Earth from Space HD. [Online] Discovery Channel HD, DVD, September 13, 2014. [Cited: February 2, 2015.]

20. Miriam Kramer. “Earth from Space” Documentary Reveals Cosmic View of Our Planet. [Online] Staff Writer, February 13, 2013. [Cited: June 8, 2015.]

21. Renee Dupuis. Discovery’s Original Special MANKIND FROM SPACE Explores Breathtaking Extent of Human Influence on the Planet. [Online] April 15, 2015. [Cited: May 12, 2016.] .

22. Iain Riddick. MANKIND FROM SPACE. [Online] a 2 hour DVD documentary film, is co-produced by Handel Productions (Montréal) and Darlow Smithson Productions (UK). Alan Handel is Executive Producer and André Barro is Producer for Handel Productions. Iain Riddick is Executive Producer and Ed Watkins is. [Cited: November 11, 2015.] http://(In association with Discovery Canada.

23. Fritjof Capra and Pier Luigi Luisi. The Systems View of Life: A Unify Vision. [Online] Cambridge University Press book, July 2, 2014.

24. Kevin Laland. Evolution Evolves. p 42. [Online] New Scientist, September 24, 2016 . [Cited: October 2, 2016.]

25. David Eagleman. Secrets Of The Brain, episode five, Why Do I Need You? at SBS TV Australia. [Online] a DVD produced by Blink Films, November 12, 2015. [Cited: December 12, 2015.]

26. Dave. Was Darwin a racist, is natural selection a racist ideology? – Nope. On Sceptical Science. [Online] February 12, 2012. [Cited: June 12, 2014.]

27. John G. West. Darwin, Racism, and Eugenics in Detroit. [Online] Charles Wright Museum of African American History in Detroit, November 5, 2010. [Cited: October 2, 2014.]

28. Richard Dawkins . The Evolutionary Future of Man. p 87. [Online] The Economist, 1993-09-11, vol. 328. [Cited: June 12, 2014.]

29. Turtle Reader, 2015. The life and letters of Charles Darwin-day 16 of 188. Voyage of the “Beagle” from December 27, 1831, to October 2, 1836. [Online] [Cited: November 12, 2015.]

30. Robert Sanders. Ethiopian desert yields oldest hominid skeleton. [Online] UCBerkeley News, October 1, 2009. [Cited: June 11, 2016.]

31. David Attenborough. Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life. a DVD. [Online] BBC 2009. [Cited: October 1, 2016.]

32. Dr John Mitchell . DNA Nation. a documentary DVD film, with writer Jacob Hickey, Scientists: Dr John Mitchell (human geneticist), Dr Carles Ralueza Fox, Dr Jason E. Lewis, Professor Richard Leakey, Dr Bajtien Lla. [Online] Australian broadcaster SBS and Black Fella Films production, . [Cited: June 12, 2016.]

33. Charles Lyell. New World Encyclopaedia. [Online] [Cited: October 10, 2014.] .

34. "Inventors were heroes". The Process of Innovation, Now and Then,. P 69. [Online] April 25, 2015. [Cited: July 12, 2015.]

35. David Attenborough. Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life. [Online] movie DVD, via BBC, February 1, 2009. [Cited: May 12, 2014.] .

36. Michael Le Page. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions. [Online] New Scientist, April 16, 2008 . [Cited: March 15, 2015.] .

37. Selam Legesse Eshete. The Relationship between Prostitution and Sex Trafficking The Case of Sweden and Denmark. p 12. [Online] January 3, 2012. [Cited: December 21, 2014.]

38. Media Resources Center. Moffitt Library UC Berkley, 510642.8197. [Online] October 5, October 5, 2012. [Cited: September 12, 2014.]

39. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. Britannica: Hippie Subculture. [Online] The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, February 9, 2015 . [Cited: November 12, 2015.]

40. Rodney P. Carlisle. Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and the Right. Darwinism 2015, p 613,. [Online] [Cited: May 23, 2015.],+by+Sir+Francis+Galton+?&source=bl&ots=PV66hCX7VW&sig=0gA5BFGBQ76HC8FUgGuaiBqCjwE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiU6IS38sHMAhVnlKYKHcKzA5MQ6AEI.

41. Charles Darwin - survival of the fittest quote. [Online] 2015. [Cited: May 12, 2015.]

42. Greg Graffin. “Survival of the fittest” is a sham. p 15. [Online] Time, Sptember 21, 2015. [Cited: September 30, 2015.] .

43. Michael T. Ghiselin. The Descent of Man, by Charles Darwin. p 442. [Online] [Cited: June 12, 2014.]

44. Daniel C. Dennett, Deb Roy. Our Transparent Future. pp. 60, 61, 62, 63,. [Online] Scientific American, March 2015 viewed June 3, 2015. [Cited: June 3, 2015.]

45. Charles Darwin. The Descent of Man. [Online] Goodreads. [Cited: October 12, 2014.] .

46. Alison Flood. On the Origin of Species voted most influential academic book in history. [Online] The Guardian, November 10, 2015. [Cited: June 9, 2016.] .

47. Tia Ghose. Darwin's “Origin of Species” Voted Most Influential Academic Book. [Online] Live Science, November 11, 2015. [Cited: October 10, 2015.]

48. Ralph V. Turner. The Meaning of Magna Carta since 1215. History Today, Volume 53 Issue 9. [Online] History Emeritus of Florida State University, September 2003. [Cited: July 23, 2015.] .

49. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. French Revolution, Aristocratic revolt, 1787–89. [Online] July 22, 2016. [Cited: August 9, 2016.]

50. Jamie Booth. Winston Churchill. p 1. [Online] Academia. [Cited: July 23, 2015 .]

51. The Economist. What’s gone wrong with Democracy. pp. 47, 52. [Online] March 1-7, 2014. [Cited: March 20, 2014.]

52. New Scientist. Better than a ballot box: Could digital democracy win your vote? [Online] April 22, 2015. [Cited: July 2, 2015 .]

53. Niall Firth. We the people, New Scientist. pp. 39, 40. [Online] April 25, 2015. [Cited: July 2, 2015.]

54. The Economist. Not running, but fleeing, with rare exceptions, America’s young are turning their backs on politics. p 32. [Online] The Economist, May 16, 2015 . [Cited: June 12, 2015.]
55. Fair Vote, The Center for Voting and Democracy. [Online] Maryland USA. [Cited: December 21, 2015.] .

56. Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page. Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. pp. 12, 14. [Online] Princeton University, September 2014. [Cited: May 2, 2015.]

57. United Nations. Inequality Matters, Report on the World Social, Situation 2013. Figure I.3 and 1.4, Gini coefficient and GNI per capita by country, pp 37, 38. [Online] [Cited: July 12, 2015.] .

58. Alan Taylor. 26 Amazing Facts About Finland's Unorthodox Education System. [Online] Business Insider Australia, December 15, 2011. [Cited: July 12, 2015 .] .

59. OECD Economic Survey. Norway 2012, p 11. [Online] [Cited: July 13, 2015.],+Gini+coefficients+before+and+aft6er+taxes+and+transfers,+in+the+late+2000s&source=bl&ots=Sc3yryMdFH&sig=xx8XgKb5D81nzQ8iYyYftbTBniU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTnpTRyfnOAhWDNJQKHSle.

60. Brainy Quote. Dwight D. Eisenhower Quotes, 2015. [Online] 2015. [Cited: October 13, 2015.]

61. "Welfare for the Rich". Not fair: welfare for the rich. p 1. [Online] The Australian, February 17, 2015. [Cited: February 20, 2015.]

62. Dr Margaret Chan. Advancing European health amidst global crises, Coalition for Health, Ethics and Society (CHES). [Online] The World Health Organization, December 6, 2011. [Cited: January 12, 2015.]

63. The Economist. Marco Rubio and the safety net. [Online] July 12, 2014. [Cited: September 24, 2014.] .

64. Richard Florida. The World’s Leading Nations for Innovation and Technology. [Online] The Atlantic Citylab, October 3, 2011. [Cited: January 12, 2015.] .

65. Nations Encyclopedia. Sweden - Science and technology. [Online] 2016. [Cited: February 2, 2016.]

66. Ha Joon Chang. Economics: The User’s Guide. p 322. [Online] Pelican Book 2014. [Cited: April 22, 2014.]

67. Luke Graham. Finland experiments with universal basic income scheme. [Online] CNBC, January 3, 2017. [Cited: January 27, 2017.]

68. Ha-Joon Chang. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism book. p 220. [Online] October 2011. [Cited: April 22, 2014.]

69. Minxin Pei, Samia Amin, Seth Graz. Why Nation-Building Fails in Mid-Course After US Intervention. [Online] Carnegie Europe, March 17, 2004. [Cited: April 12, 2014 .]

70. Foreign Policy of the United States. Opinion that US intervention does not export democracy. [Online] Wikipedia. [Cited: April 12, 2014.]

71. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and George W. Downs. Intervention and Democracy. International Organization, Vol. 60, No. 3 (summer 2006), pp. 19, 20, 22,. [Online] Cambridge University Press. [Cited: April 12, 2014.] .

72. Mark O’Keefe. Five Years After 9/11, The Clash of Civilizations Revisited. Pewforum. [Online] interview professor Samuel Huntington, August 18, 2006. [Cited: April 12, 2014.]

73. "Democracy". Democracy to the rescue? p 40. [Online] The Economist, March 14, 2015 . [Cited: April 1, 2015.]

74. Niall Firth. We the people. p. 41. [Online] New Scientist, April 25, 2015 . [Cited: May 12, 2015.]

75. Greg Rudd. Greg Rudd, Business & Government Consultant. [Online] 2015. [Cited: November 12, 2015.]

76. —. Democracy can be done better. p 24. [Online] The Australian, December 2-4, 2011. [Cited: December 12, 2014.]

77. —. Let us vote for the anti-party Common Sense Party. [Online] The Australian, November 30, 2015. [Cited: December 5, 2015.]

78. John Kerin. The poor white trash of Asia: a phrase that changed an economy. pp. 12, 45, 47,. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, March 24, 2015. [Cited: March 28, 2015 .] .

79. The Huffington Post. Ha-Joon Chang: Economics Is A Political Argument. [Online] The WorldPost, interview by Seung-Yoon Lee, April 10, 2014. [Cited: May 13, 2014.]

80. Norwegian Economy. Norwegian blues. p 63. [Online] The Economist, October 10, 2015. [Cited: October 20, 2015.] .

81. Princeton University Press. The China Model. The dialogue between Zhao Bing Bing and Daniel A. Bell. [Online] Between July 2012 and May 2013. [Cited: April 23, 2014.] .

82. David De Cremer and Tian Tao. Huawei: A Case Study of When Profit Sharing Works. [Online] Harvard Business Review, September 24, 2015. [Cited: September 30, 2015.] .

83. Ross Terrill. Xi Jinping's Version of Democracy. [Online] The Weekly Standard, February 13, 2017 . [Cited: February 14, 2017.]

84. Zoltan Istvan. Political Machines. p 18. [Online] New Scientist, August 27, 2016 . [Cited: September 12, 2016.]

85. Tim Montgomerie. The young are losing faith in democracy. p 10. [Online] The Australian (Originate from The Times), October 28, 2016. [Cited: October 28, 2016.]

86. Mark Eggleton. Growth and investment the key to stability, says Garnaut. p S1. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, November 4, 2016 . [Cited: November 4, 2016.]

87. "Tech Boom". To fly, to fall, to fly again; The tech boom may get bumpy, but it will not end in a repeat of the dotcom crash. p 18. [Online] The Economist, July 25, 2015 . [Cited: July 30, 2015.]

88. According to Matt leighninger. We the people. pp. 39, 40. [Online] New Scientist by Niall Firth, April 25, 2015. [Cited: May 3, 2015.]

89. Douglas Murray. Douglas Murray's “Strange Death of Europe” asks the most difficult question. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, July 21, 2017, viewed July 25, 2017. [Cited: July 25, 2017.]

90. "Language". Language Matters. [Online] Oxford Dictionaries. [Cited: March 23, 2015.]

91. Zoe Williams. Economics: The User's Guide by Ha-Joon Chang – review. pp. 1, 2. [Online] Zoe Williams, , May 29, 2014. [Cited: June 13, 2014 .]

92. . [Online]

93. Ha Joon- Chang. Economics: The User's Guide. [Online] Penguin Books Ltd, England. [Cited: August 23, 2015.]

94. César Hidalgo. “The evolution of growth - multiplier effects - A physicist explains how order is born”. [Online] The Economist, July 23, 2015. [Cited: August 3, 2015.] .

95. Ryan Avent. “The Third Great Wave”. [Online] The Economist, October 4, 2014. [Cited: November 11, 2014.]

96. The Economist. Easing the transition, Means and ends. [Online] October 4, 2014. [Cited: November 20, 2014.]

97. Ryan Avent. The third great wave. [Online] October4 4, 2014. [Cited: October 20, 2014.] .

98. OECD.Stat. Population. [Online] [Cited: September 19, 2016.]

99. World Bank. New country classification by income level. [Online] July 2, 2013. [Cited: September 19, 2016.]

100. The nostalgia trap. [Online] The Economist, November 15, 2014. [Cited: November 25, 2014.] .

101. Ariya Kiratikanon. One World. [Online] July 24, 2009. [Cited: November 8, 2016.] .

102. Andy Coghlan and Debora MacKenzie. Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world. [Online] New Scientist, October 19, 2011. [Cited: October 2, 2015.]

103. Catherine McLean. It’s true, bankers really do control the world: study. [Online] The Globe and Mail, October 25, 2011 . [Cited: October 2, 2015.]

104. Debora MacKenzie and Andy Coghlan. Reveal: The Capitalist network that runs the world. [Online] NewScientist, October 24, 2011. [Cited: October 2, 2015.] .

105. Andrew Gavin Marshall. The Global Banking “Super-Entity” Drug Cartel: The Free Market of Finance Capital. [Online] October 28, 2012. [Cited: November 2, 2015.]

106. Yahoo. Industrial summary. [Online] Yahoo, May 12, 2015. [Cited: May 25, 2015.] .

107. Wikipedia. United States. [Online] Wikipedia, 2016. [Cited: November 8, 2016.]

108. Economic elite back Rupert Murdoch’s inequality fears. [Online] The Australian, October 29, 2014. [Cited: October 30, 2014.]

109. Michael Scherer. Up with people. pp. 28, 29. [Online] Time magazine, July 20, 2015 . [Cited: July 27, 2015.]

110. LeTendre, Gerald K.; Gonzalez, Roger Geertz; Nomi, Takako. Feeding the Elite: The Evolution of Elite Pathways from Star High Schools to Elite Universities. Higher Education Policy, v19 n1 p7-. [Online] ERIC, March 30, 2006. [Cited: February 12, 2016.]

111. Matthew Campbell. New young aristocrats hold sway in France. [Online] The Sunday Times, September 13, 2015. [Cited: September 20, 2015.] .

112. Winnie Byanyima executive director. Richest 1% will own more than all the rest by 2016. [Online] Oxfam International, January 19, 2015. [Cited: January 25, 2015.]

113. ABC News. [Online] Australia Broadcasting Corporate (ABC), January 21, 2015. [Cited: 25 January, 2015.]

114. Jordan Weissmann. Why Liberals Have Fallen for Thomas Piketty. [Online] Slate, April 2014. [Cited: April 14, 2015.] .

115. "Inequality". Mind the gap. [Online] The Economist, From Inequality: What Can Be Done book, June 6, 2015. [Cited: June 10, 2015.]

116. Martin Wolf. Bring our elites closer to the people: One cause of disquiet is the sense that those at the top are corrupt, complacent and incompetent. [Online] Financial Times, February 2, 2016 . [Cited: February 10, 2016.]

117. Ha-Joon Chang. Tax cuts for top earners fail because the theory is broken. [Online] New Scientist, April 25, 2015. [Cited: May 2, 2015.]

118. Jackie Wattles. 10 more billionaires join Buffett-Gates Giving Pledge. [Online] CNN, June 3, 2015. [Cited: June 10, 2015.]

119. Julia La Roche. Paul Tudor Jones: Income inequality will end in revolution, taxes, or war. [Online] Business Insider Australia, March 20, 2015. [Cited: March 30, 2015.]

120. Alan Feuer. Billionaires to the Barricades. [Online] The New York Times, July 3, 2015. [Cited: July 8, 2015.]

121. Phillip Inman and Patrick Kingsley. Inside Job: how bankers caused the financial crisis. Peter Bradshaw reviews Inside Job. [Online] The Guardian, February 18, 2011 . [Cited: March 10, 2014.] .

122. Colin I. Bradford and Wonhyuk lim. Global Leadership in Transition: Making the G20 More Effective and Responsive. Conclusion: Priority Innovations and Challenges for the G20, pp. 324-332. [Online] Brookings Institution Press, Korean Development Institute. [Cited: May 17, 2015 .]

123. Alison Stewart spoke with one, Bob Ivry. The true cost of the bank bailout. [Online] PBS, September 3, 2010 . [Cited: February 2, 2015.] .

124. "Quantitative Easing". The Economist explains, What is quantitative easing. [Online] The Economist, March 9, 2015 . [Cited: April 12, 2015.] .

125. Paul Vigna. Turning on the Gas: Global Economies Add $57 Trillion in Debt. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2015. [Cited: February 15, 2015.]

126. "Digital Taylorism". Digital Taylorism. p 66. [Online] The Economist, September 12, 2015. [Cited: September 20, 2015.]

127. Paul Brians. Study Guide for the Communism Manifesto, Department of English. [Online] Washington State University, January 12, 2011. [Cited: February 20, 2015.] .

128. Boundless. Weber's View of Stratification. [Online] Boundless Sociology, January 19, 2015. [Cited: March 20, 2015.]

129. Mike Savage. Britain needs a new approach to class if inequalities are to be addressed. [Online] The London school of Economics and Political Science, from public debate on Social Class in the 21st Century, November 2, 2015. [Cited: November 20, 2015.] .

130. Mark McCrindle. Social class systems in Australia and the UK [MEDIA]. p 1. [Online] The Mccrindle Blog, April 8, 2013. [Cited: September 1, 2015.] .

131. BBC Science. The Great British Class Survey – Results. [Online] April 3, 2013. [Cited: November 3, 2015.]

132. Charles Murray. Trump’s America. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, February 12, 2016. [Cited: February 20, 2016.] .

133. "Mind the Gap". Mind the gap. [Online] The Economist, extract from Inequality: What Can Be Done Book, June 6, 2015. [Cited: June 20, 2015.]

134. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Types of Social Classes of People. [Online] 2014. [Cited: March 15, 2015 .] .

135. Kenan Malik. The Failure of Multiculturalism. [Online] Foreign Affairs, March-April 2015, . [Cited: April 15, 2015.]

136. "Hereditary meritocracy". America’s elite, a hereditary meritocracy. [Online] The Economist, January 24, 2015 . [Cited: March 1, 2015.] .

137. OECD Development Centre . OECD Development Centre Working Paper. [Online] No.285, DEV/DOC (2010)2. [Cited: June 23, 2015 .]

138. David Rohde. The Swell Middle. [Online] Reuters 2012. [Cited: January 2, 2015 .]

139. Linda Yueh. The Rise of Global Middle Class. [Online] BBC, June 19, 2013. [Cited: July 23, 2015.]

140. Oxfam. 1 percent of the world will own more than half its wealth by 2016. [Online] Australian Broadcast Corporation (ABC), January 21, 2015. [Cited: January 30, 2015.]

141. Linda Yueh. The rise of the global middle class. [Online] BBC, June 19, 2013. [Cited: June 24, 2015.] .

142. Ronald Inglehart. Inequality and Modernisation: Why Equality Is Likely to Make a Comeback. p 4. [Online] Foreign Affairs, January/February 2016. [Cited: March 3, 2016.]

143. John Kehoe. Pressure on Obama over stalled TPP deal, Farm Online. [Online] June 15, 2015. [Cited: July 25, 2015.] .

144. Noam Scheiber. Labor’s Might Seen in Failure of Trade Deal as Unions Allied to Thwart It. [Online] The New York Times, June 13, 2015. [Cited: June 20, 2015.]

145. Jonathan Tepperman. Brazil’s Antipoverty Breakthrough. p 38. [Online] Foreign Affairs, January/February 2016. [Cited: March 1, 2016.]

146. "Car and Cart". Of cars and carts. pp. 19, 20, 22. [Online] The Economist, September 19, 2015. [Cited: September 30, 2015.] .

147. Dr Pasuk Phongpaichit. Corruption, Governance and Globalisation. p. 30. [Online] 2003 , December 14, 2003. [Cited: September 15, 2015.] .

148. "Prachachart". p 2. [Online] Prachachart Business newspaper (Thai newspaper), July 12, 2004(2547). [Cited: September 15, 2015.]

149. Jacob Greber. Asian shock can’t be ruled out. p 3. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, September 15, 2017. [Cited: September 19, 2017.]

150. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. IMF admits disastrous love affair with the euro and apologises for the immolation of Greece. [Online] The Telegraph, July 29, 2016. [Cited: July 31, 2016.]

151. Dr Pasuk Phongpaichit. Economic Crisis and Culturalism. p 5. [Online] June 1998. [Cited: September 15, 2015.]

152. "Vulture Fund". A good week for some investors, Vulture funds win a legal victory over Argentina’s government, . [Online] The Economist, June 21, 2014. [Cited: August 2, 2015.] .

153. "default on its debts". The Economist explains, Why Argentina may default on its debts. [Online] The Economist, July 30, 2014. [Cited: August 10, 2014.]

154. Ha-Joon Chang. Economics: The User's Guide. p 440. [Online] Pelican Book , 2014. [Cited: February 12, 2015.]

155. Miriam Masaquiza (Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues). Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous Voices. [Online] United Nations. [Cited: November 12, 2015.] .

156. Rachel Nuwer. Anthropology: The sad truth about uncontacted tribes. [Online] August 4, 2014. [Cited: November 12, 2015.]

157. The Economist. The miracle of the Cerrado, Brazil has revolutionized its own farms. Can it do the same for others? [Online] The Economist, August 26, 2010. [Cited: July 23, 2015.]

158. CREMAQ, PIAUÍ, . The Miracle of the Cerrado, Brazil has revolutionised its own farms. Can it do the same for others? [Online] The Economist, August 26, 2010. [Cited: July 23, 2015.] .

159. Olusegun Obasanjo, (former Nigeria President). How Africa could feed the world. [Online] CNN, November 6, 2012. [Cited: July 23, 2015.] .

160. Joel K. Bourne, Jr. How to Farm a Better Fish. pp. 100,101,102,110,111. [Online] National Geography, June 2014. [Cited: August 12, 2015.] ,110,111, viewed Augu

161. Global Policy Forum (GPF). Development aid to Africa negligible in comparison to illicit outflows. [Online] Global Policy Forum (GPF), July 16, 2014. [Cited: January 14, 2015.]

162. Charles Roxburgh, Susan Lund, Arendt Van Wakelin (McKinsey Global Institute). Asia Should Buy into Africa's Growth. [Online] Forbes, December 8, 2010. [Cited: June 2, 2015.]

163. The Deloitte Consumer Review. Africa: A 21st Century View. p 8. [Online] 2014. [Cited: January 13, 2015 .] .

164. KPMG Africa. Africa’s Top 10 Fastest Growing Economies. [Online] July 8, 2014. [Cited: January 12, 2015.]

165. Kofi Annan and Sam Dryden. Food and the Transformation of Africa; Getting Smallholders Connected. pp. 124,125,126,128,129. [Online] Foreign Affairs, November/December 2015 . [Cited: December 27, 2015.]

166. Prachi Patel. Sustainability: Waste Not, Want Not. p 22. [Online] Scientific American, August 2016. [Cited: September 2, 2016.]

167. Mark Eggleton. Growth and investment the key to stability, says Garnaut. p S1. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, November 4, 2016. [Cited: November 4, 2016.]

168. John Kehoe. Capitalism is in crisis, warns Bridgewater's Ray Dalio. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, September 13, 2017. [Cited: September 18, 2017.] .

169. Timothy Aeppel. Economists Debate: Has All the Important Stuff Already Been Invented? . [Online] The Wall Street Journal, June 15, 2014. [Cited: July 12, 2015.]

170. Martin Wolf. Rebellion against elites in full swing. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, February 3, 2016. [Cited: February 10, 2016.] .

171. Paul Cleary. Joseph Stiglitz compares US conditions with USSR’s final days. [Online] The Australian, October 15, 2016. [Cited: October 17, 2016.] .

172. Betsy Morris. How Apple’s iPhone revolutionised our lives. p 11. [Online] The Australian (The Wall Street Journal), June 27, 2017. [Cited: June 28, 2017.]

173. "Super Stars". The rise of the superstars, Special report: Companies. p 6. [Online] The Economist, September 17, 2016. [Cited: September 30, 2016.]

174. "Rise of Superstars". The rise of superstars, Special report: Companies. pp. 7, 16. [Online] The Economist, September 17, 2016. [Cited: September 30, 2016.]

175. Paul Cleary. Joseph Stiglitz compares US conditions with USSR’s final days. [Online] The Australian , October 15, 2016. [Cited: October 17, 2016.]

176. Special Report, Business in China. pp. 15, 16. [Online] The Economist, September 12, 2015 . [Cited: September 20, 2015.]

177. Death and transfiguration; The golden age of the Western corporation may be coming to an end. p 62. [Online] The Economist, September 19, 2015. [Cited: September 29, 2015.]

178. Lawrence Summers. World - including China - is unprepared for China's rise. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, November 11, 2015 . [Cited: November 14, 2015.]

179. Measuring economies; The trouble with GDP. pp. 21, 22, 23, 24. [Online] The Economist, April 30, 2016. [Cited: May 12, 2016.]

180. Mark McGuinness. How Did Darwin Get His Big Idea? [Online] [Cited: February 7, 2015.] .

181. Sean O'Hagan. Camera, laptop, action: the new golden age of documentary. [Online] The Guardian, Novemner 7, 2010. [Cited: May 23, 2014.]

182. Eric Hynes. We’re Living in a Golden Age of Documentary Filmmaking, 489 214 0, But you’d never know it from watching the Oscars. [Online] February 14, 2012. [Cited: August 15, 2014.]

183. Tim Dodd. “United States universities ignoring the online revolution,”. p 35. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, February 2, 2015. [Cited: February 4, 2015.]

184. UNISUM. Understanding a Misunderstand Generation, Millennial. pp. 3, 4, 8. [Online] 2015. [Cited: March 21, 2015.]

185. Sydney Finkelstein. What most bosses get wrong about millennials: The best leaders don’t go to great lengths to retain their top young employees – and it’s a strategy that leads to long-term success. [Online] BBC, September 29, 2017. [Cited: September 30, 2017.]

186. Gary Rivett. Neuroscientist Susan Greenfield warns that young brains are being re-wired by digital technology. [Online] 891 Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) Adelaide, November 20, 2014. [Cited: December 20, 2014.]

187. Ruth Ostrow. “The selfie symptomatic of the rise of a nation of narcissists”. [Online] The Australian, March 23, 2015. [Cited: March 25, 2015.]

188. Michael Shermer. “A Moral Starting Point”. [Online] Scientific American, February 2015. [Cited: March 1, 2015.]

189. Joan Acocella. “Selfie, how big a problem is Narcissism”. [Online] The New Yorker, May 12, 2014. [Cited: January 5, 2015.] .

190. Star Wars, Disney and Myth-making. p 13. [Online] The Economist, December 19, 2015 . [Cited: December 27, 2015.]

191. Gary Rivett. Neuroscientist Susan Greenfield warns young brains being re-wired by digital technology. [Online] 891 ABC Adelaide, Professor Susan Greenfield, November 20, 2014. [Cited: November 30, 2014.]

192. Earth from Space, a new documentary. [Online] produced by NOVA, PBS, February 13, 2013. [Cited: April 12, 2015.]

193. Mankind from Space, a 2 hour DVD film (or Humanity from Space with has the same content but difference ownership). [Online] Executive Producers Iain Riddick and Alan Handel. [Online] Production Executive for Discovery Canada Bruce Glawson. Producer & Director; Duncan Copp, Narrator Kasper Michaels, Original Music Mark Korven. A Canada/United Kingdom Co-production. Produce by a. [Cited: March 1, 2016.]

194. Paul Vigna. The Turning on the Gas: Global Economies Add $57 Trillion in Debt. [Online] Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2015. [Cited: February 13, 2015.]

195. Trends 2015. [Online] International Labour Organisation, January 20, 2015. [Cited: January 25, 2015.]

196. Katie Allen. Global unemployment to rise to 212 million, says ILO. [Online] The Guardian, January 20, 2015. [Cited: January 30, 2015.] .

197. “Youth employment”. [Online] International Labor Organisation (ILO), 1996-2015. [Cited: December 19, 2015.] .

198. Youth Unemployment in the EU: A Scarred Generation? . Paragraph 10. [Online] European Union Committee, 12th Report of Session 2013–14, April 10, 2014. [Cited: May 11, 2014.]

199. International Labour Organisation, 2013, “Global Employment Trends for Youth 2013, A generation at risk”. Introduction, chapter 1.1, p 5. [Online] [Cited: May 11, 2014 .] .

200. International Labour Office, Geneva, 2013. ‘Global employment trends for youth 2013: A generation at risk. [Online] [Cited: May 11, 2014.]

201. Smart products, smart makers. p 65. [Online] The Economist, November 21, 2015. [Cited: November 27, 2015.]

202. Kim Williams. Kim Williams calls News Corp leaks a festival of vengeance, Reaction to latest News Corporation leaks reveals ongoing denial about changes in the consumption of news. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, August 22, 2014. [Cited: August 25, 2014.]

203. Artificial intelligence, Rise of the machines. pp. 16, 17. [Online] The Economist, May 9, 2015. [Cited: June 12, 2015.]

204. Richard Dobbs and Catherine Livingstone. Work is changing radically and we must change with it. p 39. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, December 4, 2015. [Cited: December 5, 2015.] .

205. Casting a wide net, Developing countries are cutting fraud and waste from anti-poverty schemes. Deciding who should be eligible is harder . [Online] The Economist, January 10, 2015. [Cited: January 15, 2015.]

206. Max Roser and Esteban Ortiz-Ospina. Literacy rates around the world from the 15th century to present – Our World in Data, with data from various sources, 2015. [Online] 2015. [Cited: July 15, 2015. .]

207. Jill Treanor. Half of world's wealth now in hands of 1% of population – report. [Online] The Guardian, October 14, 2015 . [Cited: November 15, 2015.]

208. Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard. Europe’s Shattered Dream of Order: How Putin Is Disrupting the Atlantic Alliance. p 51. [Online] Foreign Affairs, May/June 2015. [Cited: July 1, 2015 .]

209. Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. Sheltered Mined. p 6R . [Online] The Australian Financial Review, September 11, 2015. [Cited: September 14, 2015.]

210. Klaus Schwab. The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What It Mean and How to Respond. [Online] Foreign Affairs, December 12, 2015. [Cited: February 12, 2016.] .

211. Tom Standage. The return of the machinery question< Special report on Artificial Intelligence. pp. 10, 13, 15. [Online] The Economist, June 25, 2016 . [Cited: July 13, 2016.]

212. SRI. Sustainable investing: Generation SRI. pp. 63, 64. [Online] The Economist, November 25, 2017. [Cited: December 3, 2017.]

213. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. [Online] Background on the UNFCCC: The international response to climate change, 2014. [Cited: July 5, 2015.] .

214. UNFCCC. UN Climate Change Conference in Warsaw keeps governments on a track towards 2015 climate agreement. [Online] UN Climate Changes Secretariat, Warsaw, UNFCCC, November 23, 2013 . [Cited: March 3, 2015.] .

215. RT. 133 countries walk out of UN climate meeting over global warming compensation row. [Online] November 21, 2013. [Cited: November 4, 2015.]

216. India Ink. India’s Negotiator Says Climate Treaty Talks “Partial Success”. [Online] November 25, 2013 . [Cited: August 12, 2015.] .

217. BBC. UN members agree deal at Lima climate talks. [Online] December 14, 2014. [Cited: December 15, 2015.] .

218. Ecosystem Marketplace. Peru Will Look For Global Commitment on Climate Change during COP 20. [Online] July 2, 2013. [Cited: June 13, 2015.]

219. David Attenborough. State of the Planet. [Online] DVD film, 2000. [Cited: February 2, 2015.]

220. Jane Wheatley. "The Life of Attenborough – a rare glimpse into the private world of Sir David". pp. 12, 15. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, on Good Weekend, July 28, July 28, 2012. [Cited: August 2, 2012.]

221. Jeff Masters. The Jet Stream is Getting Weird, at; too late to wait heading/page. Published online: 18 November 2014 | doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican1214-68, . [Online] Scientific American, , November 18, 2014 . [Cited: July 2, 2015.] .

222. "machinery return". The return of the machinery question. p 13. [Online] June 25, 2016. [Cited: June 29, 2016.]

223. "Food throw away". Clean plates; Too much food gets thrown away. [Online] The Economist, September 1, 2012. [Cited: September 5, 2015.] .

224. Tristram Stuart. “Tristram Stuart Waste,”. [Online] Cambridge University, UK. [Cited: January 13, 2016.]

225. —. Tristram Stuart Waste. [Online] Cambridge University, UK. [Cited: October 5, 2015.]

226. UNEP. Food Waste: The Facts,United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). [Online] Regional Office of North America, March 26, 2014. [Cited: October 1, 2015.] .

227. The Economist. Food Waste, Too much food gets thrown away. [Online] The Economist, September 1, 2012. [Cited: June 3, 2015.]

228. Ariya Kiratikanon. One World, on (E) Humankind survival experience and other issues. [Online] Australia, July 24, 2009. [Cited: July 3, 2015.]

229. —. One World, on (E) Humankind survival experience and other issues. [Online] July 24, 2009. [Cited: June 3, 2015.]

230. Reuters with Saudis set $500 billion plan to develop zone linked with Jordan and Egypt. [Online] October 24, 2017. [Cited: October 29, 2017.]

231. Ariya Kiratikanon. One World, on (E) Humankind survival experience and other issues. [Online] July 24, 2009. [Cited: June 3, 2015.] .

232. Valerie Volcovici and David Brunnstrom. China puts $6 trillion price tag on its climate plan. [Online] Reuters, June 23, 2015. [Cited: July 3, 2015.]

233. Cyrus Farivar. New Audi A2 electric car sets long-distance record. [Online] Deutsche Welle. [Cited: October 15, 2015.] .

234. 'Lithium brigade". Charge of the lithium brigade. conclusion end page. [Online] The Economist, May 30, 2015. [Cited: November 30, 2015.]

235. The Economist. Electrifying everything. pp. 15, 16, 17. [Online] August 12, 2017. [Cited: August 21, 2017.]

236. Justin Worland. Batteries Are the Next Target in China’s Clean-Energy Conquest. p 14. [Online] Time, October 16, 2017. [Cited: October 20, 2017.]

237. Kylie Wansink, Paul Budde, Lucia Bibolini, Peter Evans and Henry Lancaster . 2015 Global Mobile Communications - Market Insights, Statistics and Regional Trends. [Online] –see Executive Summary: The changing face of the global mobile market in 2015, BUDDECOMM (14th Edition), April 2015. [Cited: November 3, 2015.]

238. Brian Spegele. China’s State Grid Envisions Global Wind-and-Sun Power Network. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, March 30, 2016. [Cited: April 5, 2016.]

239. Volvo. Volvo: Car manufacturer goes electric, ditches vehicles powered solely by internal combustion engine. [Online] Australia Broadcasting and Corporation (ABC News), July 6, 2017. [Cited: July 10, 2017.],-ditches-cars-powered-solely-by-gas/8683850.

240. Henry Samuel. France to “ban all petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040”. [Online] The Telegraph, July 6, 2017 . [Cited: July 10, 2017.]

241. New diesel and petrol vehicles to be banned from 2040 in UK. [Online] BBC News, July 26, 2017. [Cited: July 26, 2017.]

242. Miriam Kramer. “Earth from space” Documentary Reveals Cosmic View of Our Planet. [Online] February 13, 2013. [Cited: June 8, 2015.]

243. Jim Slotek. New discovery special explores 'Mankind from Space'. [Online] Toronto Sun, April 30, 2015. [Cited: December 12, 2015.]

244. Iain Riddick and Alan Handel. Mankind from Space. [Online] a 2 hour DVD film produce by Executive Producers Iain Riddick and Alan Handel. Production Executive for Discovery Canada Bruce Glawson. Producer & Director; Duncan Copp, Narrator Kasper Michaels, Original Music Mark Korven. A Canada/United Kingdom Co-prod. [Cited: March 1, 2015.]

245. Martinus ijhofflaan. Over 5 trillion pieces of plastic currently litter the ocean, The Ocean Cleanup. 2, 2624 ES Delft. [Online] Netherlands, July-August 16-23, 2015. [Cited: December 5, 2015.] .

246. David K. A. Barnes, Francois Galgani, Richard C. Thompson and Morton Barlaz,. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments,. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0205 (summary part) . [Online] Philosophical Transaction B, The Royal Society Publishing, June 15, 2009. [Cited: February 5, 2015.]

247. Jessica A. Knoblauch. Plastic Not-So-Fantastic: How the Versatile Material Harms the Environment and Human Health:. Environment Health News. [Online] Scientific American, July 2, 2009. [Cited: June 23, 2015.] .

248. Lucy Cormack. Marine plastic pollution senate inquiry targets Australian ocean pollution. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, February 17, 2016 . [Cited: February 25, 2016.]

249. John Ross. How did they miss 2.6 trillion trees? p 3. [Online] The Australian, September 3, 2015. [Cited: September 5, 2015.]

250. China's Great Green Wall Helps Pull CO2 Out of Atmosphere. [Online] Scientific American, April 24, 2015. [Cited: September 20, 2015.]

251. GGW. The Great Green Wall Initiative 2007-. [Online] Janury 29, 2015. [Cited: July 23, 2015.] .

252. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Renewable Energy Prospect: China 2014. [Online] 2014. [Cited: February 5, 2015.] .

253. Diane Cardwell. Renewable energy starts to win on price. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, December 5, 2014. [Cited: March 5, 2015.]

254. Goodreads Inc. Charles Dawin on creature. [Online] [Cited: February 2, 2015.]

255. Alexander Robinson. Can Geoengineering save coastal cities? . p 10. [Online] New Scientist, June 13, 2015. [Cited: June 20, 2015.]

256. Nature. Extinction risk from climate change. [Online] Nature 427, 145-148 (8 January 2004) | doi:10.1038/nature02121, October 13, 2003. [Cited: July 2, 2015.] .

257. United Nations, II. The World Population Situation in 2014. Population size and growth, No. 5. [Online] [Cited: August 12, 2015.]

258. Chris Nelder. The 21st century population crash. [Online] ZDNet, September 3, 2013 . [Cited: August 12, 2015.]

259. The Economist. Africa’s population: Can it survive such speedy growth? . [Online] The Economist, August 23, 2014. [Cited: August 12, 2015.] .

260. Robert Engelman. Six Billion in Africa. Population projections for the continent are alarming. The solution: empower women. pp. 58, 62. [Online] Scientific American, February 2016. [Cited: March 21, 2016.]

261. —. Africa's Population Will Soar Dangerously Unless Women Are More Empowered, Population projections for the continent are alarming. The solution: empower women . [Online] Scientific American, February 1, 2016. [Cited: June 3, 2016.]

262. Population. OECD.Stat. [Online] OECD. [Cited: September 19, 2016.] .

263. Hungry Notes. 2016 World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics. Hungry Notes, at Number of hungry people in the world heading, 2016. [Online] 2016. [Cited: January 15, 2017.]

264. Fiona Harvey. UN: World will miss economic benefit of 1.8 billion young people. [Online] The Guardian, October 26, 2011. [Cited: June 3, 2015.]

265. Bogen. The Bogen Project. [Online] March 15, 2017. [Cited: August 31, 2017.]

266. Alex de Sherbinin, David Carr, Susan Cassels and Leiwen Jiang. Population and environment. Annu Rev Environ Resour. Author manuscript. [Online] US national library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, NCBI, PMC, December 14, 2009. [Cited: June 3, 2015.] .

267. Fiona Harvey. UN: World will miss economic benefit of 1.8 billion young people. [Online] The Guardian, October 26, 2011. [Cited: June 3, 2015.] .

268. Sorcha Pollak. Youth population of 1.8 billion opportunity to “transform countries” Nearly 142 million girls will be married before their 18th birthday by 2020. [Online] Irish Times, November 18, 2014. [Cited: May 12, 2015.]

269. Mertule Mariam, Ethiopia. The young continent, with fertility rates falling more slowly than anywhere else, Africa faces a population explosion. pp. 19, 20. [Online] The Economist, December 12, 2015. [Cited: December 22, 2015.]

270. Sacha Nauta. The new old: The economics of longevity. pp. 4, 12. [Online] The Economist, July 8, 2017. [Cited: July 15, 2017.]

271. David Attenborough. David Attenborough's Conquest Of The Skies. DVD, Series 1 Ep 1. [Online] February 8, 2015. [Cited: September 13, 2015.]

272. The Economist. Of Secrecy and stunting. p 24. [Online] The Economist, July 4, 2015 . [Cited: August 13, 2015.] .

273. Being a woman. Despite being a woman. p 29. [Online] The Economist, June 13, 2015. [Cited: July 10, 2015.]

274. "Hindutva rate". The Hindutva rate of Growth. p 32. [Online] The Economist, January 17, 2015. [Cited: February 10, 2015.]

275. Mechai Viravaidya, Public Service Hero. [Online] The Nation Multi Media. [Cited: August 10, 2016.] .

276. United Nations. Biographies. [Online] United Nations. [Cited: February 2, 2015.]

277. Greg IP. The World’s New Population Time Bomb: Too Few People. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, November 22, 2015. [Cited: November 28, 2015.]

278. Nick Harding. Sir David Attenborough: “This awful summer? We've only ourselves to blame...”. [Online] The Independent, July 14, 2012. [Cited: April 2, 2015.] .

279. CTI Reviews. American Government, Policy and Politics; “Nash equilibrium”. [Online] CTI Reviews. [Cited: October 12, 2015.],+once+armed,+has+any+incentive+to+disarm.&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjyn6zV1ojPAhWFGZQKHSWWB1QQ6AEITTAJ#v=onepage&q=Nash%20equilibrium%20in%20which%20neither%2.

280. Mary Elise Sarotte. A Broken Promise, “What the West Really Told Moscow About NATO Expansion,”. [Online] Foreign Affairs, September-October 2014 . [Cited: November 2, 2015.] 

281. AP Interview: Gorbachev says US was short-sighted on Soviets. [Online] The Canadian Press, December 13, 2016. [Cited: December 14, 2016.] .

282. Crisis in Ukraine. [Online] The Economist, June 4, 2015. [Cited: November 12, 2015.] .

283. Mac Thornberry and Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr. A Defense Strategy for the New Administration, Preserving Primacy: American Power. [Online] Foreign Affairs, August 18, 2016. [Cited: September 2, 2016.] .

284. Fyodor Lukyanov. Putin’s Foreign Policy: The Quest to Restore Russia’s Rightful Place. p 31. [Online] Foreign Affairs, May/June 12, 2016. [Cited: August 12, 2016.]

285. S.F.Heart©1997. Albert Einstein Quotes, on War and Peace heading. [Online] [Cited: October 17, 2016.] .

286. BBC . Is there a new nuclear arms race? [Online] April 14, 2015. [Cited: July 26, 2015.] .

287. Mark Urban. Is the West losing its edge on defence? [Online] BBC News, April 14, 2015. [Cited: April 30, 2015.] .

288. Nick Miller. Russia expert warns Western powers “are in the logic of 1914” on Putin, Ukraine. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, March 6, 2015. [Cited: March 18, 2015.]

289. Fyodor Lukyanov. May 4, 2016, viewed October 10, 2016). . The Quest to Restore Russia’s Rightful Place, Russia in Global Affairs. [Online] May 4, 2016. [Cited: October 10, 2016.]

290. Tom Switzer. Trump has ended Pax Americana with Tillerson nomination. p 39. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, December 15, 2016. [Cited: December 15, 2016.]

291. Nuclear Force, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). [Online] Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), 2016. [Cited: June 15, 2016.]

292. Jonathan Marcus. Arms trade: Exports grow as world crises grip. [Online] BBC News, February 22, 2016. [Cited: March 2, 2016.] .

293. The North Atlantic Treaty (NATO). [Online] NATO, Washington D.C., March 21, 2016. [Cited: June 21, 2016.] .

294. General Sir Richard Shirreff. Former NATO leader boss predicts nuclear war with Russia unless NATO steps up security in Baltic nations. [Online], May 23, 2016. [Cited: June 21, 2016.]

295. Loren B. Thompson. Why the Baltic States are Where Nuclear War Is Most Likely to Begin. [Online] The National Interest, July 20, 2016. [Cited: July 27, 2016.]

296. "Nuclear Weapon". The unkicked addiction (Briefing Nuclear weapons). [Online] The Economist, March 7, 2015. [Cited: March 13, 2015.]

297. John Glaser. The US and China can avoid a collision course – if the US gives up its empire. [Online] The Guardian, May 29, 2015. [Cited: June 13, 2015.]

298. Jacob Heilbrunn. The Interview: Henry Kissinger. [Online] The National Interest (at the beginning of part 2), August 19, 2015. [Cited: August 25, 2015.] .

299. Mihajlo Doknić. Could American Win a Nuclear War Against Russia? [Online] Russia Insider, April 2015. [Cited: May 3, 2015.]
300. Andrew C. Revkin. Hard Fact About Nuclear Winter. pp. 63, 64, 65, 67. [Online] Science Digest, 1985. [Cited: March 12, 2015.]

301. Paul Richard Huard. Revealed: The Most Powerful Nuclear Bomb Ever. [Online] The National Interest, August 16, 2015. [Cited: August 25, 2015.]

302. Gideon Rachman. The nuclear gun is back on the table. [Online] Financial Times, November 17, 2014. [Cited: January 28, 2015.]

303. Brendan Nicholson. West “blind to nuclear threat posed by Putin”. p 4 . [Online] The Australian, July 22, July 22, 2015. [Cited: July 28, 2015.]

304. Peter King. Undermining Proliferation: Nuclear Winter and Nuclear Renunciation. The Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Working Paper No. 09/1. [Online] The University of Sydney, October 2009. [Cited: February 24, 2015.] .

305. The Editors. Nuclear War Should Require A second Opinion: Leaving the decision to strike to the president alone is dangerous. editor page. [Online] Scientific American, August 2017. [Cited: September 12, 2017.]

306. Caitlyn Gribbin. Paul Keating warns Australia to prepare for the “rise of China” with strong foreign policy. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), August 31, 2016 . [Cited: September 5, 2016.]

307. ICAN. Nuclear arsenals. [Online] International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear weapons (ICAN), 2016. [Cited: June 21, 2016.] .

308. Sam Perlo-Freeman, Aude Fleurant, Pieter D. Wezeman and Siemon T. Wezeman for SIPRI. Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2015. [Online] International Relations and Security Network (ISN) ETH Zurich, 2016. [Cited: April 25, 2016.] .

309. Go home, Yankee, The presence of American troops on foreign soil is growing more controversial. [Online] The Economist, August 13, 2016 . [Cited: August 23, 2016.]

310. Jules Dufour. The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases. [Online] The Global Deployment of US Military Personnel, September 20, 2015. [Cited: March 2, 2016.] .

311. Chris Bowlby. Could a war in space really happen? [Online] BBC News, December 19, 2015. [Cited: December 28, 2015.]

312. Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space. [Online] Federation of American Scientists (FAS), 2013. [Cited: February 23, 2015.] .

313. Damon Kitney. NSA boss: We lost trust with allies after Snowden leaks. p 6. [Online] The Australian, March 5, 2015. [Cited: March 15, 2015.]

314. Nuclear weapons; Cruise control. p 29. [Online] The Economist, January 23, 2016. [Cited: January 30, 2016.]

315. Albert Einstein Quotes. Albert Einstein Quotes. War and Peace heading. [Online] [Cited: October 17, 2016.] .

316. William J. Broad and David E. Sanger. Race for Latest Class of Nuclear Arms Threatens to Revive Cold War. [Online] The New York Times, April 16, 2016. [Cited: April 25, 2016.] .

317. David M. Edelstein and Ronald R. Krebs. Delusions of Grand Strategy. pp. 1, 114, 115. [Online] Foreign Affairs, November/December 2015. [Cited: January 12, 2015.]

318. Global conflicts “cost 13% of world GDP”. [Online] BBC, June 17, 2015. [Cited: July 17, 2015.] .

319. Dwight. D. Eisenhower. “The Chance for Peace” Address Delivered Before the American Society. [Online] Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953. [Cited: March 12, 2015.] .

320. The IT Goliath you barely know. p 34. [Online] The Weekend Australian (The Economist), July 29-30, July 29-30, 2017. [Cited: July 31, 2017.]

321. Steven C. Combs. Sun-Zi and the art of war: The rhetoric of parsimony (2000), Quarterly Journal of Speech. p 277. [Online] the Department of Communication Studies, Layola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA, June 5, 2009 . [Cited: July 2, 2015.]

322. Joshua J. Mark. Sun-Tzu, Definition. [Online] Ancient History, January 4, 2013. [Cited: March 4, 2015.]

323. The Huffington Post. Somalia Faces Famine Threat, 3 Million People In Need Of Aid: UN. [Online] UN, October 29, 2014. [Cited: February 2, 2015.] .

324. Raymond Zhong and Peter Kenny. WTO Fails to Ratify Trade Agreement Failure to Reach Compromise with India Over Agricultural Subsidies deals low to WTO. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014. [Cited: September 12, 2014.]

325. Food security is a basic right, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United nations. [Online] FAO. [Cited: October 12, 2015.] .

326. Tristram Stuart. Food Waste Fact, UK reports of food waste around the world. [Online] Trinity University 2009, 2009. [Cited: August 2, 2014.] .

327. —. The Global Food Waste Scandal, Global Feedback Ltd. [Online] Feedback Founder Tristram Stuart. [Cited: August 12, 2015.]

328. —. The Global Food Waste Scandal, Global Feedback Ltd. [Online] Feedback Founder Tristram Stuart. [Cited: August 2, 2015.]

329. Michael Le Page. Farming has made GMOs For millennia. p 14 . [Online] New Scientist, March 12, 2016. [Cited: November 2, 2015.]

330. Greens leader Richard Di Natale questions party’s GM food ban. p 1. [Online] The Australian, January 7, 2016. [Cited: January 10, 2016.]

331. Genetically Modified Foods. Genetic Science Learning Center. [Online] University of Utah. [Cited: September 14, 2016.]

332. Global Warming: News, Facts, Causes & Effects. [Online] Live Science. [Cited: February 2, 2015.] .

333. Hugh Pennington. Ebola outbreak shines light on enemies at our door. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, at Wind-borne challenges header, October 17, 2014. [Cited: October 25, 2014.]

334. Paul Farmer Diary. London Review of Books. pp 38-39. [Online] Vol. 36 No. 20 , October 23, 2014. [Cited: October 2, 2015.]

335. WHO. The World Health Organization (WHO). p 2. [Online] June 4, 2015 . [Cited: March 23, 2015.] .

336. Global Institute for Water Security. Research at the Global Institute for Water Security focuses on the following interdisciplinary themes to address challenges of local, regional and global significance. [Online] University of Saskatchewan, Canada, 2016. [Cited: September 12, 2016.] .

337. Bill Clinton's role in Israeli-Palestinian Peace Accords. [Online] Gale Student Resources in Context, 2011. [Cited: October 2, 2015.]

338. Ron Kampeas. Where the Obama-Netanyahu relationship went wrong. [Online] The Times of Israel, June 2, 2015. [Cited: July 10, 2015.] .

339. Amina R. Chaudary. The Crash of Civilisation revisited. interviewing Professor Samuel P. Huntington. [Online] digitalNPq, Islamica Magazine, winter 2007. [Cited: November 2, 2015.] .

340. Somini Sengupta. 60 Million People Fleeing Chaotic Lands, UN Says. [Online] The New York Times, June 18, 2015. [Cited: July 12, 2015.]

341. Migration from Africa: No wonder they still try. [Online] The Economist, May 31, 2014 . [Cited: July 12 , 2014.]

342. "Somali piracy". The economic consequences of Somali piracy in the Mediterranean region. [Online] Mediterranean Affairs, February 2, 2015 . [Cited: May 2, 2015.]

343. "Dark side". The dark side. [Online] The Economist, March 14, 2015. [Cited: May 12, 2015.]

344. Rory Cellan-Jones. Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind. [Online] BBC, December 2, 2014. [Cited: January 15, 2015.] .

345. Why is the South China Sea contentious? [Online] BBC News, July 12, 2016. [Cited: July 18, 2016.] .

346. Profile: Dokdo/Takeshima islands. [Online] BBC, August 10, 2012. [Cited: July 18, 2016.] .

347. How uninhabited islands soured China-Japan ties. [Online] BBC, November 10, 2014. [Cited: November 12, 2015.]

348. "Rate of Growth" . The Hindutva rate of Growth (Banyan). p 32. [Online] The Economist, January 17, 2015. [Cited: May 12, 2015.] .

349. In Depth: The future of Kashmir? [Online] BBC, 2016. [Cited: September 18, 2016.]

350. Kelsey Davenport. Chronology of US-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy. [Online] Arms Control Association, August 2016. [Cited: September 2, 2016.]

351. Donald K. Yeomans. Near-earth objects: Finding Them Before They Find Us book. [Online] Princeton University Press Release, December 5, 2012. [Cited: July 4, 2014.] .

352. —. Near-Earth Objects: Finding Them Before They Find Us book. [Online] Princeton University Press Release, December 5, 2012. [Cited: July 4, 2014.]

353. Jesse Emspak. What we would actually do to stop a “doomsday” asteroid. [Online] BBC, May 11, 2016. [Cited: July 4, 2014.]

354. Tommaso Sgobba and Isabelle Rongier editors. Space Safety is No Accident. pp. 50, 52. [Online] The 7th IAASS Conference, Springer 2016. [Cited: April 4, 2015.]

355. Olivia Solon. Killer robots? Musk and Zuckerberg escalate row over dangers of AI. [Online] The Guardian, July 26, 2017. [Cited: August 5, 2017.]

356. Rob Edwards. Book review: how to get rid of biological and nuclear weapons. p 51. [Online] NewScientist, December 9, 2014 . [Cited: April 1, 2015.]

357. Rhys Blakely Washington, Bruno Waterfield Brussel. Alarm at Obama wish to ban first nuclear strikes. [Online] The Times, August 16, 2016. [Cited: August 28, 2016.]

358. Global Zero, A world without nuclear weapons. [Online] Global Zero 2014, 2014. [Cited: March 21, 2015.]

359. Mikhail Gorbachev. Mikhail Gorbachev: “It All Looks as if the World Is Preparing for War”. [Online] Time, January 26, 2017. [Cited: January 31, 2017.]

360. Tadateru Konoe. A cold war wind is blowing once more. p 14. [Online] The Australian, June 16, 2017. [Cited: June 16, 2017.]

361. Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard. Europe's Shattered Dream of Order: How Putin Is Disrupting the Atlantic Alliance. p 103. [Online] Foreign Affairs, Fault Lines heading, May/June 2015. [Cited: June 30, 2015.]

362. Kelsey Davenport. UN Security Council Resolutions on Iran. [Online] Arms Control Association, October 2015. [Cited: November 2, 2015.]

363. Iain Riddick and Alan Handel. Humanity from space premiered Tuesday. [Online] Mankind from Space, a 2 hour DVD film produce by Executive Producers Iain Riddick and Alan Handel. Production Executive for Discovery Canada Bruce Glawson. Producer & Director; Duncan Copp, Narrator Kasper Michaels, Original Music Mark Korven. A Canada/Un, July 21, 2015. [Cited: June 8, 2016.]

364. Suzanne Goldenberg. Climate change inaction pushes “doomsday clock” closest to midnight since 1984. [Online] The Guardian, US environment correspondent, January 23, 2015. [Cited: March 9, 2015.]

365. IMF. Globalisation: A Brief Overview. [Online] IMF, May 2008. [Cited: March 23, 2014.]

366. Steger, Manfred. Globalisation: A Very Short Introduction. p 11. ISBN 978-0-19-955226-9. [Online] New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. [Cited: June 5, 2015.]

367. Manfred Steger. Dimension of Globalisation. [Online] Oxford University Press, New York, 2009. [Cited: September 25, 2017.]

368. New world encyclopedia. Globalisation. [Online] [Cited: May 12, 2015.] .

369. Michael Hendrix. The new era of Globalisation. [Online] US Chamber Foundation, February 1, 2012. [Cited: June 12, 2014.] .

370. Ha Joon Chang. 23 Things They Don’t Tell You about Capitalism. p 40. [Online] Penguin book 2011, 2011. [Cited: Decenber 5, 2014.]

371. Jim O’Neill. In Defense of Globalisation. [Online] Project Syndicate, January 17, 2017. [Cited: February 17, 2017.]

372. Alfred Romann. Anchored to a vision. [Online] China Daily, Asia, October 31, 2014. [Cited: November 4, 2014.]

373. UNWTO7. World Tourism Organization UNWTO7, 2011. “UN comes together to promote tourism for development,”. [Online] UNWTO7, April 2011. [Cited: December 3, 2014.] .

374. World Tourism Organisation UNWTO. International tourism hits one billion. [Online] World Tourism Organisation UNWTO, December 12, 2012. [Cited: December 3, 2014.]

375. The Australian. Priceline: the IT Goliath you barely know. [Online] The Australian (The Economist), July 29, 2017. [Cited: July 30, 2017.]

376. Virginia Harrison. Why millennials are the next tourism frontier. [Online] BBC, August 11, 2017. [Cited: August 13, 2017.]

377. The Australian Business Review. Priceline: the IT Goliath you barely know. [Online] The Australian Business Review, (The Economist), July 29, 2017. [Cited: August 3, 2017.]

378. Ben Potter. Workplace and Productivity: Globalisation – when worlds collide. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, December 10, 2015. [Cited: December 13, 2015.]

379. Nathan Gardels. The Rise and Fall of America's Soft Power. p 8. [Online] NPQ, Winter 2005, Winter 2005. [Cited: July 5, 2015 .] .

380. Stephen Roach. How to protect the gains of Globalisation. p 36. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, July 27, 2016. [Cited: July 27, 2016.]

381. Paul Kennedy. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers and Imperial overstretch? summarised on pages 438-9. [Online] Yale University and The Economist, June 27, 2002. [Cited: June 2, 2015.]

382. Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz. The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion, and Much More. [Online] The Washington Post, March 9, 2008. [Cited: March 14, 2014.]

383. Henry Kissinger. World Order (Book). [Online] review by Los Angelis Review of book, by Jim Sleeper, October 8, 2014. [Cited: October 20, 2014.]

384. Daniel Munevar and Eric Toussaint. The Debt of Developing Countries: The Devastating Impacts of IMF-World Bank “Economic Medicine”: Millennium Development Goals The Failure of the Debt System. [Online] Global Research, CADTM, October 11, 2013. [Cited: April 13, 2014.]

385. John Perkins. Confession of an Economic Hit Man book. Preface page IX. [Online] HFRRETT-KnEHLER Publishers. Inc. San Francisco, a BK Currents book, Copyright (c) 2004 by John Perkins. [Cited: February 2, 2015.] .

386. Debt forgiven. Report Post. [Online], 2016, 2016. [Cited: January 4, 2016.]

387. Doyle McManus. What Americans really want in the foreign policy. [Online] Los Angeles Times, May 3, 2014. [Cited: May 10, 2014.]

388. Francis Fukuyama. “America in Decay, the Sources of Political Dysfunction”. [Online] Foreign Affairs, September-October, 2014. [Cited: November 21, 2014.]

389. Ariya Kiratikanon. One World. Chapter 13. [Online] July 24, 2009. [Cited: November 1, 2015.] .

390. GPF. The Down side of the G8 Debt Deal. [Online] Global Policy Forum (GPF), July 8, 2005. [Cited: November 21, 2014.] .

391. Hilary Benn, MP. If not now, when? Urgent recommendations on debt cancellation for a strong and prosperous Africa. p 7. [Online] NGOs and academics, and from the Secretary of State for International Development, February 16, 2004. [Cited: June 23, 2014.] .

392. Blame the creditors. 2014 report. [Online] Global Policy Forum, New York. [Cited: May 11, 2015 .]

393. Heavily Indebted Poor Countries. Debt Relief Under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative. [Online] IMF, September 20, 2016. [Cited: November 8, 2016.] .

394. Henry Farrell and Martha Finnemore. The End of Hypocrisy American Foreign Policy in the Age of Leaks. [Online] Foreign Affairs, November/December 2013. [Cited: January 10, 2014.] .

395. Ben Potter. Life after Snowden, I spy with my big eye. p 1. [Online] The Australian Financial Review Weekend, December 27, 2013- January 2, 2014. [Cited: January 5, 2014 .]

396. Eric Brown. The Biggest Threat To World Peace Is ... America? from WIN and Gallup International. [Online] International Business times, February 1, 2014. [Cited: April 9, 2014.] .

397. UN. Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. [Online] Adopted by General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), December 14, 1960. [Cited: December 2, 2015.]

398. Francis Fukuyama. Francis Fukuyama: “Americans are not very good at nation-building”. [Online] The Guardian, May 23, 2011. [Cited: June 12, 2014.] .

399. Ian Bremmer. Superpower: Three Choices for America's Role in the World. pp. 19, 20. [Online] Time, June 1, 2015. [Cited: June 12, 2015.]

400. Billy Corriher. Partisan Judicial Elections and the Distorting Influence of Campaign Cash. [Online] Center for American Progress, 2012. [Cited: April 25, 2015.]

401. Charles W. Calomiris and Stephen H. Haber. Why Banking Systems Succeed --- and Fail. [Online] Foreign Affairs, November-December 2013. [Cited: January 10, 2015.]

402. Wikipedia, 2015. List of Recessions in the United States. [Online] Wikipedia, 2015, 2015. [Cited: September 12, 2015.] .

403. Tejvan Pettinger. Washington consensus – definition and criticism. [Online] Economics Help, April 25, 2013. [Cited: March 12, 2014.]

404. Ha Joon Chang. 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism book. p 63. [Online] October 2011. [Cited: July 2, 2014.]

405. Jakril Hoque. The Washington Consensus: Chile and Argentina. [Online] [Cited: December 2, 2015.]

406. Ha Joon Chang. 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism. p 125. [Online] October 2011 . [Cited: March 12, 2014.]

407. Marian Wang. What’s happening with That Solar Company Scandal? Here’s Our Guide on Solyndra. [Online] ProPublica, September 15, 2011. [Cited: September 1, 2015.]

408. Christopher Chantrill. usgovernment debt. US. [Online] January 20, January 20, 2016. [Cited: February 2, 2016.] .

409. Chris Hamilton. Fundamentally Flawed, How the US, EU, UK, and Japan are delaying the Inevitable Bankruptcy. pp. 10, 12, 14. [Online] 2015, February 2015. [Cited: May 2, 2015.]

410. Kevin Phillips. Bad Money, Reckless Finance, Failed Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism. pp. 27, 28. [Online] 2009. [Cited: November 23, 2014.]

411. Kevin Danaher . American Dream? Globalisation and the Downsizing of the American Dream. [Online] Global Exchange, 2015. [Cited: December 12, 2015.]

412. Rana Foroohar. Mad as Hell, All Over Again. p 42. [Online] Time, October 13, 2014. [Cited: October 20, 2015.]

413. The Economist. Criminalising the American company: A Mammoth guilt trip. pp. 19, 21. [Online] The Economist, August 30, 2014. [Cited: September 15, 2014.]

414. Francis Fukuyama. America Decay: The Sources of Political Dysfunction. [Online] Foreign Affairs, September/November 2014. [Cited: November 15, 2014.]

415. David Leonhardt and Kevin Quealy. The American Middle Class Is No Longer the World’s Richest. [Online] The New York Times, April 22, 2014. [Cited: May 12, 2014.]

416. The US Homeless. The 2013 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress. p 5. [Online] The US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and Development, 5, viewed June 24, 2014. [Cited: June 24, 2014.]

417. Homeless report. Homelessness in the US. [Online] National Student Campaign Against Hunger and Homelessness, 2016. [Cited: July 2, 2016.] .

418. Ronald Ingle hart. Inequality and Modernisation, Why Equality Is Likely to Make a Comeback. p 8. [Online] Foreign Affairs, January/February 2016 . [Cited: March 30, 2016.]

419. Thomas Gabe. Poverty in the United States: 2013. [Online] January 29, 2015. [Cited: February 20, 2015.]

420. Prison study. International Centre for Prison Studies 2014. [Online] 2014. [Cited: September 10, 2014.]

421. VSB military. United States Armed Forces 2015 - Most Expensive Armed Forces in the World. [Online] US Military Power 2015, 2015. [Cited: December 2, 2015 .] .

422. Gary D. Halbert. Is The Economic Recovery Stalling? [Online] ProFutures, April 24, 2012. [Cited: March 23, 2014.] .

423. Nicholas Eberstadt. America’s unseen social crisis: men without work. p 18. [Online] Time, October 3, 2016. [Cited: October 12, 2016.]

424. Jens Manuel Kroonstad and Jeffrey S. Passel. Five facts about illegal immigration in the US. [Online] Pew Research Center, November 18, 2014. [Cited: December 12, 2014.] .

425. The Economist. The problem with profits: Big firms in the United States have never had it so good. Time for more competition. p 11. [Online] The Economist, March 26, March 26, 2016, p 11, viewed April 10, 2016. [Cited: April 10, 2016.]

426. —. Too much of a good thing: profits are too high. America needs a giant dose of competition. pp. 23, 24, 25. [Online] The Economist, March 26, 2016. [Cited: April 12, 2016.]

427. Lee Fang. Where have all the Lobbyists Gone. [Online] The Nation, February 19, 2014. [Cited: March 10, 2014.]

428. Farlex, 2015. Lobbying, the process of influencing public and government policy at all levels: federal, state, and local. [Online] The Free dictionary, November 21, 2015. [Cited: November 30, 2015.]

429. google. Lobby. [Online] ff200_chart_final, April 2016. [Cited: April 28, 2016.]

430. Brad Plumer. The outsized returns from lobbying. [Online] The Washington Post, October 10, 2011. [Cited: October 20, 2014.]

431. Lee Drutman and Steven Teles. Why Congress Relies on Lobbyists Instead of Thinking for Itself: Its lack of long-term expertise forces legislators to rely on special interests, or defer to bureaucrats, instead of making independent decisions. [Online] The Atlantic, March 10, 2015. [Cited: May 12, 2015.] .

432. Lianna Brinded. IRRC Reveals 25% of US Public M&A Deals Involve Insider Trading. [Online] International Business Times, June 17, 2014. [Cited: June 25, 2014.] .

433. Catels. Cartels just one more fix. [Online] The Economist, March 29, 2014. [Cited: May 12, 2014.]

434. Lee Drutman. How Corporate Lobbyists Conquered American Democracy. [Online] The Atlantic, April 20, 2015. [Cited: May 10, 2015.]

435. Dwight D. Eisenhower. [Online] Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library, Museum & Boyhood Home, January 1, 1961. [Cited: April 2, 2015.] .

436. Evangeline Marzec. What Is Corporate Lobbying? [Online] The Houston Chronicle, Chronicle Chrono, Demand Media, 2015. [Cited: March 13, 2015.] .

437. Ian Millhiser. Mitch McConnell: We Must Rewrite The Constitution Because “Elections” Haven’t “Worked”. [Online] Think progress, July 13, 2011. [Cited: July 12, 2014.] .

438. John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge. The State of the State: The Global Contest for the Future of Government. [Online] Foreign Affairs, July/August 2014. [Cited: September 23, 2014.]

439. Healthcare. Healthcare, Source; Modify World Health Organisation. [Online] (WHO) 2012 report. [Cited: March 15, 2015.]

440. Health-care fraud. Health-care fraud: The $272 billion swindle, Why thieves love America’s health-care system. [Online] The Economist, May 31, 2014. [Cited: June 12, 2014.] (Health-care fraud: The $272 billion swindle, Why thieves love America’s health-care system, The Economist, May 31st, 2014, viewed June 12, 2014). 

441. Terry Frieden. Merck to pay $950 million for illegal marketing of Vioxx, the US Justice Department (FDA) report. [Online] CNN, November 23, 2011. [Cited: June 21, 2014.] .

442. Nick O'Malley. Multibillion-dollar lobbying caused Daraprim price hike: analysis. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, September 23, 2015. [Cited: September 27, 2015.]

443. The Economist. Zombie patients drug fraud. p. 68. [Online] The Economist, June 21, 2014. [Cited: June 29, 2014.]

444. Joseph Walker. Drugmakers Point Finger at Middlemen for Rising Drug Prices. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, October 3, 2016. [Cited: October 28, 2016.]

445. Matthew C. Taibbi book. “The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap”. [Online] Washington Post, review by Hedrick Smith, April 11, 2014. [Cited: June 25, 2014.] .

446. The Economist. Tacking tax evasion, America the not so brave. p 62. [Online] The Economist, May 23, 2015 . [Cited: June 12, 2015.]

447. Tax havens. Tax havens, The missing $20 trillion. [Online] The Economist, February 16, 2013. [Cited: May 21, 2014.]

448. Tom Allard. Global tax avoidance - a trillion dollar evil. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, February 21, 2014. [Cited: February 25, 2014.]

449. Chiara Albanese, David Enrich and Katie Martin. Six Lenders to Pay a Total of $4.3 Billion to Resolve Allegations of Foreign-Exchange Manipulation. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, November 12, 2014. [Cited: November 18, 2014.] .

450. The Economist. Financial Crimes, Unfair cop, America’s approach to punishing financial crime is muddled, lenient and self-defeating. [Online] The Economist, May 23, 2015. [Cited: June 12, 2015.]

451. Panama papers. The Guardian view on the Panama Papers: secret riches and public rage. [Online] The Guardian Editorial, April 5, 2016. [Cited: April 15, 2016.]

452. Oxfam. US firms stash $1.9 trillion in offshore tax havens: Oxfam. [Online] The Strait Times, April 15, 2016. [Cited: April 20, 2016.] .

453. Joseph E. Stiglitz and Mark Pieth. Joseph E. Stiglitz and Mark Pieth: Why We Left the Panama Commission. [Online] Time, August 10, 2016 . [Cited: August 24, 2016.]

454. Michael Ignatieff. The authoritarians of their own good fortune . [Online] The Australian Financial Review, July 23, 2014. [Cited: July 30, 2014.]

455. Aviva Shen. Even Obama’s Ambitious New Infrastructure Proposal May Not Be Enough To Save Our Roads And Bridges. [Online] Think Progress, February 26, 2014. [Cited: January 12, 2017.]

456. America’s crumbling infrastructur. America’s crumbling infrastructure: Bridging the gap. p 31. [Online] The Economist, June 28, 2014. [Cited: July 13, 2014.]

457. Thomas Jessen Adams. Importing US model will be a recipe for disaster. [Online] The Australian, May 21, 2014. [Cited: May 29, 2014.]

458. Frank Bruni. The Elite Squeeze: the schools appear more exclusive than ever. But a high-quality education has never been easier to find. p 33. [Online] Time, March 30, 2015. [Cited: April 13, 2015.] March 30, 2015, .

459. Peg Tyre. The Math Revolution. [Online] The Atlantic, March 2016. [Cited: May 23, 2016.] .

460. Tim Dodd. United States universities ignoring the online revolution. p 35. [Online] The Australian Financial Review, February 2, 2015, p 35. [Cited: March 13, 2015.] .

461. David Rothkopf . Disconnected, as technological development shifts into hyper-speed, governments remain stuck in neutral. [Online] Foreign Policy group, March 17, 2014. [Cited: April 13, 2014.] .

462. Francis Fukuyama. America in Decay, The Sources of political Dysfunction. [Online] Foreign Affairs, September/October 2014. [Cited: November 20, 2014.]

463. Michel Scherer. Immune Deficiency: Why a measles vaccine has presidential wannabes talking in code. p 10. [Online] Time , February 16, 2015 . [Cited: March 1, 2015.]

464. The Economist. Milking taxpayers. As crop prices fall, farmers grow subsidies instead. [Online] The Economist, February 14, 2015. [Cited: March 22, 2014.]

465. James Owen. Evolution Less Accepted in US than Other Western Countries, Study Finds. [Online] National Geographic News, August 10, 2006. [Cited: April 12, 2014.]

466. Jordan Weissmann. How America's Minimum Wage Really Stacks Up Globally. [Online] The Atlantic, September 2, 2013. [Cited: November 23, 2015.]

467. Joan Acocella. Selfie, how big a problem is narcissism . [Online] The New Yorker, May 12, 2014. [Cited: May 22, 2014.] .

468. Dwight D. Eisenhower. Social security. [Online] Goodreads. [Cited: October 2, 2015.]

469. Jules Dufour. The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases; the Global Deployment of US Military Personnel, from; II. More than 1000 US Bases and/or Military Installations. [Online] Global Research, November 15, 2014. [Cited: November 27, 2014.]

470. Dwight D. Eisenhower. Dwight D. Eisenhower; address before the American Society of Newspaper Editors. [Online] Statler Hotel, Washington, DC, April 21, 1956. [Cited: July 22, 2014.]

471. Robert Litan. Start-Up Slowdown; How the United States Can Regain Its Entrepreneurial Edge. pp. 49,50. [Online] Foreign Affairs, January/February 2015. [Cited: March 25, 2015.]

472. Philip K. Howard. Fixing Broken Government: Put Humans in Charge. [Online] The Atlantic, September 12, 2014. [Cited: October 12, 2014.]

473. Paul Krugman. No Big Deal. [Online] The New York Times, february 27, 2014. [Cited: March 5, 2014.]

474. Joseph E. Stiglitz. On the Wrong Side of Globalisation. [Online] The New York Times, March 15 2014. [Cited: March 27, 2014.] .

475. Lynn A. Stout. Why we should stop teaching Dodge v. Ford. Volume 3 Spring 2008, Number 1, pp. 165, 166,. [Online] Cornell Law Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship and Virginia Law & Business Review, Spring 2008. [Cited: February 10, 2017.]

476. Walter Isaacson. World Order book; Henry Kissinger Reminds Us Why Realism Matters. [Online] Time, September 6, 2014. [Cited: September 19, 2014.]

477. The Economist. Briefing American Democracy; Powering down. p 24. [Online] The Economist, November 8, 2014. [Cited: November 23, 2014.]

478. Clive Crook. America’s Tolerance Problem. [Online] Bloomberg, January 25, 2015. [Cited: February 10, 2015.] .

479. Robert Litan. Start-Up Slowdown; How the United States Can Regain Its Entrepreneurial Edge. pp. 47, 48. [Online] Foreign Affairs, January-February 2015. [Cited: March 12, 2015.]

480. Government Corruption. Judicial Watch-Breitbart Poll: 77% of Americans Concerned about Government Corruption; Majority See it Getting Worse, , . . [Online] Judicial Watch, December 26, 2013. [Cited: June 12, 2014.]

481. Neal Gabler. The secret shame of middle-class Americans. [Online] The Atlantic, May 2016. [Cited: June 30, 2016.]

482. Dwight D. Eisenhower . Dwight D. Eisenhower quotes. [Online] Goodreads. [Cited: July 22, 2014 .]

483. Charles Murray. Trump’s America. [Online] The Wall Street Journal, February 12, 2016. [Cited: February 14, 2016.] .

484. David John Marotta. What Is Rent Seeking Behavior . [Online] Forbes, February 23, 2013. [Cited: March 2, 2015.] .

485. David R. Henderson. Rent Seeking. [Online] The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics. [Cited: Jauary 10, 2015.] .

486. Tom Switzer. Disillusion and dislike of Hillary Clinton: how Donald Trump can win. [Online] The Sydney Morning Herald, September 18, 2016. [Cited: December 1, 2016.]

487. BBC news. David Remnick: Why Trump’s win is "an American tragedy," . [Online] BBC news, December 17, 2016. [Cited: December 18, 2016.]

488. Paul Kelly. Centre of politics pulled apart by outsider centrifugal forces. [Online] The Australian, December 14, 2016. [Cited: December 14, 2016.]

489. BBC . David Remnick: Why Trump’s win is “an American tragedy”. [Online] BBC news, December 17, 2016. [Cited: December 18, 2016.]

490. Thomas Friedman. “America’s place in the world”. See Barack Obama’s video interview with New York Times. [Online] The New York Times, August 2014. [Cited: December 28, 2016.]

491. Most Resource-Rich. The World’s Most Resource-Rich Countries. [Online] 24/7 Wall St, April 18, 2012. [Cited: June 1, 2015.] .

492. Technopedia. Digital Revolution. [Online] Technopedia, 2016. [Cited: May 16, 2016.] .

493. Sport in America. Sport in America. [Online] US Diplomatic Mission to Germany, July 2010. [Cited: September 12, 2016.]

494. Sport in the USA. Sport in the USA. [Online] Topend Sports Network, 2016. [Cited: September 12, 2016.]

495. Francis Fukuyama and Zhang Weiwei. The China Model: A dialogue between Francis Fukuyama and Zhang Weiwei. Volume 28 #4 fall 2011. [Online] New Perspective Quarterly, Fall 2011. [Cited: June 21, 2014.] .

496. Joseph Stiglitz. How Trump Happened. [Online] The Project Syndicate, October 14, 2016. [Cited: November 14, 2016.]

497. The Economist. The problem with profits: Big firms in the United States have never had it so good. Time for more competition. p 11. [Online] The Economist, March 26, 2016. [Cited: April 10, 2016.] .

498. BBC. Should we give every homeless person a home? . [Online] BBC, April 27, 2016. [Cited: June 3, 2016.]

499. The Economist. The power of groupthink, (Special report: Trump’s America). pp. 9, 10, 11. [Online] The Economist, July 1, 2017. [Cited: July 12, 2017.]