Politico invited 15 futurists to make 2025 predictions, and here's my take. Most are laughable, and most the non-laughable ones aren't black swans. Only one, near the end, fits the bill.
Largest cyberattack in history? Semi-no brainer that AI could be hacked and cracked in service of a cyberattack. And, possibly, the largest in history.
A new Iran nuclear weapons deal? No fucking way, not after Trump 1.0 assassinated Soleimani.
Secessionists on the march? No, Congress is not approving an Oregon-Idaho border shift. Neither is the Oregon Lege, and maybe not Idahell's, for all I know. And, no, some off-the-wall weathervane statement by Trump ain't changing that fact on the ground, and therefore, this event won't trigger something bigger.
A new pandemic, and spreading because of wingnut reactions to COVID public health? Possible in 2025. Probable? You can't give odds on something like that. But, that doesn't make it a "black swan."
Trump-Xi alliance emerging? Yeah, a degree of rapproachment might happen, but probably not enough to call it an "alliance."
A two-state solution? No fucking way. At a minimum, Bibi will have to be voted out of office PLUS a credible non-Zionist alternative emerge on the "left" in Israel. At a maximum, the Saudis and other Gulf states will have to threaten economic action which US oil doesn't leave them fully in a position to do today. There's a reason why I mock the likes of John McLaughlin as Nat-Sec Nutsacks™, and stuff like this is it.
Market crash triggers a global panic? How big a crash? We're due for a recession in the US as I type, plus, per the Trump-Xi story, at some point, some Chinese bubbles will burst. So, not a black swan.
Climate action becomes the new norm? For whom? Shock me that this was written by climate change Obamiac Katharine Hayhoe, who has a hopey-dopey book out, too, per this section.
Unexpected geopolitical alliances and realignments? Bryndan D. Moore, tho not listed as one of the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™, comes off like one. No, Trump ain't getting some massive realignment in the Middle East and Moore doesn't mention one elsewhere. Bye.
South Korea's secret nuclear weapons program? THIS I might just buy, and for such a program to have remained secret for this long? Black swan indeed. Plausibility? S. Nathan Park is at the Quincy Institute and thus NOT one of the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™. I'd ponder this one.
An unvaccinated military? Not likely. Joint Chiefs on down would push back hard against Trump listening to Brainworm Bobby on this one.
The people of Belarus could see freedom? Highly unlikely that Aleksandr Lukashenko falls; almost certainly not happening unless Putin falls first, or Lukashenko pulls a Prigozhin and marches on Moscow. Evelyn Farkas IS a Nat-Sec Nutsacks™ and one having the female version of a wet dream, as of course, if this DID happen, NATO membership for Belarus would be mentioned next.
Loss of power? Yes, we have an aging infrastructure in Merikkka, but a Cuban or Puerto Rican event ain't happening here.
The temptation to reach for the nuclear toolbox? Interesting, Jeff Greenfield, but why focus on Russia?
Decisive breakthrough in quantum computing? Isn't this just as much just around the corner as peaceful nuclear fusion?
No comments:
Post a Comment