I think we're already there, and despite the fact you can see laws signed that would point to more surveillance, you can't ban encryption effectively. It's kinda hard to ban maths, much harder than weed or booze, and see how they went.
Point is, these laws IMO drive awareness of the issue, and everyone can just encrypt their stuff easily, and enforcement of a ban on that is near impossible.
Regionalistic Economies in place of globalism
That's the geopolitical dream of some countries ... but I don't see the current world order in trade buckling. That said, let's say that the current world order changes by the USD losing the world's biggest reserve currency status, what then? Will some countries simply not trade with others because of that? Maybe some pecking orders will rearrange themselves, but no one is interested in destroying the system, people just want their country to dictate instead of the US.
Widening wealth disparity
I don't think it can widen much more, as the pendulum swings both ways. See how socio-economic woes destabilized the US. We either fix the billionaire problem in a legal orderly fashion, or it resolves itself in an uglier way. It can't get much worse than this without social order breaking down, and then it's all moot. The rich can move to their New Zealand bunkers or the Moon to escape the mob, it's not that much different from them dying or going to prison as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
Intensified distrust of our governments
Have we ever trusted them? And to be honest, should we trust them? I mean I think governments are less untrustworthy than corporations, but still, they have power, and thus should be scrutinized. And besides, the loonies who always vote for the biggest idiot already don't trust the government. If this growing distrust results in more participation in politics from decent people who just want to live their lives, that's a good thing.
I think wealth disparity can get much worse than this. People used to be enslaved and forced into serfdom. The people on top wouldn't have to win if the people revolted, they just have to not lose and let the people who already struggle die from starvation. Such a scenario is highly unpredictable and personally I still think the people would win, but it's definitely an uphill battle that's getting harder the more we remain passive.
With all the dystopian content I've been consuming lately I'd say we're heading to an age of
Mass surveilance
Regionalistic Economies in place of globalism
Widening wealth disparity
Intensified distrust of our governments
That is if the tensions in Asia Pacific don't turn into an all out conflict ( Live in PH )
Let me be a bit more optimistic:
I think we're already there, and despite the fact you can see laws signed that would point to more surveillance, you can't ban encryption effectively. It's kinda hard to ban maths, much harder than weed or booze, and see how they went. Point is, these laws IMO drive awareness of the issue, and everyone can just encrypt their stuff easily, and enforcement of a ban on that is near impossible.
That's the geopolitical dream of some countries ... but I don't see the current world order in trade buckling. That said, let's say that the current world order changes by the USD losing the world's biggest reserve currency status, what then? Will some countries simply not trade with others because of that? Maybe some pecking orders will rearrange themselves, but no one is interested in destroying the system, people just want their country to dictate instead of the US.
I don't think it can widen much more, as the pendulum swings both ways. See how socio-economic woes destabilized the US. We either fix the billionaire problem in a legal orderly fashion, or it resolves itself in an uglier way. It can't get much worse than this without social order breaking down, and then it's all moot. The rich can move to their New Zealand bunkers or the Moon to escape the mob, it's not that much different from them dying or going to prison as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
Have we ever trusted them? And to be honest, should we trust them? I mean I think governments are less untrustworthy than corporations, but still, they have power, and thus should be scrutinized. And besides, the loonies who always vote for the biggest idiot already don't trust the government. If this growing distrust results in more participation in politics from decent people who just want to live their lives, that's a good thing.
I think wealth disparity can get much worse than this. People used to be enslaved and forced into serfdom. The people on top wouldn't have to win if the people revolted, they just have to not lose and let the people who already struggle die from starvation. Such a scenario is highly unpredictable and personally I still think the people would win, but it's definitely an uphill battle that's getting harder the more we remain passive.
This just seems like extrapolation and very likely.