The Washington Post covered China’s rising scientific prowess today, revealing both impressive gains and some weak spots.
China is steadily accumulating bragging points:
- China has the world’s second-fastest supercomputer.
- China has gone from 14th place in 1995 in publications in scientific and technical journals to 2nd now, behind the US.
- A Chinese institute made the largest-ever purchase of high-tech genome-sequencing machines, and with them “could very well surpass the entire gene-sequencing output of the United States.”
- More Chinese researchers are being lured back to their homeland after training in the US (raising issues around the risks and rewards of hosting so many Chinese students).
Chinese weaknesses are apparent too:
- Government bureaucrats “mandate discoveries,” completely missing the nature of innovation (and likely promoting shoddy work).
- China engages in huge amounts of junk science–the articles cites dubious stem cell therapies–and junk patents.
- Plagiarism and doctored results are commonplace — which should give Western researchers, especially those in health and pharma, pause.
Perhaps most interesting are indications that Chinese researchers are less constrained by ethical concerns than Western scientists. One Chinese geneticist mentioned in the article is studying the genomes of his most adept peers in school, comparing them to “normal kids.” If something is too controversial for the West — cloning, human enhancement, or genetic interventions, for instance — it could well end up happening in China.
The Washington Post reports that Confucianism is enjoying a revival in China, propelled both by state promotion and popular enthusiasm.
The Party, Andrew Higgins suggests, sees the philosophy as a counter to Westernization, but it is not without danger to existing power structures, as it requires rulers to be virtuous and benevolent. Still, Confucianism could fill a philosophical vacuum that the last 40 years has left in China, and provide a map for changing relationships between the government and the people.
It could also be a means that China enhances it now-weak soft power, which currently is based on little more than pragmatic utility: development that can appeal to the masses, and legitimized authoritarianism which many elites might like to emulate.
A successful, Confucian China would have real ideas to offer to much of the developing world. Large portions of Africa, Asia, and Latin America would benefit from a Confucian social contract, in which elites have strong obligations to the populace. Even without Western democracy, that would be vastly different approach from the predatory practices of many states today.
Domestically, the relationship of China’s rulers and ruled will have to evolve as well. A Chinese executive in this article suggests why: “For the past 30 years, China has constantly stressed the economy, not culture, philosophy, and reflection,” he said. “But after you reach a certain economic level, you can start to think.”
*****************************
Follow on Twitter @Geofutures
Image of Confucius courtesy Ivan Walsh (Flickr)
The powered armored battlesuit is a staple of science fiction, and is getting increasing attention from real militaries. They are the future of warfare in Friedman’s The Next 100 Years. But how close are they to reality? The science fiction site Io9 has broken down the capabilities of the battlesuit in “Iron Man,” and how much it would cost to replicate (sort of) such a suit. Their breakdown:
- Exoskeleton — $10 million
- Head-up display — $54 million
- Portable power source — $36 million
- Jet packs — $400,000
- Wearable computers — $20,000
- TOTAL: $100 million
Io9 correctly notes that this is roughly the cost of an F35 fighter plane. Given that such a suit has capabilities much greater than such a fighter plane, why aren’t we making them? Because we can’t.
- Power: We don’t have anything that can generate anything like the output of Iron Man’s power pack, so the suit would be far weaker than the movie version.
- Flight: Because of the power problem, a flying suit could not fly long or far.
- Armor: Today’s exoskeletons are not armored. Even if we could build a powerful suit, it could not stand up against even small-arms fire, much less cannons and missiles. And the more we armor present-day exoskeletons, the slower and clumsier they’d be.
On the positive side, one could build a highly capable head-up display for a fraction of $54 million, so the battlesuit wearer would be able to see which insurgent with a $200 AK-47 knockoff was going to take him down.
The power and armor problems are not insurmountable, but a battlesuit that is fast, agile, powerful, and armored still seems to be decades away.
(Image courtesy BobbyProm, Flickr)
Modern Western European societies have had the advantage of social cohesion, cultivated on the basis of relative linguistic, ethnic, and racial homogeneity, and they made that social cohesion self-reinforcing, by pursuing egalitarian economics that ironed out class differences.
As the Greek economic crisis unfolds, it becomes clear that, by forming the European Union, Europeans may have reduced their ability to act in mutual solidarity. This is most evident in the role of Germany, which, as the largest economy, would have to be the biggest source of bailout funds. “The relatively thrifty Germans” simply don’t want to help “their more free-spending Mediterranean neighbors,” as one source put it. Germans may be generous with their fellow Germans, but spending to make up for the low productivity and early retirements of Greeks is too much.
This resembles the source of a lot of American political paralysis: diversity creates the sense of otherness, people who are too different to trust, and not worth taxing oneself for.
Greece is not part of Western Europe — it’s more Balkan and Levantine — but the challenge would grow even greater with, say, Ukraine or (Gott forbid) Turkey.
“The heaviest punishment inflicted upon Greece was the control of the finances imposed at the proposal of Germany, as the Germans had been the chief sufferers of the financial crisis.” Current news? No, an account of an 1897 crisis over Crete.[1] Plus ça change.
***********************************
[1] The Book of History, Vol. XII (New York: The Grolier Society, c. 1915), p. 5212.
Image copyright FutureAtlas.com — usable with link and attribution.
The AP reported last week that some “Tea Party” leaders and Oklahoma legislators are discussing forming a militia to defend against encroachment by the federal government.
There are other indicators that extremism is finding new purchase.
In February, a man used his light plane to launch a terrorist suicide attack on a government office in Austin, Texas. He appeared to be a troubled man acting alone, but that is the case with many people who are also political terrorists, such as the Fort Hood shooter Major Hassan. Stack invoked politics directly as a motive:
I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are.
Stack is citing classic insurgency theory as well: trigger an overreaction that fuels a rebellion.
His manifesto is also highly reminiscent of much of the rhetoric emanating from factions of the Tea Party movement, which brings us to the question: is that movement symptomatic of a threat to American stability? There are a number of worrying signs:
- Scale: There has been a right wing of this ilk for decades, but this incarnation seems larger and has more tendrils into the “mainstream.” If even a tiny fraction of turned toward violence, they might number in the tens of thousands.
- Celebration of violence: Tea Partiers have formed ties with “militia” groups that have preparing for violence as their central activity.
- Lack of restraining mechanism: In the past, mainstream media and the Republican Party provided dampers on the spread of right-wing radicalism. Now, extremists can confirm their views with them own media (which includes some corporate media entities as well). And the most of the Republican Party is either silent in the face of extremism, or actively panders to or reinforces it.
- Irrationality: The strong role of anger, and the strange visions of socialism and / or fascism, are also worrying. One could have a perfectly rational (or at least reality-based, if passionate) movement that favored radically downsizing government, but this doesn’t seem to be that movement. Many seem to have headed straight for the black helicopter rabbit holes.
Foreign terrorists can do the US harm; domestic extremism is orders of magnitude more dangerous, as it can undermine fundamental stability.
And the danger does not have to involve violence: a competent and trusted government is rare in the world, and one’s of America’s biggest competitive advantages. Destroying that trust and dismantling that competence would deal a severe blow to American prospects.
The Economist held a debate earlier this week about taking military action against Iran’s nuclear program.
In favor of military action was General Chuck F. Wald, a director at Deloitte. Dr. Emily Landau, a senior research associate at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, opposed the option.
For military action
General Wald offered these forecasts:
Wired reports that the Air Force is developing tiny, armed drones.
The articles quotes a military document reporting the development of “a Micro-Air Vehicle (MAV) with innovative seeker/tracking sensor algorithms that can engage maneuvering high-value targets.” Such a system could allow precision and stealth, with small charges replacing relatively indiscriminate munitions such as the Hellfire missile.
Such systems could be enhanced much further. They might use small projectiles rather than explosives, and their targeting could be refined. Before too long, a killer MAV might even use facial recognition (with shades of the hunter-seeker anticipated in Dune).
Non-state combatants may have their own options that could rapidly equal many military capabilities. See this drone helicopter with visual feed and augmented reality gaming options for a hint.
Hobbyists have already developed model aircraft with intercontinental capabilities, and it is quite unlikely that governments are currently capable of stopping an albatross-size vehicle flying low over the ocean or a border.
Applications go beyond warfare, of course. See this post about human rights monitoring and journalism, for instance.
(Picture courtesy US Air Force)
Author Bruce Sterling offered his “State of the World 2010” on The Well this week. A few excerpts follow.
As a result of “an emergent, market-driven global financial system that was all about a faith-based market fundamentalism,” he says,
we’ve ended up with our current “It’s a Wonderful Life” Pottersville, where Rupert Murdoch plays our Mr Potter. …. Societies that are top-heavy in this way are just not gonna have major prosperity. Too much of the civil population has been fenced off from the trough. The wealth-generating capacity of the society has been short-circuited. There’s zero political will to socialize the entire planet and re-channel its currency flows, so that’s not gonna happen. Basically, the political class is waiting for the civil population to come back to the church of the free market and get over the fact that its cardinals walk in public with no clothes on.
So you’re just not gonna see a lively, vibrant scene in Pottersville. You can have a Japanese Pottersville, where everybody’s getting older and they’re building huge concrete bridges to nowhere. Or a Managed Democracy Putin-Pottersville, where everybody agrees not to say anything much about the many Potemkin aspects. You could even get some Rio de Janeiro Pottersville full of armed, dropout-ethnic shantytowns where everybody’s high on medical marijuana. But not prosperity.
Continue reading ‘Bruce Sterling’s State of the World’
Yemen has now joined the list of prominent theaters in the battle against Islamist extremism. This is no surprise to anyone who had noted its place in governance rankings.
Where next? Here’s the basic list: the 20 least-stable countries in the world, with those in play in that battle in red, and others with large Muslim populations in green.
It’s not that simple, of course, as receptivity to extremism varies widely, and recruitment can go on anywhere, as the apparent Nigerian underwear bomber illustrates, again. But this is a starter list of places that might matter in terms of instability, and where global Islamic groups might look to build safe havens.
Other than Bangladesh, they are all in Africa. Some, such as Sudan and Kenya, could serve to expand existing zones of instability. Others could provide new foci: Nigeria forms the border between West and Central Africa, and has about 60 million Muslims. Recent polling data suggests that about 26 million of these are potentially sympathetic to extremist causes.
The environment was prominent on the program of The Economist’s World in 2010 conference this week. Some particularly interesting points:
Joe Lockhart, Founding Partner and Managing Director, The Glover Park Group:
- The rest of world is going ahead on climate change. If the United States steps away from leading on climate change again, it will continue our slide away from global leadership in general.
Gary Lawrence, Urban Strategies Leader, Arup:
- People at the Chinese Academy of Sciences are telling him that “we’re using your debt” to create a green system “that will run the world.”
- Fifty-two percent of the US economy is located in coastal zones that would be affected by a one-meter rise in sea level.
Gawain Kripke, Director of Policy and Research, Oxfam America:
- Climate change is the single greatest threat to global poverty reduction.
Vijay Vaitheeswaram, Healthcare Editor, The Economist:
- New nuclear power will not be viable in Western, liberalized energy markets; only places like China where the cost of investment does not matter will be able to use it.
Twitter: @Geofutures
(Image courtesy Rob Brewer, Flickr)