Dark Scorpion,
I'm not sure where to start here, but i'll start with some books you've mentioned.
1.) You mentioned George Friedman and some of his books. Here is what one astute reviewer had to say about Mr. Friedman's book, The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century:
"Everyone praises "America's Secret War" for Friedman's in-depth knowledge of both the U.S. military, and 25 years experience in studying Eurasia. However, it is a far leap to predict the next hundred years and expect to be taken seriously by applying strict geopolitical ideology to the world to the absence of any and all other significant factors and historical "twists of fate," as in a rogue nuclear weapon/s?
Either it is of no interest to him, or he has far less area of expertise in Asia itself, but to write off China in one small, vague, chapter is an enormous disservice, completely without any supporting data that by 2020 China will "destabilize." In 2008-9 the entire world banking system "destabilized" to the surprise of many, and yet China's did not, has not; and possesses the largest liquid assets on the planet, of which they have invested heavily in U.S. Treasury bonds. His lack of any mention of the New World's banking was an obvious oversight.
Additionally, his premise that, to summarize, Japan will again expand as it did prior to WWII and will again take over parts of Mainland China is laughable. China has the largest standing military in the world. No, they do not possess much of an navy, but it has more than enough aircraft to do the exact reverse, which is physically invade Japan to put an immediate stop to Japanese aggression. Boots on the ground are quite cheap, and China has lots and lots of boots. And the money to keep them there.
Does Friedman believe Nanking has forgotten? China is an excellent observer of other cultures' mistakes. When the Chinese government converted and moves into a capitalist driven economy, they did not have the problems and horrors Russia had, because they were astute observers.
China does not have a history of aggression toward other countries (if one excludes Tibet), but I live in China, and I have no fear now or in the future that Japan will ever be able to "convince" the Chinese of their need for Chinese materials and labor should be satisfied with a Japanese presence. Not in this century and not in the next.
And, finally, it is as if Africa and India have no import in the next 100 years. He does not even bother to mention them."
Kathryn O'Hehir
2.) You mentioned John Perkins books and three of his books which you have read. I have one right here in front of me that I read 3 years ago, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man:
Here's what one astute reader had to say about this book:
"For all the hype, this book fails to make the reader want to turn the pages. I labored through the first half and had to put it down. According to his description, I am an economic hit man. In reality, I work with international financial institutions to help third world and lesser developed nations where they need the help most. There is politics involved. There are government snoops interfering, sometimes playing a big role. That's because governments are involved in these transactions. We're helping a nation, not a business or a school or a small community. When governments are involved, politics is involved. Wealthy, industrialized, civilized, educated, literate, GIVING/LENDING nations don't have lending terms dictated to them by often corrupt, fighting, under-developed, fractious, very poorly managed states. If no portion of these funds were returned to the established, able and capable businesses from the lending nations, the incentives to loan would be much diminished, and the help would be much less likely to be received. If 100% of the funds were circulated within the LDC or related LDCs, a much larger % of the funds would be wasted, stolen or mismanaged and the objectives/projects would fail for lack of expertise or ready means to deploy the funds successfully in the intended projects. If the funds go solely to feeding and housing and not changing the aspects of the recipient country's hobbled economy, then there will be no later and better capacity to self-manage or to repay the funds, and again, the funds would therefore not be made available. This Perkins bloke is full of himself and apparently very ignorant of basic economic facts. He is either naive or . . . I don't know what. But, he's nothing special and his book is even less so. LDC's have a long history of defaults because they are the kind of countries that don't already have institutions and methods and tools well established that allow for proper fiscal management. The size of the loans these days, and of recent defaults and bailouts, have not been determined by the World Bank or IMF nearly as much as the demands and burdensome needs and failures and violations of terms and blatant disregard of agreements from these failed or failing economies. If the remedies are harsh, it's because the problems are out of control. Perkins is selling a bill of goods and as a subject matter expert, I am not buying. Other buyers beware and be wary of these claims."
BT Holden
I'm curious as to what you think about these observations?
Thanks, Frank
