10 lessons for a post pandemic world Fareed Zakaria 2022
The world after the pandemic
10 lessons for the post-pandemic world:The COVID-19 pandemic is not the first blow in recent human history. Wars, financial crises, terrorist attacks – all these events were accompanied by serious political and economic upheavals, but none of them, perhaps, reached such proportions.
Initially causing a local crisis, the Chinese virus has quickly become a worldwide problem. Even the most closely connected countries closed their borders, one after another government imposed the strictest lockdowns, health systems failed to cope with the load, the economic damage progressed every day – the world was on the verge of collapse.
In the short term, we still taxied. The measures taken helped to at least partially contain the increase in the incidence, and the accumulated reserves helped to support the global economy during its complete shutdown. But Farid Zakaria is confident that the “long-lasting” impact of the crisis is much more serious than temporary recession and social inconvenience . The economic and political consequences stretch for decades to come, but the time to adapt to change is now.
The pandemic has significantly accelerated the course of history. Trends originating in the recent past peaked within just a few weeks. And where there is speed, there is instability. Will this pandemic be the last one, even if we take all possible precautions from now on? Unlikely. Will we be able to stop digitalization and preserve the existing geopolitical order, ignoring the emergence of new forces? Absolutely not. This means that we must think ahead about how we will deal with growing inequality, social and international tensions, lack of resources and other challenges of the future.
Our world is organized according to the principle of “black swans” 1 – from time to time, events that are difficult to predict, which have significant consequences, occur in it. In the future, their number will only grow. Humanity has three possible responses to shock: fear, denial, and adaptation. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown how devastating the consequences can be when humanity is stuck in the first two stages. We spend billions of dollars preparing for possible military action, but we refuse to take into account something as small as a virus, even though it ends up having the most devastating impact on the world since World War II.
The modern world is like a computer network. The failure of one, the smallest element can lead to the collapse of the entire system. The difficulty is that it is simply impossible to find and neutralize all dangerous elements. Crises are inevitable, but the catastrophes associated with them can be prevented. The time has come to figure out how to adapt the current international system to the new reality and what steps will help us start this process right now.
Our world is open, dynamic, but very unstable. These are the conditions of the game: out of three characteristics – openness, speed, stability – only two can be selected at a time. For example, the dynamic and stable system of China will by definition be closed, while the open and stable systems of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires gradually declined due to their sluggishness.
An open and dynamic system brings internal tension and imbalance. Although we can predict some of the negative consequences of such a balance of power, most of them will come as a surprise to us.
For example, subsequent pandemics. Mankind is so irresponsible to the environment, as if asking for a retaliatory strike. And nature has its own remedy – viruses. AIDS, Ebola, SARS, bird flu, swine flu, and now it looks like the coronavirus came from animals. This may be the result of an atypically rapid development of new territories and the destruction of the natural habitat of many animals, and hence closer proximity to those of them that carry the infection especially quickly.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
As the American physician Larry Brilliant says, “Disease outbreaks are inevitable, but pandemics are optional . ” Yes, it is unlikely that we will be able to prevent the emergence of new diseases, but by learning how to prepare for them in advance, take the right measures at an early stage and generally respond adequately to them, we can quickly reduce the trajectory of their spread. The costs of preventing various scenarios and preparing for them are incommensurable with the economic losses that we bear in the midst of the crisis.
Economic development is also fraught with many dangers. Take meat consumption. In addition to the obvious – excessive demand for meat is very negative for both the environment and human health – there is also a less visible, but no less frightening risk: the genetic selection of farm animals (for example, increasing desired characteristics like the size of chicken breasts) has made their genes are almost identical. And the lack of genetic diversity is fraught with the erasure of immunological barriers. Simply put, agro-farms are the perfect breeding ground for pathogens.
In particular, some scientists believe that one of the main problems that humanity will face is antibiotic-resistant bacteria , which are stuffed without measure into the animals bred there. And this is against the backdrop of climate change and the increasing spread of its tropical version, which is especially friendly to the spread of viral diseases.
But these are only natural risks, and there are also purely human ones. Can humanity use disease as a weapon? Undoubtedly. Moreover, compared to nuclear weapons, bioweapons are cheaper to develop, harder to detect, but the consequences of their use can be no less devastating.
All this does not mean that we are cursed. The planet is incredibly resilient, and humanity is no less flexible. You just need to start adapting to the conditions of ever-increasing instability – and start right now. In his book 2 of the same name , Nassim Taleb proposes to create not just flexible, but antifragile systems that would become even stronger due to chaos and crises.
You can balance a dynamic system with security.
We can’t abolish all food markets, but we can regulate them by banning the sale of wild animal carcasses like lizards and bats. It is also impossible to ban the whole world from eating meat, but promoting a healthier lifestyle with reduced meat consumption will have a positive impact on human health and the environment.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
But most importantly, the world needs stronger and more resilient health systems that can freely communicate with each other and share experiences. We will not be able to defeat the global pandemic with a series of local strikes.
Lesson #2: The quality of government is more important than its quantity
All countries have dealt with the pandemic in their own way. South Korea, New Zealand and Taiwan, countries with center-left governments, responded most energetically to the outbreak. The centre-right did not lag behind: Germany, Austria and Australia also took active steps to combat the virus. The most relaxed in this regard were Mexico and Brazil, ruled by ardent populists, but Sweden, despite its center-left orientation, made the same list.
The difference between these countries lies not only in the left or right bias of the ruling party, but also in the very system of government. Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore—countries that responded quickly to the pandemic, quickly introduced mass testing, effectively tracked the infected, and significantly slowed the spread of the disease in the early stages—countries with relatively few civil servants. On the other hand, Germany, Denmark, Finland, Canada, which also successfully coped with the pandemic, have a much larger state apparatus. What does this tell us? What matters is not whether your government is big or small, center-right or center-left, but what quality it is.
For example, consider two countries: Great Britain and Greece. Anti-government ideology has flourished in the UK since the 1980s. By analogy with the United States, the country has significantly reduced the number of government agencies, and the populist Boris Johnson, who is very skeptical of experts and officials in general, has become the head of the government. His government has dealt frankly badly with the pandemic crisis, unlike the Nordic countries. And what is more remarkable – in contrast to Greece, famous for its clumsy bureaucratic machine. The fact is that in Greece the operation was led by a capable, technocratic leader who believed in science and good governance. Sometimes a difference in leadership tone is everything.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
The mere expansion or contraction of government is not enough to solve social problems. Good government has limited power and clear lines of authority. Government officials should have sufficient autonomy, freedom of action and the ability to make their own judgments. And for this it is necessary to hire bright, committed people who are ready to serve their country and receive respect and support as a reward. In Taiwan and South Korea, too, things were not always so great. Starting from corrupt dictatorships and adopting the experience of others, they managed to create their own successful models of government over several decades.It is these features that unite all countries that have successfully coped with the pandemic – the ability to learn from the mistakes of others, learn from the experience of others and draw conclusions from the history of the past.
Lesson #3: Free Markets Are Not Enough
Today, it seems to many that only the development of a free market economy can help us cope with the growing inequality and instability in the world of work caused by rapid technological innovation and international competition. However, the solution to these problems requires government intervention.
Of course, the free market provides excellent opportunities. It is incredibly dynamic and can “disperse” even a stagnant economy. In India and China, millions of people have been lifted out of poverty precisely through the development of free trade.
The market generates innovation and provides an opportunity to improve the lives of people from all walks of life. But he also has disadvantages. The free market generates not only opportunities, but also inequality, profit-centricity, the desire for monopoly. During the pandemic, we all suddenly realized that people should be rewarded for honest work, even if it does not bring instant and tangible profit . Doctors, scientists, teachers, janitors – they all perform important work, the payment of which is not yet equal to the benefits that it brings to society.
A good example of the successful integration of the state and the free economy can be found in the Nordic countries. They realized that the open market is a powerful but insufficient tool, it needs support and cushioning. By remaining open to the world and at the same time spending huge amounts of money on adapting people to new conditions, they were able to create a dynamic, democratic, sustainable and equal environment.
Denmark consistently ranks at the top of the international rankings of the well-being of citizens, largely due to its taxation policy and the subsequent distribution of the funds raised. The system is designed to generate profit through the open market and free trade. Then the state collects most of these funds and distributes them among citizens so that they have equal opportunities.
Taxes in Denmark amount to about 45% of the country’s GDP, and not only the wealthy segments of the population are heavily taxed. Sales tax is 25%, while in most European countries this figure is 20%, and in the US – only 7%. Of course, such a tax hits the poor most of all, who are forced to spend most of their income on purchases, but there are incomparably more state assistance programs for representatives of the lower and middle classes.
Yes, taxes take a significant portion of people’s income, but at the same time they work less, take more days off, spend less on education, health care, vocational retraining, and even transportation.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
The balance of job security and labor market flexibility achieved by the Nordic countries allows them to adequately fit into the modern global world and at the same time reduce the population’s anxiety about constantly changing working and living conditions.
We cannot shut down the whole world or stop global competition. We can only ride global trends with more or less success. Properly built state regulation will help establish healthy and fair competition. Tax policy should be formulated in such a way that it benefits workers, not capital. The government should invest with a vengeance in science and technology, education and professional retraining.
The main task is to help citizens meet global competition and technological transformation head on.
Lesson #4: People should listen to experts, and experts should listen to people.
In the modern world, the value of expert opinion is reduced, and there are two reasons for this:
1. Experts speak a language that people don’t understand.
2. People tend to make decisions based on pre-existing inclinations and prejudices rather than on the basis of the facts presented.
Let’s analyze each of them in more detail. It would seem that in a situation of a global pandemic, it should be clear to everyone that listening to the opinion of experts is vital . Among the states that respected and heeded the warnings of scientists were such countries as Taiwan, Germany and Greece. In Brazil, Great Britain and Mexico the situation was radically different. What makes them different?
- Transparency. By deciding to remove some restrictions in Germany, Angela Merkel clearly demonstrated on the basis of what indicators the government makes a particular decision. This gave people the opportunity to independently assess the risks and legitimacy of the requirements placed on them.
- No double standards. When the president of a country does not wear a mask and openly breaks the rules of social distancing, and officials allow themselves to not comply with the isolation rules introduced throughout the country, it is difficult to expect more reasonable behavior from the rest of the citizens. In addition, this undermines the authority of both the government and doctors who insist on certain restrictions.
- Attitude towards experts of the first persons of the country. If a president or prime minister openly states that “we’ve listened to expert opinion for a long time, and look where it got us,” the likelihood of public safety neglect is greatly increased.
In addition, science is not only universal consensus and great discoveries, but also a constantly evolving process of cognition . The problem is not that when faced with a new disease, experts repeatedly change their minds in assessing its danger, but that each such judgment is presented to the public in the form of a final verdict, which sooner or later makes people give up: “Everyone says different things, who to believe is not clear.
No expert can fully answer the question of how to overcome the pandemic. The doctor cannot estimate how the economic shutdown will affect the future of the country, or calculate the future unemployment rate. The economist will not give a clear answer when and to what extent the subway can be reopened. It is important not only to work together, but also to explain the reasons for certain decisions through joint efforts.
However, with the perception of information, everything is also not so simple. According to recent research, people make decisions based not on objective data, but on their own preferences and pre-existing beliefs . If you believe in a conspiracy theory, you will pass any incoming information through the filter of this prejudice and, no matter how reliable it may be, just confirm your own opinion. Or, say, if you are inclined to sympathize with this or that political leader, his arguments, no matter how groundless they may be, will seem to you stronger than scientifically confirmed facts.
Of course, people must learn to think critically and find really authoritative experts who are trustworthy. But experts must also learn to listen to people and answer their questions in a language they understand. The world is getting more complicated by the minute. In the future, we will need even more experts to be successful. And how these two strata interact will determine how quickly and successfully we as a society will be able to adapt to an ever-changing environment.
One of the characteristics of great social upheavals is that they amplify existing trends. Thus, the pandemic has accelerated the final digitalization of all areas of our lives. If earlier we still doubted whether online education was so effective and whether it was worth signing up for an online consultation with a doctor, then the lockdown simply left us no choice. And not only to individuals, but also to entire businesses: the largest Hollywood studios present their projects on streaming platforms, Michelin-starred restaurants deliver food to homes, and fitness clubs start YouTube channels.
And yet the main change that will affect humanity is the change of the entire working landscape. In a sense, we are experiencing a setback – industrialization severed the connection between work and home, and the technological revolution restored it. Most likely, in the near future, most companies will switch to a hybrid mode : the main work will be done remotely, and the office will remain a place for weekly meetings and brainstorms.
If we talk about industries, the pandemic has affected medicine the most . We have finally become convinced that software can handle many tasks better than humans. The program allows you to quickly automate and optimize routine processes. Machines are already helping people make diagnoses, perform surgeries, and prescribe treatments. In the near future, this trend will only intensify with the help of the development of artificial intelligence technologies.
The fact that AI has not been very effective in the fight against the coronavirus only says that this technology has its limitations, for example in a situation of lack of data. However, over time, we will have more and more digital information about various diseases, and the capabilities of AI will grow. Already, AI can determine which patients will get better and which will get worse, based on the existing patterns of the course of the disease. And ahead of us are robots that will be better than people to cope with routine tasks: unmanned vehicles will help reduce road deaths, the program will cope with legal analysis faster than a legal trainee, etc. The better robots work, the less people are needed .Therefore, specialists and scientists discussing the future of work must recognize that the future has already arrived. And it’s time for the state to seriously think about what our present will be like.
There are two possible scenarios:
1. AI is reducing the number of familiar jobs, but new ones are being created instead. The state supports those who experience difficulties in finding employment. People have more free time and technological opportunities to express themselves in creativity.
2. Current trends cover all large areas of life, but the government does not respond to them and does not develop large-scale programs to adapt to the new reality. Inequality is growing, jobs are disappearing, real incomes are stagnating, and the quality of life is declining. A small number of the rich are getting richer, and the majority are constantly getting poorer, slipping into alcoholism, drug addiction and suicidal tendencies.
We are on the verge of both scenarios. Which of them will become a reality is up to us to decide.
Lesson #6 Aristotle was right – we are indeed social animals.
People are moving to cities en masse. In 1950, only a third of the world’s population lived in cities; by 2020, more than half will be urban dwellers. The UN estimates that by 2050 more than two-thirds of all people will live in cities. Do cities pose a threat from an epidemiological point of view? On the one hand, yes. Viruses thrive in a large, busy, densely populated space. And using the example of the pandemic, we saw that people who had the means to do so tried to leave the closed cities for the countryside. The market for renting and selling houses is one of the few relatively unaffected segments.
On the other hand, it cannot be said that outside the cities the situation with the increase in the incidence was any better . On the contrary, some of the most densely populated cities coped best with the pandemic: Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei. The advantage of cities is that they quickly learn from their mistakes. The recent SARS epidemic taught them a hard lesson. Since then, the leadership has invested heavily in health and sanitation, so that they were better prepared for COVID-19 than the sparsely populated provinces.
The main lesson about cities is that they will not disappear. The process of de-urbanization is very unlikely, and exponential growth of formerly small towns is more than possible. There is nothing wrong. On the contrary, the city is the ideal form of organization of modern life. In cities, people can communicate, work, play, accumulate economic and social capital together. Aristotle was right: man is a social animal. We strive for interaction, communication, competition, and most of the really significant agreements are reached in an informal setting. In addition, for many, the city represents a safer environment: hospitals and fire stations within walking distance, highly regulated traffic, pedestrian zones and even neighborhoods, more efficient police.
It is noteworthy that by 2030, 80% of metropolitan areas will be located in developing countries. What will these cities look like? Most likely, they will follow the path of Paris. In 2020, Mayor Anne Hidalgo proposed a program according to which Paris should turn into a city where everything a person might need – pharmacies, shops, schools, cafes, business centers, clinics – will be located within a 15-minute walk from home. That is, at the management level, the metropolis will function as a single organism, but inside it will be divided into smaller communities commensurate with a person.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
We are entering a world of victorious diversity — ideas, industries, professions, companies, people. These people will have different, sometimes polar, backgrounds, they will profess different faiths, speak different languages. For a society to thrive, it needs to learn how to manage this diversity and even grow stronger at the expense of it. Cities are a natural and, perhaps, the best melting pot, so we should pay special attention to the organization of life in them.
Lesson #7: Inequality will increase
Contrary to popular belief, global inequality has been declining in recent decades. The income gap between richer and poorer nations, such as between Americans and Malaysians, has also narrowed. Even the level of inequality within countries began to stabilize for the first time after a long period of growth.
The World Bank analyzed data from 91 countries between 1993 and 2008 and concluded that 42 countries saw increases in inequality while 39 countries fell. Things only got better from 2008 to 2013: for every country where inequality rose, there were two countries where it fell. In Latin America, famous for its rigidly hierarchical societies, in 12 out of 16 countries, the percentage of greater use of general welfare has increased. This was not the case everywhere – in the richest and most successful countries, such as the United States, the gap between the rich and the poor, on the contrary, increased, but on a global scale, the trend was characterized by a decrease. The total number of people in the world living below the poverty line fell from 1.9 billion in 1990 to 650 million in 2018.10 lessons for the post-pandemic world
Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has wiped out much of that progress. After a general economic collapse, a debt crisis inevitably sets in. The United States, some European countries, Japan and China experienced a severe economic shock, but were able to cushion it by their willingness to spend resources on government support programs. These countries can borrow large amounts of money at low interest rates with relative ease. Poor countries with large debt obligations cannot do this. They will have to borrow money at even higher interest rates and pay it back quickly in rapidly depreciating local currencies, which could soon lead to hyperinflation and default.
According to various studies, over the next five years, from 70 to 430 million people will again fall below the poverty line. At the same time, the most tangible inequality – between the richest and poorest people in the world – is growing again, and at a catastrophic rate.
The difference between countries will also depend on the quality of the health care system. Many states began to open borders, but only for people from countries with a low incidence rate and high standards of medical care. And the travelers themselves will no longer want to stay in a country with a weak healthcare system for a long time, so exotic countries will again lose their attractiveness. But, for example, in Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico, the tourism industry is from 15 to 25% of GDP.
Similar processes take place in the business environment. The big players are getting bigger, the small ones languish in obscurity. Again, this is not a new trend, but the pandemic has accelerated it considerably. In recent years, large companies have been gaining more and more market share, leaving competitors far behind. Amazon, Google, Walmart, Volkswagen, Carrefour, Siemens, Alibaba, Tencent are all examples of giants constantly expanding their business internationally. During the pandemic, digital companies experienced a real boom, as even more people began to use their services, and now they are not going to refuse them. In addition, in times of great uncertainty, people tend to use the products of well-known, stable brands with an international reputation .
To partially overcome this trend, we need to develop a more creative approach to business. For example, to introduce large-scale programs of additional education and professional retraining, as well as to revise the income tax formation scheme.
Many believe that the pandemic is the final nail in the coffin of globalization. But is it? People have been opposing globalization and predicting its imminent death for decades, writing damning books and organizing entire political movements to resist this process. However, no one succeeded in turning back time.
Today, many countries have realized their dependence on foreign suppliers of medicines and medical supplies. Politicians from countries ranging from Europe to Japan to India have stated that their immediate goal is to return production to their country and reformat the supply chain, making it more flexible and manageable. But suspending tourism, closing borders and revisiting supplies is just a pause, not deglobalization , as any impediments to free trade will only slow down the recovery.
The next pandemic could be drastically different from a respiratory virus like COVID-19. Even if countries move some medical production from China to their territories, this may turn out to be a completely useless measure in the fight against future dangers. It is simply impossible to transfer all production home. It’s too expensive and not economically viable.
Instead, we need to think about creating a state stock of essential medical supplies, as is already being done with fuel stocks . In addition, companies should have their own stock of materials and tools that will allow them to maintain production until the private sector responds to the sudden demand associated with a shortage of foreign goods.
Wealth is an important but far from dominant part of most modern economies. In many cases, the backbone of the economy is the service sector, which by definition is difficult to export and is heavily regulated by the state (eg medicine). However, the main modern trend is the growth of the digital economy, and by definition it is global. Companies around the world sell their products through Amazon, Facebook and Alibaba platforms, and digital tools help them increase productivity, enhance marketing and ensure smooth delivery. The digital economy is rapidly developing, which means that globalization does not end, but only changes shape.
For a long time it was believed that no country in the world could compete with America, either in the economic or in the political space. However, today it is no longer possible to deny the power of China. The world is moving towards a bipolar system in which the two winners are far ahead of the laggards.
This balance of power was established primarily because the rise of China weakened not America, but Europe . Since 1990, the overall share of the European Union countries in the international economy has fallen from 30% to 20% and below. In the geopolitical arena, the EU, as an integral association, also cannot boast of great success. However, other countries are far from even this league. India’s economy is one-fifth of China’s, Russia’s is one-eighth.
Of course, in terms of military capabilities, China is still weaker than the United States, but in other respects – economic and technological – it is an equal rival. The tension between the countries is growing, as is their gap from other players. Does this mean that conflict is inevitable?
No. Contradictions, of course, cannot be avoided, but conflict is far from an obligatory consequence of established relations . We often build our predictions on the experience of the past.
After the Second World War, the USA and the USSR jumped ahead and almost immediately entered into a new cold war with each other. It seems logical to assume that something similar will happen now. However, Shanghai and Washington maintain much less tense relations. The Chinese model involves a bizarre mix of liberal, mercantilist economics and repressive politics. But even despite the latter, China fits much better into the accepted international order than the Soviet Union once did. The current superpowers are much more economically interconnected, which, despite their disagreements, encourages them to cooperate.
COVID-19 has forced countries to look inward. All over the world, even in the environment of traditionally united Europe, “self-interest” and “reliance on oneself” have become the main words.
The world has repeatedly faced severe trials. World War I, a global depression, the rise of totalitarianism, World War II, a nuclear attack on Japanese cities… And yet, after every major crisis, world leaders advocated increased international cooperation . People who saw with their own eyes the consequences of nationalism and the pursuit of solely their own interests, considered it their duty to build a world that would never again slide into such a competition.
All these years we have enjoyed the fruits of their labors – 75 years of relative peace on Earth, the development of democracy, the growth of respect for human rights, the radical reduction of poverty around the world. But it seems that it was the quiet life that made us cynics, devaluing the idealism that once brought us to this point .
Nationalists like to point out that international cooperation did not help us stop the pandemic. They argue that the World Health Organization, which is supposed to control such things, has not done its job well. But it is worth noting that if the lack of effectiveness of WHO’s actions speaks of anything, it is the need to strengthen international relations. WHO is a small organization with a tiny budget, whose activities are carried out through the voluntary participation of member countries. She has neither the power nor the power to influence their decisions. Nevertheless, the organization’s employees managed to collect 1.5 million test kits and send protective equipment to more than 133 countries – an invaluable help for the poorest of them.
In addition, most of the mistakes were made inside countries, not outside. The UK and America received far fewer Chinese tourists and yet fared worse than Taiwan and South Korea.
The world is changing. New forces and new alliances are emerging on the international scene, reflecting the trend towards a more diverse and distributed environment.
A multilateral world is coming to replace the multipolar world, where no country can achieve anything alone, even such strong players as the United States and China . An international system in which more countries have the right to vote will give new impetus to the development of democracy. And joining forces will help to cope with common troubles: the danger of unregulated cyberspace, environmental pollution and global warming.
Top 10 Thoughts
1. Our world is open, dynamic and very unstable. It’s time to adapt to new conditions and learn to adapt to instability, opposing it with security.
2. In the fight against international crises, it is not important whether your government is large or small, whether it is center-right or center-left, but what quality of decisions it is capable of making.
3. Growing economic inequality and instability in the world of work require intervention not only by the forces of the free market, but also by government regulation.
4. People must learn to critically select experts and listen to them, and experts must learn to speak the same language with people outside their circle. The quality of our adaptation to the new environment also depends on the quality of interaction between the two parties.
5. Digitalization and the reduction of traditional jobs are inevitable. To successfully overcome the crisis, states must develop large-scale programs of state support for citizens and the creation of new working conditions.
6. Despite the outflow of people from cities during the pandemic, the process of urbanization is unstoppable. And this is for the best, because it is the urban environment that will help society cope with the ever-increasing diversity of the world.
7. The pandemic has reinforced an already existing trend: the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. To overcome the associated crisis, it is necessary to introduce new rules for taxation and regulation of the business environment.
8. Despite the protectionist rhetoric adopted by politicians after the pandemic, globalization cannot be stopped. So, it is better to lead it.
9. The US and China are economic superpowers that have left potential competitors far behind. With such a balance of power, contradictions are inevitable, but the second cold war is more of a choice than an absolute inevitability.
10. The desire of countries for greater disunity and independence is understandable, but counterproductive : in the new, multilateral world, no country can achieve anything alone, be it China or the United States.
1. Read the summary of the book by Nassim Taleb “The Black Swan. Under the sign of unpredictability .
2. Read the summary of Nassim Taleb ‘s book Antifragility. How to capitalize on chaos” .