Op-Ed Contributor: The Ends of the World as We Know Them
January 1, 2005
By JARED DIAMOND
Los Angeles - NEW Year's weekend traditionally is a time
for us to reflect, and to make resolutions based on our
reflections. In this fresh year, with the United States
seemingly at the height of its power and at the start of a
new presidential term, Americans are increasingly concerned
and divided about where we are going. How long can America
remain ascendant? Where will we stand 10 years from now, or
even next year?
Such questions seem especially appropriate this year.
History warns us that when once-powerful societies
collapse, they tend to do so quickly and unexpectedly. That
shouldn't come as much of a surprise: peak power usually
means peak population, peak needs, and hence peak
vulnerability. What can be learned from history that could
help us avoid joining the ranks of those who declined
swiftly? We must expect the answers to be complex, because
historical reality is complex: while some societies did
indeed collapse spectacularly, others have managed to
thrive for thousands of years without major reversal.
When it comes to historical collapses, five groups of
interacting factors have been especially important: the
damage that people have inflicted on their environment;
climate change; enemies; changes in friendly trading
partners; and the society's political, economic and social
responses to these shifts. That's not to say that all five
causes play a role in every case. Instead, think of this as
a useful checklist of factors that should be examined, but
whose relative importance varies from case to case. . . .
. . . But how long can we keep this up? Though we are the richest
nation on earth, there's simply no way we can afford (or
muster the troops) to intervene in the dozens of countries
where emerging threats lurk - particularly when each
intervention these days can cost more than $100 billion and
require more than 100,000 troops.
A genuine reappraisal would require us to recognize that it
will be far less expensive and far more effective to
address the underlying problems of public health,
population and environment that ultimately cause threats to
us to emerge in poor countries. In the past, we have
regarded foreign aid as either charity or as buying
support; now, it's an act of self-interest to preserve our
own economy and protect American lives.
Do we have cause for hope? Many of my friends are
pessimistic when they contemplate the world's growing
population and human demands colliding with shrinking
resources. But I draw hope from the knowledge that
humanity's biggest problems today are ones entirely of our
own making. Asteroids hurtling at us beyond our control
don't figure high on our list of imminent dangers. To save
ourselves, we don't need new technology: we just need the
political will to face up to our problems of population and
the environment.
I also draw hope from a unique advantage that we enjoy.
Unlike any previous society in history, our global society
today is the first with the opportunity to learn from the
mistakes of societies remote from us in space and in time.
When the Maya and Mangarevans were cutting down their
trees, there were no historians or archaeologists, no
newspapers or television, to warn them of the consequences
of their actions. We, on the other hand, have a detailed
chronicle of human successes and failures at our disposal.
Will we choose to use it?
Jared Diamond, who won the 1998 Pulitzer Prize in general
nonfiction for "Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human
Societies," is the author of the forthcoming "Collapse: How
Societies Choose or Fail to Succeed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/01/opinion/01diamond.html?ex=1105633650&ei=1&en=94173dbf9362eeb6
)
