There is nothing more enlightening than reading articles from 10-15 years ago about the conflicts taking place now. You see—so strikingly—how we both foresaw them and failed to avoid them. You wonder: were people crazy then? No, they were not crazier than we are now.
I was reading The New Cold War: The United States, Russia, and China from Kosovo to Ukraine. It is a selection of articles written by Gilbert Achcar since the mid-1990s. Two things are absolutely striking:
- The NATO-Russia new Cold War incl. the Ukraine-Russia conflict was seen / hoped for / tried to avoid by everyone who mattered since the early 1990s. It is not news. It is the history foretold.
- China’s technological performance was totally underestimated. In discussions 15y ago, it is treated as a mere producer of inferior consumer goods. It is supposed to stay there forever.
Conclusion. When we try to divine the future, we are likely to be both right and wrong We just do not know which part is which.
It is a total waste of time and effort to read today’s analyses of current affairs. They simply amplify the common opinions held today. They bring nothing new. To help you think about the present you should read what was written in the past when the present was the future.
To go over the historically uncontroversial examples. The point is not to read in the 1990s how Saddam was using poison gas in the war against Iran. The point is to read articles from the 1980s saying how it is the right policy to stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.
The point is not to read the articles from 1943 telling you how Mussolini is a bad fascist. The point is to read the articles from 1923 telling you how great it is that Mussolini is controlling the communists and bringing production back.