A more useful paradigm: the "Walled World"?
Everybody struggles to group various nations into socioeconomic chunks. We speak awkwardly about the "third world" and the "industrialized world." We even speak euphemistically about the "industrializing world" regardless of whether some countries are actually making progress toward industrialization. This graphic, created by Td Architects in Holland, shows something they call the "Walled World" -- the countries where 14% of the world's population generates 73% of the income -- so much relative wealth that they need to wall off or patrol their borders to block mass migrations. Instead of old labels, should we use "inside" or "outside" the "walled world"? (Click on the image for the big version.)
Comments:
" 14% of the world's population generates 73% of the income" you mean the 14% who steal the world's income, as they can generate nothing of thin air.
Like this is some sort of new idea? The Chinese built the "great wall" to discourage invaders, and in their minds there was China, and then there was "everywhere else" which was seen as an uncivililized wilderness. They are still pretty much looking at the world that way. Let's not forget historically how every other great civilization throughout history has at one time or another seen the need to fortify their borders and/or cities to repel invaders and retain the things of value (resources, food, culture, etc...) that made their society attractive to outsiders to begin with. The only difference between then and now is that "invasion" has a much less aggresive appearance, and outwordly appears more benign. I.E., illegal immigration. The destructive force it brings with it is just as crippleing to modern "empires" (if not more so) than an army of brigandes attacking with spears, swords, clubs, and siege works.
You negate the production of petroleum products.
Post a Comment
<< Home