Portofino Resort- Now with a new BEACH BAR!!
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#190297 - 02/19/06 12:20 PM If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Sir Isaac Newton Offline
If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.

Author warns that U.S. may go the way of the British Empire

Reviewed by Jurriaan Kamp

San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, February 19, 2006


The Untied States of America

Polarization, Fracturing and Our Future

By Juan Enriquez

CROWN; 352 PAGES; $24.95


In 1950, the United Nations had 50 members. Today there are 191 U.N. member states. The vast majority of these new countries came from Africa, Asia and Europe. Only three countries (Surinam, Guyana and Belize) out of the 141 new ones came from the North and South American continents.
These are interesting facts to Juan Enriquez, an American businessman, best-selling author and former Harvard academic. In his new book, "The Untied States of America," Enriquez warns of the coming disintegration of the United States and explores how that will affect the nation's status as the unparalleled superpower. This is a challenging, controversial subject at a time in history when American power around the world appears supreme. The Soviet Union no longer stands as a military, political or economic rival now that capitalism has triumphed over communism.

While America is increasingly affected by the fast economic rise of China, this challenge doesn't appear to threaten America's leadership in global politics. Americans dominate the world community today in the same way the British did a century ago. But that comparison also contains a warning. In the beginning of his book, Enriquez presents readers with an experiment. Imagine you're a member of the British cabinet in 1905. A world map hangs on the wall of the elegant conference room at 10 Downing St. delineating the greatest empire that has ever existed: an area encompassing nearly 11.5 million square miles, 20 percent of the world's land and nearly one-quarter of the total human population. The question is: How will the world look in 50 years -- in 1955?

What would you have thought? Would Britain's territory expand? Stay the same size? Could anyone have conceived that the British Empire would completely fall apart between 1905 and 1955? That British territory would comprise only 97,000 square miles in 1955?

Imagine asking George W. Bush the same question now, in 2006. How will the United States look in 50 years? How many stars will the American flag have? Still 50? The chances of finding a prominent politician in Washington today who could imagine the disintegration of the United States seem minuscule. But Enriquez suggests that it is in fact quite probable that America in 2056 will not be the same powerful country it is today. Based on a great deal of historical, financial, political and cultural data, Enriquez convincingly argues that the future does not augur well for the unity of the United States.

While the title and the subject of his new book don't immediately indicate it, Enriquez is driven by his love of science. Enriquez set up the Life Sciences Project at the Harvard Business School, is chairman of Biotechonomy, a venture-capital fund specializing in biotechnology, and author of an earlier book on the same general subject, "As the Future Catches You." That resume explains why Enriquez attended a conference titled "Celebrating a Decade of Genome Sequencing." This international summit on DNA research, genetics, biochemistry and biology took place in December at UC San Diego, which heads global research in this area. Even the casual visitor quickly becomes aware that this is where the future of energy, food, health and computer science, and therefore of society itself, is generated, largely separate from politics, the media and ordinary citizens. The conference illustrates the crucial role that prominent scientific research plays in a country's future success and its economic wealth.

In the numerous PowerPoint presentations given by authorities in many fields, it becomes clear to Enriquez that technology offers enormous opportunities and that it is easy for some societies to miss the boat. Enriquez knows that countries that emphasize the importance of science will be the future leaders. And he sees that the United States -- despite, for example, the leading position of UC San Diego -- is losing ground. He believes this is a sign of America's waning strength. "The future depends on how you treat people today," he writes, noting that the performance of the United States in this regard is not great. The U.S. national debt, topping $8 trillion, is troubling evidence that the United States is squandering its future. "From time immemorial the last thing a government does is drive the country to bankruptcy," Enriquez observes. "You cannot spend five to six percent more than the country earns every year without serious consequences. It is not inconceivable that the United States will be running out of money."

It can be said that the our per capita debt level, at around $27,500, is acceptable relative to that of other leading industrial nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). But the United States appears far different than other Western OECD nations when you look at other economic and social statistics. Enriquez names a few: The minimum wage has fallen by 37 percent since 1968 in terms of real dollars; 11 percent of Americans don't have enough to eat; in 2000, the federal government spent $2,106 on each American child while spending $21,120 on each person older than 65. Enriquez cites research indicating that if the U.S. government maintains its current policies, nearly half the budget will be spent on senior citizens by 2016. Hence his question: Do you invest in the future or in the past?

Within two generations, 40 percent of the American population will be made up of African Americans and Latinos. Both groups continue to lag far behind whites and Asian Americans in the educational system. Few graduate from college, and even fewer get advanced degrees or become scientists. Countries such as Finland, Iceland, Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Singapore are already surpassing the United States when it comes to scientific research. Enriquez says that without making significant investments in education for African Americans and Latinos, who will make up almost half the population by mid-century, America cannot maintain its current prominence in the sciences. But not only is the United States failing to make vital national investments, it is allowing the national debt to increase as the Bush administration believes it can lower taxes at the same time as spending $200 million a day on the wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Enriquez warns: "They spend everything trying to protect what they have today."

Enriquez is also seriously concerned about the conceit that characterizes current American politics. A lot of what the government does, he says, speaks of its conviction that "our way is the only way." This attitude goes hand in hand with an unhealthy blending of science and religion. "Religious beliefs are being manipulated to win elections," he says.

A sound balance between science, religion and ethics forms an essential foundation for the healthy development of any society, Enriquez believes. And he is convinced that within this balance, attention to science determines a country's future level of wealth. He mentions that the British discovered DNA back in the 1950s and that British scientists laid the foundation for cloning. "But they failed to translate that science into business. They considered it inappropriate, unethical, to earn money on science. Just look where British science is now. Societies that make their football stars rich and their scientists poor are doomed."

A lot of large companies have broken into smaller units since the 1960s because they could no longer prove to their shareholders that the whole was worth more than the independent parts. Enriquez predicts that minorities will soon be asking nations the same questions. What is the benefit of this structure? Does this country represent our interests in the best way? "And those are questions that are hard to answer."

Borders are extremely abstract. Only islands have clear geographical boundaries. Countries are not natural structures, and they are therefore kept together by flags and national anthems, or -- in Enriquez's view -- by "myths." And the power of those myths goes as far as the next generation wants to believe in them. In other words: If the American dream comes true for ever-fewer Americans, the unity of the United States will come under increasing pressure. This is the point at which questions will naturally arise about whether there are other possible configurations that would give citizens a better shot at fulfilling their dreams.

But isn't America a stable country? Wasn't it founded based on one language and a clear set of principles? Enriquez delicately points out that the same was true for the United Kingdom, which is increasingly devolving into the separate nations of England, Scotland and Wales, and for Spain, where Basques and Catalans are hacking away at national unity. And, pointing to the history of the United States, he adds, "If the parents can split, the kids can split."

The early signs of American disintegration are already apparent, according to Enriquez. In the state of Vermont there is a small but serious separatist movement, and a declaration of independence is being drawn up. States in the northeastern United States have formed an alliance to carry out the Kyoto climate agreement, which the Bush administration refuses to sign. And guess what's been the motto on Texas license plates since 2004? "It's like a whole other country." Texas earlier announced that all the state's schoolchildren would be saying their pledge of allegiance not only to the American flag but also to the flag of Texas. Finally, in an opinion poll, 42 percent of Texans came out in favor of more political autonomy for Texas as long as it could be arranged within the confederation of the United States.

Then there's California, the seventh-largest economy in the world, where a large part of the population -- including many Republican supporters of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger -- are extremely displeased with Washington's current conservative politics. California's independence is the subject of frequent jokes at parties and gatherings of the intelligentsia. American Indians are also stepping up demands for attention to the historical injustice that caused them to lose their land. Several current court cases, for instance, involve native peoples' claim to one-third of the land in the state of New York. Over the past 20 years, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have seen discussions about returning seized lands to native peoples as well as adjustments of the Terra nullius principle (that European pioneers appropriated no man's land). It's hard to imagine the United States will be spared a revisit of its history regarding Indian peoples. During his presidency, Bill Clinton already made excuses for the "illegal occupation" of Hawaii. Enriquez adds another ticking time bomb in a postscript to his book: "If slaves performed $40 million worth of unpaid labour between 1790 and 1860, reparations would be around $1.4 trillion."

In further support of his thesis about American disintegration, Enriquez points to the European Union. The economic umbrella of the EU makes it much easier for smaller entities to be independent. Broader trends of globalization also offer small countries advantages they didn't have. Despite their diminutive sizes, Singapore and Hong Kong, as well as Luxembourg and Switzerland, have been able to develop into extremely successful economic entities. After making this sharp -- and when it comes to the United States, gloomy -- analysis, it is remarkable that Enriquez writes at the end of his book that he doesn't want to be a preacher of doom. "My desire is simply that citizens ... realize what they have," he writes, "what they are doing and what they might do differently if they wish to avoid what so many have already gone through."

Throughout "The Untied States of America," Enriquez offers suggestions for policy reforms that continually emphasize focusing on science and education for minorities as well as special-needs groups. Why should the Netherlands, for instance, be a leading global flower grower and trader when the climate is more suitable in other parts of the world? Dutch success stems from knowledge -- from specific, constant attention to science, and research and development. Enriquez points to Finland, which grew to become a digital superpower in the space of a single generation. And Iceland, which has expanded into a leading technological power thanks to enormous investments in education. "You can build a great country when you change education and surf the waves of technology. You can make and unmake countries in months."

His most creative -- and most politically unfeasible -- solution for the United States involves a change in voting rights. To rectify the imbalance between the older and younger generations, Enriquez suggests giving parents voting rights on behalf of their underage children. This would mean that a family with four children and two adults would have six votes. The change would put an end to current policies that appropriate the most money to older people because they have the most votes. "If the votes of underage children counted, it would lead to investments in their interests. In good schools. The question is how much support there would be for going to war when the children would be sent off as soldiers."

That last suggestion embodies the bold message of "The Untied States of America." The future success of a country begins by paying attention to how we fulfill the long-term wishes and interests of its citizens today. These citizens of today determine the economic power of tomorrow. Economic power lies at the roots of the current superpower status of the United States. Enriquez points out that this economic superiority is swiftly being consumed by arrogant international policies and decadent consumerism. Such a policy has destroyed superpowers throughout history, Enriquez warns as the proverbial voice crying in the wilderness. But the information and ideas he outlines here do offer a pragmatic alternative to the Disunited States of the future.

Jurriaan Kamp is founder and editor in chief of Ode magazine.
Check out my site: www.ambergriscayerealestate.net

#190298 - 02/19/06 01:25 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
travelqueen Offline
Wow that's long! Someone read it and give me the short version. laugh

#190299 - 02/19/06 01:57 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Marty Offline
no shit. is there an abridger around? is that a word?

#190300 - 02/19/06 02:22 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
klcman Offline
it is now!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _________________ _ _ _ _ _ _
But then what do I know, I am but a mere caveman

#190301 - 02/19/06 05:09 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Otteralum Offline
SIN, c'mon. I read this missive in an attempt to understand you. A few common sense observations.

1) Comparisons to the British empire and the EU are absurd. With the exception of Native American reservations, there are no geographic entities in the US that are defined by a single ethnic group. The British Empire was and the EU is exactly opposite.

2) You cannot gauge commitment to science and technology by government funding. The US promotes this education through corporate and University efforts funded by the private sector. Apples and oranges. Most of Europe taxes everyone and then centrally invests back into science. I won't debate which is better, but it does not suggest the US is disproportionately preparing for the future.

3) The US separtist movements are quite humorous. The Libertarian Free State project in Vermont is the best comedy of all to merit comment in this guys book and shows he's off his rocker. If anything, increased Federal involvment has made the US union stronger than it has ever been. I would actually advocate more state freedom as was in the early years post-independence. This freedom of states to experiment with different nuances of government created some competition of sorts where better ideas evolved. Now the Federal government micromanages everything from speed limits to standardized school testing. This wasn't so just 25 years ago. I would say the trend is just the opposite of what the author suggests.

I like the idea of someone who studied technology predicting socio-political trends. Kinda like a sous chef telling me if the coming cold front will prodcue rain.

I will have a Belikin -- put it on klcman's tab.

#190302 - 02/19/06 05:48 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Ernie B Offline
TQ- Whenyou get the 'short' version, please give me the 'thumb nail' version.
Gun Control is Hitting Your Target.

#190303 - 02/19/06 08:59 PM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
TQ- when you get the 'thumb nail' version, eh...don't send it to me! :p

#190304 - 02/20/06 09:46 AM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Tagenrog Offline
I think Enriquez is 90% correct. The only differences are that it won’t take 50 years. It took Rome 300 years, the British Empire 50 years and because of globalization and efficient communication, it will take the US much less time. Also, the US probably won’t split up geographically, it will split up socially. The “ownership society” and the “me generation” will pit “haves” against the “have nots”, religious conservatives against seculars, African-Americans against Latinos, and moderates against the extremes of both stripes. The US will have gated communities protecting each group from the others and voting for their own special interests.

#190305 - 02/20/06 09:59 AM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Otteralum Offline
Nice pessimism. Entirely disagree. The U.S. might get legitimately beat at its own game in the global marketplace, but these gloom and doom visionaries are wrong. We survivied "have v. have-not" periods far more dramatic in our history than this one. Racial and socio-economic divisions will continue to be sure, but the US has too much of an intolerance for intolerance that none of this will come to pass in our lifetimes.
I will have a Belikin -- put it on klcman's tab.

#190306 - 02/20/06 10:05 AM Re: If we don't hang together, we just might wind up hanging separately.
Otteralum Offline
Tag, tell me more about what you mean. You mention several examples of division. How do you see this differing from today's divisions if there's no geographic splits?
I will have a Belikin -- put it on klcman's tab.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Click for excellent scuba lessons with Elbert Greer!

Things to do

Daily News
Daily Weather

Classified Ads
San Pedro Sun
Ambergris Today
SP Town Council
Channel 7
Channel 5
Love FM
The Reporter
Caye Caulker

TV Newscasts
Radio Stations

Click for our
Search thousands of Belizean-only websites

Event Guides
Event Calendar
Specials & Events
Things to Do
iTravel Belize
Paradise Theater

San Pedro Scoop!
Tia Chocolate
My Beautiful Belize
I-Travel Belize
Belize Adventure
Belize Hub
Romantic Travel
Bound for Belize
Conch Creative
As The Coconuts Drop
More Blogs...
Search thousands of Belizean-only websites
Chaa Creek is an award-winning luxury Belize Resort, rated as one of the worlds best Eco Lodges. We are a pioneer in adventure travel to Belize since 1981!
White Sands Dive Shop - 5 Star PADI Dive Facility - Daily diving, SCUBA instruction and Snorkeling
Caribbean Inspired All Natural Condiments & Spice Blends, Over 100 are Gluten Free!
We manage a variety of homes, apartments, condos and commercial properties here on Ambergris Caye. Our minimum lease on ALL properties is six months.
Conch Shell Inn: All rooms are right on the beach in the heart of San Pedro, so within walking distance to anything and everything!!
Lil’ Alphonse has snorkel equipment to fit anyone as well as Marine Park Tickets and flotation devices to assist those not as experienced.
Coastal Xpress offers a daily scheduled ferry run to most resorts, restaurants and private piers on the island of Anbergris Caye. We also offer  private and charter water taxi service.
Mini Chat

Cayo Espanto
Click for Cayo Espanto, and have your own private island
More Links
Click for exciting and adventurous tours of Belize with Katie Valk!
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
Who's Online
2 registered (Philus, 1 invisible), 35 Guests and 7 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
18,631 Registered Members
44 Forums
63,697 Topics
461,208 Posts

Most users ever online: 1,262 @ 06/10/07 02:16 PM

AmbergrisCaye.com CayeCaulker.org HELP! Visitor Center Goods & Services San Pedro Town
BelizeSearch.com Message Board Lodging Diving Fishing Things to Do History
BelizeNews.com Maps Phonebook Belize Business Directory
BelizeCards.com SanPedroDaily.com Picture of the Day

The opinions and views expressed on this board are the subjective opinions of Ambergris Caye Message Board members
and not of the Ambergris Caye Message Board its affiliates, or its employees.