Scenario of global Elites for the next 80 years

in Conspiracy Theory by

2 Answers

+1 vote
selected ago by
Best answer

When we talk about the future, we often only talk about the collapse of the global world into pan-regions, completely ignoring both other scenarios and further developments. What will happen after the formation of pan-regions, when yesterday's allies begin to fight among themselves for resources, territories, population and meanings?

Despite the fact that the question of the future world is one of the central issues among the materials of the portal, the absolute majority of articles and statements boils down to the following::

  • the global world in crisis;
  • the world will break up into pan-regions/ monetary and economic zones;
  • who and what threatens the process of disintegration, and what we should do.

Among the comments, the discussion of the above topics prevails, both in a constructive and negative way – " you are all lying, nothing in the world will change." At the same time, there are no very important things among the materials – a comprehensive review of all possible scenarios for the development of the world in the medium term and an analysis of further development.

This gap must be filled in, otherwise, the picture turns out to be fragmentary and unsystematic, creating the illusion of weak positions.

Medium-term perspective

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world entered a period of globalization based on right-liberal principles. The concept of crisis-free existence was formulated, and it seemed to many that the achieved advantage could not be lost. But reality, as always, laughed at human stupidity and self-conceit – the global idea of the world order is rapidly degrading. Some ten years ago, the United States, under the control of the Finintern, was the main one in the world and consistently ground everyone under its own principles and laws. Now the United States has practically escaped from the care of financiers and is purposefully losing weight, becoming "just "and "First among equals". At the same time, the deglobalization process continues.

World Scenario Tree

Scenarios for the future development of the world are reflected in the picture. The darker the color used for painting, the more likely it is, in my subjective opinion. Arrows show transitions between scenarios. The arrow to the right edge of the image indicates that the scenario is stable and moves to the future. Let's take a closer look at the scenarios of the next few years.

The "Neo-imperialism, multiculturalism" scenario is an inertial one, and until 2012 the world was dominated by the opinion that it was predestined and dominant. I will say more, most of our liberals still live in these fantasies. But this scenario is almost closed. Immediately after the crisis in 2008, on the basis of the G20 and other platforms, they enthusiastically discussed how to get out of the crisis and further develop the world, and after 2012, as it turned out, there is no such topic in public discourse. Is everything all right? Not at all. The development of a global right-liberal world is postulated at the level of duty, mandatory and meaningless slogans, and that's all. To implement this scenario, it is necessary to break almost all the trends in the economy and politics, and for this there are neither the resources nor the consensus of the elites. Finintern is trying to regain control of the US and / or launch a new globalism in alliance with China and Britain, but they are not succeeding. All they can achieve is to delay the processes, but not deploy them in any way. The interests of this scenario are clear: the Finintern, China, Britain, the EU, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

China's attempt to lead globalization does not stand out in a separate scenario. China's strategy was thoroughly understood that this is essentially a Finintern game with Britain, i.e. the same neo-imperialist project or an attempt to equip its pan-region by making it as large as possible.

"Multipolar world of pan-regions" - this scenario has been justified by M. L. Khazin for about 20 years, and we will not dwell on this issue in detail – those who wish can find a lot of materials on the portal. The main thing is that at present this scenario is the main and most likely, no matter how many people want the opposite. Who is interested in this scenario? Patriotic elites of the USA, continental Europe, BRICS countries (except China) and other potential subjects of the geopolitical game. This scenario has the most supporters in the world.

In recent years, there have been several periods when the world has come close to the "Global Catastrophe/ war" scenario, a clash of powers on the principle of war for war's sake, up to the local use of nuclear weapons and the fragmentation of the world. In particular, we could go in this direction if X wins.Clinton in the 2016 election, the logic of events after the destruction of the Malaysian Boeing by the Ukrainians and their curators also pushed for this. Now the probability of implementing this scenario has become much less, and the trend for further decline remains. The potential actors in this scenario are the Finintern, Britain, and the Islamic world; for the rest of us, this game does not bring anything good.

In addition to the rather obvious scenarios mentioned above, there is another "Invasion of neo-barbarians", in fact, a new large migration of peoples, with the subsequent degradation of states, social relations and the economy. The result will be throwing the world's civilization far back. This scenario is beneficial for the same players as the global war option, but you should also add India.

Thus, the most likely development of events is the disintegration of the world into pan – regions. This option is acceptable or favorable for all countries, regions, peoples and elites of the world, with the exception of the Finintern and China. For Russia, the collapse of the global world offers a chance not only to preserve, but also to return to the role of a geopolitical player. The probability of remaining a scenario is low and continues to fall every day, so the inertial option - "Neo-imperialism" is now almost closed.

Actually, here we have exhausted all the topics covered on the portal about the future development of the world, and we are moving on to the new area – what scenarios for the future development of the world there are in the long term.

The future after a multipolar world

The entire scenario tree is divided into three groups according to the degree of concentration – the world is global, the world is divided into regions, and the world is fragmented to separate local structures and associations.

After the most likely scenario of the world's disintegration into pan-regions, the trend towards an increase in the division of labor and unification will remain, we will separately recall the impact of robotization as part of the transition to the sixth technological order and the increase in the potential for growth of the division of labor system. There are three scenarios for the future development of the world, and we will focus on them in more detail.

A multipolar world is an unstable construct, and weak geopolitical projects in the financial, military or psychohistorical part will be absorbed by stronger ones, repeating the history of the 20th century. There are two stable positions to move to – one or three centers.

The "tripolar world" is one of the attractors of further development. The dominance of three geopolitical players with different meanings in the world can provide a balance for a long time. It is important that the centers are "removed" from each other in the field of psychohistory, so that absorption or long-term union is impossible. As a result of the Second World War, the United States, Britain and the USSR remained, which did not create a stable structure, the meanings of the first two were very close, which led to a natural result. And then there was a bipolar confrontation, which could not last long. There is no point in talking about the "Non-Aligned Movement" – it was not a subject and a player, but, in fact, a swamp and a game board. Ideally, three geopolitical players will be located in different squares on the diagram of the meanings of geopolitical players: "conservative-liberal", "left-right". There can be only one exception – all three projects will be right-wing conservative, for example – Christian, Islamic and Indian, the design will be stable, but its formation in the modern world is beyond reality.

Ideology of geopolitical projects

The figure shows an updated chart of ideologies/ meanings of potential geopolitical players. I have slightly adjusted the position compared to the previous version, but at the moment I am only interested in the position of projects in squares. As you can see, the project of the left-wing globalists has no competition, and if Latin America can create its own geopolitical project, and let me remind you, this is one of the most interesting and promising projects, then their future is very non-trivial. The situation is similar with Russia, if we reject the inertial scenario of "Third Rome", we have only one China in our competitors, but taking into account its low specification, there are no competitors in the left – conservative camp.

The next two squares are highly competitive, and given the failure of the global project of the right-wing liberals, someone from the right-wing conservatives will come out in the top three.

Thus, the configuration of the tripolar world is viewed as follows:

  • Russia's left-conservative project/ fallback — China;
  • Latin America's left-liberal project;
  • right-wing conservative project of the USA/ any of the projects in this quarter, including continuing to rule China.
  • In the absence of one of the strong left-wing projects, the right-wing liberals will again take the stage.

What is the main conclusion? A left-conservative project must be built in Russia, and it must survive until only three poles of power remain. The second conclusion is that for Russia's long-term prospects in the world, a strong Latin America is needed.

0 votes

A new attempt at globalization

If the stable state is missed again — the tripolar world - then we are waiting for a new attempt to unite the world. In this case, there are two scenarios of globalization – "One world for all" and "One world for a select few". A "united world for the elite" will be formed if the right-wing project wins the competition of geopolitical projects. Specific options will include totalitarian scenarios of a "new caste society", "space colonialism", "global environmentalism", "world of transhumanism", "world of technological singularity" and other projects. Currently, all these scenarios are closed. For example, " global environmentalism "was finally shot down by D. Trump, torpedoing the Paris climate Agreement, and the" technological singularity "scenario did not gain a critical mass of"believers". It is necessary to say about "digital slavery", this is not a separate scenario, but an integral part of almost any version of the future in the "one world for the elite" format.

Let's move on to the "One World for All" scenario. By analogy with the previous one, it will start to be implemented in the case of globalization based on the left project. While only two options are visible-noospheric liberalism (in the Voltaire sense) and noospheric communism, this is not enough and there should be more options.

It is necessary to explain why I think the probability of a tripolar world is higher than the next attempt at globalization – the previous attempt was unsuccessful, there is a law of redundancy in the universe, which is contradicted by a single global world, any globalization interferes too much with the God-given free will of man.

Can the tripolar world again embark on the path of globalization in the future? There is such a chance, but with a higher probability, the emergence of a tripolar world will open up new scenarios of more balanced development for humanity, compared to globalization.

Post-disaster scenarios

The fragmentation of the world as a result of catastrophic development options will set humanity far back, but at the same time it will open up several scenarios that were previously missed. The inertial scenario after a global war will be the "Dark Ages". The degradation of the social, political, economic and ethno-cultural structure of the world will be significant, not until the Stone Age, of course, but it will not seem small. A lot will be lost, and given the global nature of the previous processes, it will affect everyone. There have been similar periods of decline in human history, for comparison, the size of Rome during the Roman Republic was only reached at the beginning of the 20th century. It is clear that we are not talking about a couple of millennia, but several generations will remember the current years as the "golden age".

In addition to the "Dark Ages", which will be characterized by very deep fragmentation and degradation, two previously missed scenarios will open up – " The World of Corporations "and"The World of policies". In the first scenario, corporatocrats – the technocracy of a post-industrial society-gain power. The world will not be happy, because the best corporation takes care of the population (people who do not work in it) worse than the absolute majority of states. In the conditions of degradation of traditional state structures, this path can be quite stable. In the future, this scenario will develop in the direction of globalization in the "One World for the Elite" version.

The second scenario is characterized by the creation of independent cities/ agglomerations around the world and the loss of the concept of "nation". Unlike the "World of Corporations", the further development of this scenario will follow the traditional path – the" World of neo-empires " — globalization. By the way, along the way of building empires (of all kinds) the world can go right after the disaster. The "World of neo-Empires" will largely repeat the period of the 19th-early 20th century in terms of organization and principles of existence, but the players, countries and peoples will change significantly. But still, it will be a repetition of the path already traveled once.

Thus, the development of catastrophic scenarios can both repeat the path already traveled once, and open up new paths, but I doubt that this will make a positive sense for humanity as a whole.


At the moment, the world has almost passed the crossroads of choice and decided on the most likely scenario for further development, which will be a "Multipolar World". Options for catastrophes or preserving a single global world already seem unrealistic. Finintern and China will suffer the greatest losses from deglobalization, while Russia may be one of the main beneficiaries.

Since the tendency to increase the division of labor remains, the attempt to unite will be repeated once again, but this time on principles different from the right-liberal ones. But this loop of history has an interesting alternative – a tripolar, stable world. If Russia forms a left-conservative independent geopolitical project, we are practically guaranteed a place in the top three hegemons. At the moment, the other" finalists " are the United States, with a right-wing conservative project, and Latin America — with a left-liberal one.

If we miss the opportunity to form a tripolar world, then we are waiting for a new round of globalization and another destruction of the Tower of Babel. At the same time, if globalization is based on the ideas of the right-wing project, then we are not waiting for an enviable totalitarian future, and it does not matter whether it will be a "new caste society", "space colonialism", "global environmentalism" or what else. A variant of left-wing globalism – "one world for all" - is more attractive, but so far humanity does not have an understanding of how to implement Vernadsky's ideas about the noosphere in practice.

Russia's program is clear – forming an independent left-conservative geopolitical project, preventing the emergence of other left-conservative projects in the world, and fully supporting left-liberal ideas in Latin America to form its own project-based approach.

Welcome to Textanswer, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community. Facebook twitter Reddit

2.8k questions

6.9k answers


439 users