Here's a quick follow up to my review of Tom Barnett's new book, "Great Powers". Tom's central historical analogy is that the disorder we see around the world today is akin to a frontier that is slowly, but inexorably being civilized. Here's more (from Mark Safransky's interview of Tom Barnett, PDF):
This is all about frontier integration. Globalization is like America’s rapid and aggressive push Westward across the 19th century: a lot of the same bad actors and a lot of the same tools applied. So don’t be surprised when the Pinkertons show up, or when the covered wagons are attacked, or when the Injuns head to the Badlands for sanctuary. Thus, the goals of our frontline players are fairly straightforward: create the baseline security to allow the connectivity to grow. Focus on social trust and institutions as much as possible, but co-opt existing structures whenever and wherever you can. It doesn’t have to be perfect and it sure as hell doesn’t have to measure up to America’s mature standards. This is a frontier setting within globalization-treat it as such. The good news is, the settlers are already there, with more uncredentialed wealth than we realize (see Hernando DeSoto), if you respect their existing rule-sets and realize they will change only when the locals see the need themselves, so no instant rule-set packages applied by outsiders, please. Finally, acknowledge that with growing connectivity with the outside world, you will see more nationalism, more ethnic tensions, and more religious identity. These are all natural reactions, and not signs of your failure, so patience is the key.
This is a good demonstration that history is a great teacher but it lies with alacrity. A frontier analogy assumes a system in ascendence. That's not the case in our current situation, although the look and feel (the rhyme) appears to be similar. Zones of trust aren't expanding, they are diminishing (Wall Street's excesses are a great example of that). So, what is actually happening?