Reviews for Breve historia del futuro/ Brief History of the Future (Spanish Edition)

The average rating for Breve historia del futuro/ Brief History of the Future (Spanish Edition) based on 2 reviews is 2.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2009-07-13 00:00:00 Stanley Walker Very interesting review of history. The premise is that human civilization continues to march toward greater openness in market/capitalism and in freedom. With the rise of the renaissance, there have been a rise and fall of leading cities in this area. As one falters, another rises - Bruges, Venice, Antwerp, Genoa, Amserdam, London, Boston, New York, and LA. Much of this is based on Turner's work on Great Cities - must be centers of trade, be innovators, and welcome immigrants. With this history in place, what happens in the future? What will be the next center of innovation? He reviews the leading candidates and discounts them all - China - will be splintered by different ethnicities and still has far to go with GDP growth to catch up with the west (same as Z. Farrad's book Post-American Century.) Japan is not open to immigation and had its opportunity in the 1980s and did not ascend. India - still not much of a market (too much government control). Europe is not an innovator or strong growth. Australia is very innovative and open to immigration, but too small at 6M citizens. Texas and San Jose are options. The next city to ascend will probably be virtual. In the future, creative work will rule the economy. However, the USA will start to falter, but not fall. Taxes, defense budgets, and CO2 will cause America to lose its sole role as Superpower. But a lot of chaos in the future - rise of pirates (he includes terrorists as pirates), more failed states, more mercenaries, less regular armies. He predicts more wars that lead to a pan-global government. I like the whole book, but the author lost me at the end - way too European for my American outlook on the world. I do not share his optimism on our ability to have a global government - but I do see a much higher acceptance of this as I look at younger generations.

Review # 2 was written on 2021-05-17 00:00:00 Linda Thompson Ok, I read this book and all I can say it is not worth reading, even if you are interested in transhumanism. The first 50% is very simplified history. Author's vision is that there are 3 kinds of power: religious, military and mercenary, and, of course, he is a fan of the latter. The second part is his futuristic speculations of how this mercenary power will take over the globe. He is speaking about the market, technologies, about the violence, ultimate solitude of the individual etc. But all that is not like predictions, but more like some modelling, while ignoring all the complexity of history, society and technology. So it is more like some kind of manifesto or some political speech for the Davos-like forum. I read the book because of the quote below that is said to be from the book. It was not in the book, at least not in my copy. There was nothing about so offensive as euthanasia of idiots or similar eugenics, but at the same time the tone of the author's voice was similar and the things he is talking about is probably more cloaked, but still very NWO-conspirative. For example, he is talking about the man-made pandemics, a lot about micro-chips, nano-robotics etc. (he calls all those "nomadic devices", about the gray-goo and blue-goo. I still leave this citation here, to check up later: "In the future it will be a question of finding a way to reduce the population. We will start with the old man, because once he is over 60-65 years old, man lives longer than he produces and it costs society dearly. Then the weak and then the useless who do not contribute anything to society because there will be more and more, and especially finally the stupid. Euthanasia directed at these groups; euthanasia must be an essential instrument of our future societies, in all cases. Of course, we will not be able to execute people or organize camps. We will get rid of them by making them believe that it is for their own good. Too large a population, and for the most part unnecessary, is something economically too expensive. Socially, it is also much better for the human machine to stop abruptly rather than gradually deteriorate. We won’t be able to pass intelligence tests on millions and millions of people, you can imagine! We will find something or cause it; a pandemic that targets certain people, a real economic crisis or not, a virus that will affect the old or the elderly, it does not matter, the weak and the fearful will succumb. The stupid will believe it and ask to be treated. We will have taken care of having planned the treatment, a treatment that will be the solution. The selection of idiots will therefore be done by itself: they will go to the slaughterhouse alone.“