Tweet
FERGUSON LINKS PROGRESS AND WAR
By Bonnie J. Kavoussi
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?r ef=520585
Published On Tuesday, November 06, 2007 11:26 PM
The 20th century was a time of unprecedented progress, Tisch Professor
of History Niall Ferguson said yesterday. Life expectancy soared,
quality of life improved, and democracy spread. But why was the
twentieth century also the bloodiest?
According to Ferguson, who spoke to a crowd of 20 students at Hilles
as part of the "Coffee with a View" series yesterday afternoon,
the answer lies partly in that very progress.
In a talk entitled, "The War of the World," Ferguson argued that the
major ingredients for world war continue to loom today.
Ferguson said that economic volatility, ethnic disintegration, and
empires in decline-- what he called the "three E's"--are responsible
for the unprecedented scale of violence in the past century.
In the economic booms, said Ferguson, it was often minorities--such
as the Jews in Europe and the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire--who
disproportionately benefited. Then, "in the crunch, the blame for
economic downturn could be placed on the successful minority," he said.
In a time of Western decline--as in any time of imperial
decline--Ferguson said, "the question is: Who is in charge now?"
While violence in the first half of the 20th century was concentrated
in Central and Eastern Europe, Ferguson said the next fulcrum of
violence will probably be the Middle East. All the ingredients for
"megadeath" are there, he said.
But Ferguson said that "the importance of human agency" in starting
wars should not be dismissed.
In the question and answer session that followed, when multiple
students asked him to predict the level of violence in the next few
decades, Ferguson said that "there's no such thing as the future--there
are only futures."
Although Ferguson said that a major war within the next decade is
likely, he said, "I'm describing to you only the preconditions for
violence.
This does not make it inevitable."
Just as Nixon visited Beijing, he said, the next American president
can visit Tehran and draw back from the brink of war.
"Violence is quite likely, and avoiding it will require leadership,"
concluded Ferguson.
By Bonnie J. Kavoussi
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?r ef=520585
Published On Tuesday, November 06, 2007 11:26 PM
The 20th century was a time of unprecedented progress, Tisch Professor
of History Niall Ferguson said yesterday. Life expectancy soared,
quality of life improved, and democracy spread. But why was the
twentieth century also the bloodiest?
According to Ferguson, who spoke to a crowd of 20 students at Hilles
as part of the "Coffee with a View" series yesterday afternoon,
the answer lies partly in that very progress.
In a talk entitled, "The War of the World," Ferguson argued that the
major ingredients for world war continue to loom today.
Ferguson said that economic volatility, ethnic disintegration, and
empires in decline-- what he called the "three E's"--are responsible
for the unprecedented scale of violence in the past century.
In the economic booms, said Ferguson, it was often minorities--such
as the Jews in Europe and the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire--who
disproportionately benefited. Then, "in the crunch, the blame for
economic downturn could be placed on the successful minority," he said.
In a time of Western decline--as in any time of imperial
decline--Ferguson said, "the question is: Who is in charge now?"
While violence in the first half of the 20th century was concentrated
in Central and Eastern Europe, Ferguson said the next fulcrum of
violence will probably be the Middle East. All the ingredients for
"megadeath" are there, he said.
But Ferguson said that "the importance of human agency" in starting
wars should not be dismissed.
In the question and answer session that followed, when multiple
students asked him to predict the level of violence in the next few
decades, Ferguson said that "there's no such thing as the future--there
are only futures."
Although Ferguson said that a major war within the next decade is
likely, he said, "I'm describing to you only the preconditions for
violence.
This does not make it inevitable."
Just as Nixon visited Beijing, he said, the next American president
can visit Tehran and draw back from the brink of war.
"Violence is quite likely, and avoiding it will require leadership,"
concluded Ferguson.