Scenarios for the future according to Rockefeller Foundation

[Galaxia2002]

I was reading the 2012 olimpics thread and I start to read a publication of the Rockefeller Foundation (2010), a report that bngenoh linked

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,26953.msg346791.html#msg346791

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/news/publications/scenarios-future-technology

What is interesting is how they project disasters, pandemics, ect, for the future. It fits with what we are acquainted here in the forum and what has been described by the C's. Of course this also can be a smoke courtain. I will put some excerpts

They posed four big scenarios, depending on this two parameters:

"GLOBAL POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ALIGNMENT
This uncertainty refers to both the amount of economic integration — the flow of goods, capital, people, and ideas — as well as the extent to which enduring and effective political structures enable the world to deal with many of the global challenges it faces."

and

"ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

This uncertainty refers to the capacity at different levels of society to cope with change and to adapt effectively. This ability to adapt can mean proactively managing existing systems and structures to ensure their resilience against external forces, as well as the ability to transform those systems and structures when a changed context means they are no longer suitable."


"The Rockefeller Foundation and GBN began the scenario process by surfacing a host of driving forces that would affect the future of technology and international development. These forces were generated through both secondary research and in-depth interviews with Foundation staff, Foundation grantees, and external experts."

Once crossed, these axes create a matrix of four very different futures:

LOCK STEP – A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback

CLEVER TOGETHER – A world in which highly coordinated and successful strategies emerge for addressing both urgent and entrenched worldwide issues

HACK ATTACK – An economically unstable and shock-prone world in which governments weaken, criminals thrive, and dangerous innovations emerge

SMART SCRAMBLE – An economically depressed world in which individuals and communities develop localized, makeshift solutions to a growing set of problems

THE SCENARIO NARRATIVES

The scenarios that follow are not meant to be exhaustive — rather, they are designed to be both plausible and provocative, to engage your
imagination while also raising new questions for you about what that future might look and feel like. Each scenario tells a story of how the
world, and in particular the developing world, might progress over the next 15 to 20 years, with an emphasis on those elements relating
to the use of different technologies and the interaction of these technologies with the lives of the poor and vulnerable.[...]

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating
from wild geese — was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the
virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of
them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings satempty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

The pandemic blanketed the planet — though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where
the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a
challenge. The United States’s initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the
spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better — China in particular. The Chinese
government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of
all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter postpandemic
recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic,
national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face
masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded,
this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from
the spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty — leaders
around the world took a firmer grip on power.

At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty — and their privacy — to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.

Across the developing world, however, the story was different — and much more variable.
Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed highemitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more
authoritarian leadership worked less well — and in some cases tragically — in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased
power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.

Undeniably, the planet’s climate was becoming increasingly unstable.
Sea levels were rising fast, even as countries continued to build-out coastal mega-cities. In 2014, the Hudson River overflowed into New
York City during a storm surge, turning the World Trade Center site into a three-foot-deep lake. The image of motorboats navigating
through lower Manhattan jarred the world’s most powerful nations into realizing that climate change was not just a developing-world problem.
That same year, new measurements showing that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were climbing precipitously created new urgency and pressure for governments (really, for everyone) to do something fast.

Devastating shocks like September 11, the Southeast Asian tsunami of 2004, and the 2010 Haiti earthquake had certainly primed the world for sudden disasters. But no one was prepared for a world in which large-scale catastrophes would occur with such breathtaking
frequency. The years 2010 to 2020 were dubbed the “doom decade” for good reason: the 2012 Olympic bombing, which killed 13,000, was followed closely by an earthquake in Indonesia killing 40,000, a tsunami that almost wiped out Nicaragua, and the onset of the West China
Famine, caused by a once-in-a-millennium drought linked to climate change.

Not surprisingly, this opening series of deadly asynchronous catastrophes (there were more) put enormous pressure on an already overstressed global economy that had entered the decade still in recession. Massive humanitarian relief efforts cost vast sums of money, but the primary sources — from aid agencies to developed-world governments — had run out of funds to offer.

Most nation-states could no longer afford their locked-in costs, let alone respond to increased citizen demands for more security, more
healthcare coverage, more social programs and services, and more infrastructure repair. In 2014, when mudslides in Lima buried thousands,
only minimal help trickled in, prompting the Economist headline: “Is the Planet Finally Bankrupt?”

These dire circumstances forced tough tradeoffs. In 2015, the U.S. reallocated a large share of its defense spending to domestic concerns, pulling
out of Afghanistan — where the resurgent Taliban seized power once again. In Europe, Asia, South America, and Africa, more and more nation states lost control of their public finances [...]

[...]With government power weakened, order rapidly disintegrating, and safety nets evaporating, violence and crime grew more rampant.
Countries with ethnic, religious, or class divisions saw especially sharp spikes in hostility.[...]

[...]With increasing ease, these “global guerillas” moved illicit products through underground channels from poor producer countries to markets in the developed world.[...]
In the context of weak health systems, corruption, and inattention to standards — either within countries or from global bodies like the World Health Organization — tainted vaccines entered the public health systems of several African countries. In 2021, 600 children in Cote d’Ivoire
died from a bogus Hepatitis B vaccine, which paled in comparison to the scandal sparked by mass deaths from a tainted anti-malarial drug
years later.
[...]The positive effects of the mobile and internet revolutions were tempered by their increasing fragility as scamming and viruses proliferated, preventing these networks from achieving the reliability required to become the backbone of developing economies — or a source of trustworthy information for anybody.[...]
[...]
Those who couldn’t buy their way out of chaos — which was most people — retreated to whatever “safety” they could find. With opportunity frozen and global mobility at a near standstill — no place wanted more people, especially more poor people — it was often a retreat to the familiar: family ties, religious beliefs, or even national allegiance. Trust was afforded to those who guaranteed safety and survival — whether it was a warlord, an evangelical preacher, or a mother. In some places, the collapse of state capacity led to a resurgence of feudalism. In other areas, people managed to create more resilient communities operating as isolated micro versions of formerly large-scale systems. The weakening of national governments also enabled grassroots movements to form and grow, creating rays of hope amid the bleakness. By 2030, the distinction between “developed” and “developing” nations no longer seemed particularly descriptive or relevant[...]

 

[Galaxia2002]

I have just realized that there are an article in this topic in SOTT. Sorry . Maybe the moderators can put it the Sott section?

 

[bngenoh]

This whole report is interesting as regards the scenarios, but as we all know from history, futurists have been more often wrong than right. Consider this conceptualization of the future of air travel circa 1900:

But the scenarios are surprisingly well balanced, so wait and see I guess, as the C's would say.

 

[obyvatel]

There is some priming going on in this report. The projected success of the Chinese Govt in tackling an epidemic by adopting "strong" measures would be one of them. The report has the feel of a game theory based projection study - osit.

 

[bngenoh]

There is some priming going on in this report. The projected success of the Chinese Govt in tackling an epidemic by adopting "strong" measures would be one of them. The report has the feel of a game theory based projection study - osit.

That was one of my impressions as well obyvatel, especially the whole rich moving into fortress like compounds and the poor into ghettos basically a return to feudalism, thus the whole developed/developing world thing becoming irrelevant, ya, they wish, I guess that's what they do best, project their delusions onto the reality and act to actualize it thus creating destruction for all, and eventually probably themselves.

 

[obyvatel]

There is some priming going on in this report. The projected success of the Chinese Govt in tackling an epidemic by adopting "strong" measures would be one of them. The report has the feel of a game theory based projection study - osit.

That was one of my impressions as well

Hi bngenoh,

That was not apparent from your previous post where you stated the scenarios were surprisingly well-balanced and posted a picture which looked like an effort to find humor in the situation.

When you have conflicting opinions on a subject, it may be useful to use critical thinking to suss out which view seems to be closer to objective reality. Otherwise, the mind is being carried away by the first associative thought that is brought forth by any topic.
fwiw

 

[loreta]

Why are they doing those futuristic scenarios? Why always those scenarios are so negatives? And also,why all this is accessible to everyone? It is for me a mystery. The Rockefeller association is working for whom when they imagine what can happen in the future?

Do we know if one of their scenarios has happened? I really don't like these predictions. Because this looks very serious for them. We are not reading a fiction novella, nor a scenario for a movie. We know how strong is their power.

 

[bngenoh]

There is some priming going on in this report. The projected success of the Chinese Govt in tackling an epidemic by adopting "strong" measures would be one of them. The report has the feel of a game theory based projection study - osit.

That was one of my impressions as well

Hi bngenoh,

That was not apparent from your previous post where you stated the scenarios were surprisingly well-balanced and posted a picture which looked like an effort to find humor in the situation.

When you have conflicting opinions on a subject, it may be useful to use critical thinking to suss out which view seems to be closer to objective reality. Otherwise, the mind is being carried away by the first associative thought that is brought forth by any topic.
fwiw

The well balanced bit, was about the general flavor of the scenarios, there were bits that I saw as a psychos wet dream of domination after the dust has settled as well, I was referring to the general sense of the report, always keeping in mind that the devil is in the details and that when one speaks in generalities, natural discontinuities follow. This keeps me from dragging out a post, it is only when a member brings it out to the table, then I say "yes, I noted that as well..." or "yes, but..." or "no,..." etc.

 

[Galaxia2002]

Why are they doing those futuristic scenarios? Why always those scenarios are so negatives? And also,why all this is accessible to everyone? It is for me a mystery. The Rockefeller association is working for whom when they imagine what can happen in the future?

Do we know if one of their scenarios has happened? I really don't like these predictions. Because this looks very serious for them. We are not reading a fiction novella, nor a scenario for a movie. We know how strong is their power.

Hi Loreta, what happened is that I focused in take the more relevant information from the report, negative in its most. The report also speculate about positives futures, but even in that scenarios prevails the pandemics scenario, the use of GMO's food promoted as a good thing and the control of CO2 emissions.
This foundation can be (just speculation) one of the most outer circle regarding secret societies, the quorum, Illuminati, masonry, that maybe have some clue about the future and that permeates in their discussions and his work.

 

[obyvatel]

There is some priming going on in this report. The projected success of the Chinese Govt in tackling an epidemic by adopting "strong" measures would be one of them. The report has the feel of a game theory based projection study - osit.

That was one of my impressions as well

Hi bngenoh,

That was not apparent from your previous post where you stated the scenarios were surprisingly well-balanced and posted a picture which looked like an effort to find humor in the situation.

When you have conflicting opinions on a subject, it may be useful to use critical thinking to suss out which view seems to be closer to objective reality. Otherwise, the mind is being carried away by the first associative thought that is brought forth by any topic.
fwiw

The well balanced bit, was about the general flavor of the scenarios, there were bits that I saw as a psychos wet dream of domination after the dust has settled as well, I was referring to the general sense of the report, always keeping in mind that the devil is in the details and that when one speaks in generalities, natural discontinuities follow. This keeps me from dragging out a post, it is only when a member brings it out to the table, then I say "yes, I noted that as well..." or "yes, but..." or "no,..." etc.

Read your first post again bngenoh and try to see if you can find a disconnect between that one and what you agreed to in the subsequent post. I do not find anything humorous about the report. Well-balanced indicates looking at situations from different perspectives imo - I did not find that in the report either.

 

[bngenoh]

Read your first post again bngenoh and try to see if you can find a disconnect between that one and what you agreed to in the subsequent post. I do not find anything humorous about the report. Well-balanced indicates looking at situations from different perspectives imo - I did not find that in the report either.

Hi obyvatel, let me try to clarify,

The picture about the future of air travel, was included to show just how wrong experts can be about their predictions about the future, it was not intended as humorous at all, I should have explained.

As to well balanced:

Once crossed, these axes create a matrix of four very different futures:

LOCK STEP – A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback

CLEVER TOGETHER – A world in which highly coordinated and successful strategies emerge for addressing both urgent and entrenched worldwide issues

HACK ATTACK – An economically unstable and shock-prone world in which governments weaken, criminals thrive, and dangerous innovations emerge

SMART SCRAMBLE – An economically depressed world in which individuals and communities develop localized, makeshift solutions to a growing set of problems.

What surprised me and elicited my well balanced opinion, was the smart scramble, considering the source of the report, they could've easily not even mentioned such a possibility. All the scenarios are playing out in real time, it was just surprising to me that they would even mention it as a valid possibility.

 

[Don Genaro]

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating
from wild geese...

Interesting that this time it's being spread by wild geese given the meaning of a wild goose chase in English. Reminds me of the wild rat chase in finding the cause of the black death. I suppose, at least, the "truth" here is that it's airborne. Also, interesting that they give 2012 for this since the C's said "18 to 24 months for the return of the black death" about 16 months ago...