本文探讨了两位思想家，布鲁诺·马萨斯和彼得·泽汉对世界未来的不同见解。马萨斯在《欧亚大陆的黎明》中对欧亚大陆的未来持乐观态度，认为欧亚大陆将崛起，并成为全球经济和政治的新中心。而泽汉则在《分裂的国度》中表达了对未来的悲观看法，认为美国影响力衰退将导致世界秩序崩溃，并引发新的冲突。

🤔 马萨斯在《欧亚大陆的黎明》中对欧亚大陆的未来持乐观态度，认为欧亚大陆将崛起，并成为全球经济和政治的新中心。他认为，欧亚大陆拥有丰富的资源和人口，以及独特的文化和历史，这些因素将推动其在未来发挥重要作用。他认为，中国崛起将是欧亚大陆崛起的关键动力，而欧亚大陆将成为全球经济和政治的新中心。

🌎 泽汉在《分裂的国度》中表达了对未来的悲观看法，认为美国影响力衰退将导致世界秩序崩溃，并引发新的冲突。他认为，美国在全球范围内的军事力量和经济实力正在下降，而其他国家则在崛起，这将导致世界格局发生重大变化。他认为，世界将回归到一个更加混乱和不稳定的状态，各国将为了资源和安全而相互竞争。

🤔 马萨斯和泽汉对未来的不同解读，反映了当前世界所面临的挑战和机遇。随着美国影响力的衰退，世界格局正在发生变化，而欧亚大陆的崛起将对未来的世界秩序产生重大影响。

🌎 尽管马萨斯和泽汉对未来的看法存在差异，但他们都认为，美国在全球范围内的影响力正在下降，这将导致世界格局发生重大变化。

🤔 他们的观点为我们提供了理解未来世界发展趋势的宝贵视角，也为我们思考如何应对未来挑战提供了参考。

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xexFJ7h0vULMDE7N77q_MIzXoerexfe_CqqGEL6hEoQ/edit#heading=h.qi8yp2d9wbt2

Podcast note: This reader-written review was included because it won the Readers' Choice Award from among all the runners-up.

What does the future look like? We are living through a transition between epochs. Whether marked by COVID-19, the election of Donald Trump or earlier by the global sub-prime crisis, the golden age of post-Cold War prosperity is ending. With the era defined by US political, cultural and economic hegemony, its decline is inextricably linked to the decline in US influence. Is the twenty first century really going to be the “Asian century” as China’s growth continues unabated? Or perhaps African, given by far the largest forecast population growth? What will become of the US? Of China and Russia and Europe? Two thinkers have sought to define this future. 

 

I first came across Bruno Maçães in 2017 on Marginal Revolution where Tyler Cowen was effusive about Maçães’ new book. I have enjoyed following his conversations and thoughts ever since, but it was only recently that I read Dawn of Eurasia. It is the first book of a career politician and diplomat clearly in love with his continent.

Peter Zeihan I came across on Patrick O'Shaughnessy’s excellent podcast. His brash prophesy and contrarian views on geopolitics are hypnotic and endlessly fascinating. Disunited Nations is his latest in a series that documents the rise and rise of US power. 

I found comparing them irresistible. Each lingers after reading. It’s that wonderful feeling of discovering a new area of knowledge to mine. Not natural companions, and mesmerising in their own ways, each story has a different texture and plots a different path for the world. Where one sees pessimistic reversion to a historic state of conflict, the other sees hopeful evolution. Where one deterministically condemns nations to their geographic destinies, the other sees each nation’s destiny as unwritten, yet to be informed by its history, literature and peoples.

 

Both Peter Zeihan and Bruno Maçães see US influence receding. But they agree on little else. Zeihan is deeply pessimistic about a world that awaits a more isolationist US, with a crumbling world order leaving less room for prosperity and reverting to nation-states jostling for food, energy and military security. Maçães sees China’s rise as