By Nneka Okumazie

It is likely that a key reason for Asia’s powerful rise in recent decades is that white people fell into a deep perilous sleep – with no wakefulness in sight.

There is something significant to free enterprise – cold hard cash. And Asia continues to beat them at their own game.

Capitalism, predicated on competitive productivity, found fertility in Asia, as the whites optimized for profit, which goes to some, and waned in – a – collective progress.

Budget cuts, deficits, dismaying healthcare situations, austerity, unemployment, recession, etc. are bells of a decline, though strengths abound in other areas.

There is wealth in the dirt and for centuries, the whites were able to pass around aspects of the unpleasant – in important but profitable work – to others.

But this, for Asia, unlike others in the past for situation, prescience, etc. was willing to seem dumb and get roughened, learn, position, get better and become the engine of global supply.

Though many posit paths for Asia’s not so simple rise, one thing is clear, they took advantage.

The rise of Asia does not mean they would overpower the world, or lead it – unlikely, at least through this century, but they have taken hold of something that in possession of the whites may have been – some – more equitable for the world.

The rise of the dominant civilization through centuries came with trenchant imagination, invention, overwhelming courage, in-group fairness, trust, some integrity, rarefied observation, impermeable loyalty, push-pull drive or attempt propensity, spot-opportunity-alertness, etc.

But these, for more whites, continue to recede.

It is true that after near matchless excellence through history, to relish and chill, because with what should be part decline – remains far ahead of most of the world.

Though emerging differently – Asia was able to soup together their ways and other aspects of growth determinism.

There is no way it should not have been obvious that in a capitalist society, the most important sector is the economy and the most important field is economics.

Another dance is of the drifter’s drum.

Once the economy falters – others follow.

Most of the things that grow – commercially – are for perceived value, graded by price.

Big stuff like the defence that grows across nations – seeming to defy local economics, is not by itself growth but a governance tumour.

There is the security hallucination of weapons first, forgetting the economy is the greatest weapon.

Aside from growing wastes with rusty weapons across zones, there are categories that will almost never be used, not because there won’t be conflicts but because there is less incentive for self-destruction, for those that have things going – somewhat – well for them.

Also, those in power, who initiate wars, often believe that they can win and retain power, not because they see it as a path to ruin.

So, battles are often circumspectly selected, and the mad person is not that crazy – at least initially.

There is a point of enough for direct weapons of war – in proportion to priority objectives.

But there may never be enough for indirect weapons of war – economy, food, development, etc.

The groupies for direct weapons forget that some of the leading nations of present-day productivity are not the most abundant with weapons. Those, for years, on weapons speedway focused on it, to lead, losing out on other areas, as others rose.

Some countries almost seem to have outsourced their defence. Also, there is a high attraction for others to have an alliance with those who make stuff, or maybe prioritize them.

More weapons may mean an appetite for conflict or hyper-belligerence.

Conflicts remain uncertain with the use of fair weapons, as well unclear benefits amid so much noise.

The economic decline may – maybe – be turned around with invasion centuries ago – and then occupation, but with horror weapons now and continuous options for resources and production elsewhere, weapons winders bear economic senescence.

Some may argue the need for new frontiers of defence, yes, maybe, but the economy, economy mostly.

There should be at least hundreds of new economic ideas tested on small scale across locations – to find new options with demand, supply and more.

Economics should be the most with the number of tryouts seeking how to make progress in a changing world, but painfully, most in the field are showroom economists, displaying data prowess, bickering over trends and terms but deficient in applicable economic ideas for continuous progress.

They have become watchers of the gauge, rather than seek hundreds of mobility alternatives to keep the economic cargo moving; that if some parts go to others, there should be tens of options to redirect the loss in gainful ways.

There are some big ideas on what to do in some cases and sometimes just one. If the best to come up with is just one, not at least twenty, it has already failed. Who cares about prestigious titles, degrees, places or roles if they have little ideas in their field on how to move all forward as they watch their civilization asphyxiate?

Most economists in recent decades had no major paths for the future. They sheltered in the lack-of-better-ideas prison, similar now by most economists, towards the future, with resignation. Such a shame that they know how many economic troubles had been responsible for problems across the world throughout history, but refuse to drive economics reproductively with great ideas for new options regardless of what emerges and how tough it gets, uncertainties or catastrophes.

Most economists are an embarrassment, with nothing to contribute to progress than – to be dated analysis, debates over who crashes first, sham indicators and void revisions.

They forget how responsible they are not just for their own civilization, but also for the developing world since the majority of the developing world will never do anything new for themselves except copy from elsewhere, or adopt something really insignificant to their collective progress and yell.

Many years ago, the rigid capitalism models, caused lots of union troubles that may be led, in part, to horror stance that maybe also led, in part, to trouble ideologies years on. Economy first, but most economists show no leadership, so the advantage is taken of their turf for all kinds of illegal stuff.

If for example, in many developing countries, someone asks some people, why are you involved in organized crime? They may give common ludicrous answers, but one thing they don’t often say:

They want to be regarded.

In many developing countries, money – per capitalism copy – rules, so not having means being nothing, and many don’t want this.

So, for them, it is a status game, show-off and classifying display to appear better than others.

Status is worthless.

It is not often obvious because most people want to be admired, but status by itself – as a destination, not a tool – is worthless.

The world is a collection of segmented countries. If developed countries are trains on their tracks, and some emerging nations too are, some developing nations have no trains, no tracks and their people are standing by.

In that no progress situation, some are better off, so instead of most seeking ways to found a new track, or repurpose an old track, get some locomotor and get started, their people on that ground, table on status, use possessions or exposure to class, so as to distinguish selves from others.

Some get aboard other trains, do OK, but mostly get sucked in becoming little to progress.

They may not see it but are insignificant in how most act or appear, to many on trains of progress.

Who cares that someone in some null developing country somewhere drives a cool vehicle?

What does it solve? What does that do for the world or their people per progress?

There is some developing country somewhere, with their reputable companies, neighbourhoods, schools, positions, tribalism, with people there thinking they have it all, who cannot look at themselves at how backwards they are, and find ways to collectively go forward.

Most often forget that individual success is mostly an opportunity to take the collective risk so that if it works, it benefits them and their people. But unfortunately, these places lack much, while getting consumed by petty heavy nonsense, repeating the same with many of their progenitors.

There is often an insistence on education, democracy, freedom, transparency, etc. Those are cool indexes but are like the tenth need for most developing countries.

Since their schools mostly don’t have advanced facilities or much, rather than focus on studying what others are studying, yet not great at it, they should instead have institutes of imagination, colleges of observation, labs of integrity, departments of courage, groups of fairness, schools of trust and integrity.

Most of the countries lack these. There is hardly a way for most new leaders or many of the sham revolutions to do much.

Why won’t many be corrupt?

On the ground, the goal is to make it comfortable or maybe find ways to feel better than others, etc.

What a joke for all the symbolism from most of these places that they just cannot have basic fairness.

Conferences, summits or gatherings to discuss their nothing subjects all lack emotional observation, no exception.

The same way status is worthless in those countries is the same way status is worthless anywhere in the world.

The moving train has several mechanical parts, it is possible to be on an amazing train and have others work on the ugly parts, but after a while, those tending and supplying the ugly parts hold some power. Status may still seem valid, but others handle something important.

Status, Rolodex or connections, as the way things should happen, is part of the model of economic decline.

It was cool monarchy powered stuff, but with similar, now, in parallel to Asia’s fierce economic procession, doom, doom.

There are many of the bygone eras who hardly saw the future. Then in their status, feeling like the centre of all, are gone, faded, irrelevant, not remembered. This is often forgotten by many in the present.

There are people who for whatever reason believe that being born white or in some associated country means being special, or better than others, NO it does not.

Those in the tug for this or against can’t see their loss in economic substitution.

For some, they claim they are protecting civilization, or others from taking over, but this will not happen.

Mostly, in these major countries, they have so many programs, to assist the sick, the troubled, those in need, including interventions, tips against addiction, harm, etc. The summary of the message is don’t waste your life, even if it achieves nothing grand per se, just do OK, and who knows, it might.

Now, in some places, certain tiny groups say they have to do ruinous martyrdom to conquer others. So an ideology that tells people to waste their life will conquer a place already evolved to cherish life?

It won’t happen.

Most of the fears are diversions from an economy that has cratered and no answer, so find something to grab minds and leave out answers.

Whatever the future may hold, hate is not the future.

Deception is not the future.

It is possible to predict their directions, but both will not win.

In hindsight deceit revealed is sometimes more than disappointing, just like hate, greed, lust, evil, wickedness, etc.

It is easier to predict the future, with themes than with events.

The future is extremism, though could be in useful stuff.

Extremism, not moderation will be the future, from different directions.

Though Asia made it, they don’t have big ideas that would move them or the world far super forward.

The world too is short on answers.

The fields that produce studies and should quadruple outputs, to close in on pervasive progress face funding cuts and diversions.

Progress stalls because of economics and swing set, post-ideas economists.

Technology is far subject to economics than many believe it is an advance driven progress.

There is a big country whose meaning will – maybe – depend on sabotage and antagonism because they have lost out on the future, so they have to posture with both.

There is also another big country, with super-smart people doing amazingly and leading across fields nationally and internationally, but that country is unlikely to succeed, even if some of their known cognitive snipers elsewhere – come to power.

This is due to religious aggression, certain culture and the funnel of their people to get out to enthusiastically build the civilization of others.

Religion is mostly about association and possession – what the people believe they have. It is not often the most important to decisions as many prioritize whatever according to desires, needs or status, not adherence or pure heart.

The future is religion as well, though may not be just organized.

Some people remain consumed by what skills people would need in future?

Economics is before all, few see it or that it is diseased and needs massive multiple ideas, instead most people run amok seeking scraps of economic servants.

[Matthew 6:21, For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.]