|
''Y = Arctg X: The Hyperbola of the World Order'' is a nonfiction world history and world politics book by historian Max Ostrovsky with a "Foreword" by anthropologist Robert Carneiro. It aims to explain why certain civilizations existed as systems of independent states while others evolved into universal empires, what conditions cause the pendulum to swing one way or the other, what the drawn theory implies for the future of the modern civilization, and where we stand now. ==Overview== An inexorable trend occurred throughout the human history: political units strove to grow larger in size and fewer in number. Leafing through pages of historical atlases, this trend strikes the observer. With scientific regularity appeared record-breaking empires in terms of both territory and population.〔List of Largest Empires〕 It looks as expanding pulsation of mathematically describable social trend.〔Hart, Hornell, "The Logistic Growth of Political Areas", ''Social Forces'', 26, (1948), 396-408; Naroll, Raoul, "Imperial Cycles and World Order", ''Peace Research Society'', 7, (1967), 83-101; Marano, Louis A., "A Macrohistoric Trend Towards World Government", ''Behavior Science Notes'', 8, (1973), 35-40.〕 The implication of this trend is obvious and its significance is hard to overestimate. The trend actually represents a process of the ongoing political unification of the world. The projection of the trend into very close future suggests the appearance of a single world-wide empire.〔K'ang Yu-wei, ''The One World Philosophy'', (tr. Thompson, Lawrence G., London, 1958); Vacher de Lapouge; George, ''L'Aryen: Son Rôle Social'', (Nantes, 1899, chapter "L`Avenir des Aryens,"); Robert Carneiro, "Political Expansion as an Expression of the Principle of Competitive Exclusion", ''Studying War: Anthropological Perspective'', (eds. Reyna, Stephen P. & Dawns, Richard Erskine, Gordon and Breach, New Hampshire, 1994); Robert Carneiro, "The Political Unification of the World", ''Cross Cultural Survey'', 38/2, (2004), 162-177.〕 ''Y = Arctg X: The Hyperbola of the World Order'' analyzes the trend in order to offer an explanatory theory and project the theory into future. Based on four civilizations—Egypt, Mesopotamia, China and the Mediterranean—the theory is tested on the whole world. Beginning since the dawn of history, it proceeds through the present stage into future. It combines the theories devoted to the theme from the earliest, drawn by Shang Yang,〔Shang Yang, ''The Book of the Governor of Shang Region'', (tr. Perelomov, L.S., Moscow, 1993).〕 Kautilya,〔Kautilya, ''Arthasastra'', (tr. Ramaswamy, T. N., Asia Publishers, London, 1962).〕 and Polybius,〔Polybius, ''Histories'', (tr. Tijev, A. J., Ladomir, Petersburg, 1994).〕 until the latest ones, by Edward Luttwak〔Edward Luttwak, ''The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire from the First Century AD to the Third'', (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976).〕 and Zbigniew Brzezinski.〔Zbigniew Brzezinski, ''The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives'', (Perseus Books, New York, 1997).〕 The analysis finds that any political system with a firm agricultural foundation is pre-destined to politically unify and turn the state of unity into norm. A long list of secondary factors lacks determinative influence but merely deflects the process whether accelerating or decelerating it. The main secondary factor is geopolitical circumscription〔Robert Carneiro, "The Circumscription Theory: Challenge and Response", ''American Behavioral Scientist'', 31/4, (1988), 497-511.〕—the degree to which a political system is spatially compact, static and isolated from other systems. The more a system is circumscribed, the sooner it unifies and the longer its unity persists. Circumscription explains the difference between the European and the Chinese patterns. Circumscribed China mostly existed as universal empire while ever-expanding Europe perpetuated the model of independent states. The same had held true for the difference between Egypt and Mesopotamia.〔Mario Liverani, ''International Relations in the Ancient Near East, 1600-1100 BC'', (New York: Palgrave, 2001); Mario Liverani, ''Prestige and Interest: International Relations in the Near East ca. 1600-1100 BC'', (Padova: Palgrave, 1990).〕 In history, two synchronous political processes occurred—external expansion and internal consolidation. Expansion complicated and sometimes outpaced consolidation. But the gap between the two processes was doomed to close due to the fact that the space of the earth is definite. The space ended towards the 20th century. The sovereign void of the world ended. No outlet for further expansion was left.〔Halford J. Mackinder, The Geographical Pivot of History, (London: J. Murray, 1904); Fredrick Jackson Turner, ''The Frontier in American History'', (New York: Holt, Rinchart and Winston, 1920).〕 The factor of circumscription became enacted and that moment our civilization headed straight towards overall unity. The Long Peace of La Belle Epoque was doomed; instead followed the era of World Wars. The time had come for great powers to clash in the fight of elimination. This time, the centripetal factor of circumscription was multiplied by the modern technology of warfare and communication. The technological progress reduced space and caused the world to shrink in terms of time required to overcome distance. Due to technological progress within circumscribed space, warfare drastically increased and within less than a century we overcame the centuries-old balance of power and reached a unipolar hegemonic world order. The macro-historical view reveals the true meaning of the ''unipolar moment'' we have witnessed. Underestimated by contemporary observers, the proclamation of the New World Order in 1990 signifies a milestone in the millennia-old trend of the political unification of the world. The synthesis of the theory with modern conditions suggests that the genesis of the World State is much closer at hand than it seems to most of us. Persistent multipolar and bipolar worlds passed their event horizon. Modern conditions swing the pendulum into the opposite direction—towards ever greater political consolidation. That is, the present global hegemony is supposed not to dissolve back into multipolarity but to turn into global empire.〔Hegemony and empire are distinguished according to Thucydides-the former as controlling only external affairs of other states and the latter their both external and internal affairs. Thucydides, ''History'', (tr. Stratanovsky, G. A., Moscow: Ladomir, 1981).〕 How hegemony is transformed into empire is exemplified by transformations of similar hegemonies in the past—Rome〔Edward N. Luttwak, ''The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire from the First Century AD to the Third'', (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976).〕 and Ch'in. Both adhered to the pattern of defensive imperialism, both began with isolationism (the earliest in history instances of the Monroe Doctrine) and both evolved from isolationism through hegemony into empire. The thesis shows that all three grand strategic transformations—of Rome, Ch'in and the United States—are essentially the same with the modern process being currently uncompleted. The two previous hegemonies produced anti-hegemonic back-clashes, defeated anti-hegemonic powers and established universal empires. Mainstream theories of International Relations expect anti-hegemonic power-balancing in our world too.〔Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics, (McGraw Hill, 1979); Kenneth N. Waltz, "The Emerging Structure of International Politics,"' ''International Security'', 18/2, (1993), 44-79;John J. Mearsheimer, "Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War,"' ''International Security'', 15/1, (1990), 5-56; Christopher Layne, "The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise?" ''International Security'', 17/4, (1993), 5-51; Christopher Layne, "The Unipolar Illusion Revisited: The Coming End of the United States’ Unipolar Moment", ''International Security'', 31/2, (2006), 7–41.〕 This work indicates plenty of symptoms confirming the gathering storm, mainly over the Eurasian land mass. The restoration of multipolarity became a universal aspiration across this continent; the transatlantic split revealed its tectonic depth; strategic partnership between major Eurasian powers is evolving; and the geopolitical doctrine of Eurasianism in Russia rose like a phoenix.〔Eurasia Movement; Alexander Dugin, ''Основы геополитики: геополитическое будущее России'' (''Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia''), (Moscow: Arctogaia, 1997); Alexander Dugin, "Манифест: Евразия превыше всего," (Manifest: Eurasia over All), http://newright.il.if.ua/evrazia.html; Alexander Dugin, ''Проект Евразия'', (''Project Eurasia''), )Moscow: Jauza, 2004); Mark Bassin, "Classical Eurasianism and the Geopolitics of Russian Identity" (2001) http://www.dartmouth.edu/~crn/crn_papers/Bassin.pdf; Mark Bassin, "Eurasianism "Classical" and "Neo": The Lines of Continuity," src-h.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/coe21/publish/no17.../14bassin.pdf; Mark Bassin, "Geopolitical Culture in the Post-9/11 Era: The Masks of Prometeus Revisited", (2007), http://www.colorado.edu/IBS/PEC/johno/pub/nazi; Mark Bassin, "Classical Eurasianism and the Geopolitics of Russian Identity," ''Ab Imperio'' 2, (2003), 257-267.〕 The beating pulse of Eurasia is still beating. The clash of civilizations is not plausible. Rather, the forthcoming clash is of Hemispheres—the Western based on North America versus the Eastern based on Eurasia. Turning to the school of geopolitics, this scenario is confirmed by the fondest of geopolitical theories.〔Halford J. Mackinder, The Geographical Pivot of History, (London: J. Murray, 1904).; Halford J. Mackinder, ''Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction'', (New York: Henri Holt & Company, 1919); Homer Lea, ''The Day of the Saxon''. (New York & London: Harper and Brothers, 1912); Alfred Thayer Mahan, ''The Problem of Asia and the Effects upon International Politics'', (Washington & London: Kennikat Press, 1920); Karl Haushofer, "Continental Bloc: Mittel Europa – Eurasia - Japan," 1941, in ''On Geopolitics'', (tr. Usachev I. G., Moscow: Mysl', 2004]; Nicholas John Spykman, ''America's Strategy in World Politics: the United States and the Balance of Power'', (New York: Archon Books, 1942); Nicholas John Spykman, ''The Geography of Peace'', (New York: Archon Books, 1944; Henry Kissinger, ''Diplomacy'', (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994); Zbigniew Brzezinski, ''The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives'', (New York: Perseus Books, 1997); Alexander Dugin, ''Основы геополитики: геополитическое будущее России'' (Foundations of Geopolitics), (Moscow: Arctogaia, 1997).〕 The geopolitical motion of the Eurasian land mass seems to indicate that close is the moment when a fight for global power would erupt mightier than the earth has ever seen, an ''Endkampf'' of epic dimensions. The two Hemispheres would clash on four fronts, exchanging multi-megaton salvos across all four oceans. In previous civilizations, warfare of any kind and scale was not eliminated but by universal unity. The nuclear warfare, as the record of human nature strongly suggests, will not be an exception. This book is devoid of maudlin sentiment or pious exhortation. It does not flinch to state: the mightiest war on this earth is yet to be fought, whether civilization is to survive or not. Either we will have a nuclear apocalypse or a nuclear genesis of the World State. In case the world survives World War III in one piece physically, a certain winning people would weld it into one piece politically. The War would be followed by sweeping conquest and annexation by a victorious power of the most of the world. The universal annexation would proceed under the known device: "one world or none." All weapons of mass destruction would be outlawed. The rest of strategic armor would be monopolized by the central power. The hegemonic strategy would be discredited once and for all in favor of the imperial. With shorter interruptions, the universal empires of ancient Egypt and China persisted for two-and-a-half millennia of their circumscribed existence, until they were engulfed by larger systems. The modern system, being global, is totally circumscribed. It can neither expand, nor be engulfed by a larger system, and this geopolitical condition will remain until the end of history. We are already in the global hegemony, we can expect its transformation into the global empire already within the span of this generation, but we should not expect its fall already after two-and-a-half millennia. Reversing the famous thesis,〔Charles Krauthammer, "The Unipolar Moment," ''Foreign Affairs'', 70/1, (Winter 1990/1), 23-33.〕 the "unipolar moment" proved to be not moment but state and hence onward is not supposed to be interrupted but by rare and brief, albeit deadly and destructive, multipolar moments. The image on the front cover (see above) shows two Egyptian gods, Horus and Seth, holding the hieroglyphic icon of unity. This 4000-year-old image illustrates the model of civilization which, besides being an exotic past, is our own very long future. ''Y = Arctg X: The Hyperbola of the World Order'' differs from the post-modern research, alternating between case-studies devoid of broader implication and broader topics described in relativist terms. The present theory of history is an instance of Realpolitik and Geopolitik, leading to a sweeping determinist theory and a clear future project. The world-historical trend is mathematically expressed by one short formula. This kind of theory seems to be debut by a professional historian. The science of history neither recognizes theories nor is used to multi-disciplinary approach. On the other hand, social sciences accustomed to theories take only a little note in primary sources. This theory, by contrast, is built on a firm factual basis of primary sources comparable in their quantity and diversity only to historical source-books. They range from the ''Epic of Gilgamesh'' to ''Herald Tribune'', from Bible to ''Mein Kampf'', and from the Shang bones inscriptions to the Pentagon tapes. The uniqueness of this theory of history is a combination of the primary-sources research common for historians with the theoretical and multi-disciplinary approach common for other social scientists. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Y = Arctg X: The Hyperbola of the World Order」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|