Making predictions about the future can be a futile enterprise. Not only because of the complexity of social life but also because of the uncertainty that sits outside of human control. The past and the present can offer us some indication of where we are heading, but the truth is that we are as clueless as the protagonists of Saramagu's novel, Blindness. Some historians like to remind us that history repeats itself, in the sense that similar past events and developments created the conditions for significant changes to the established order, such as wars. But in 2022 history repeated (?) itself not as a bad joke, but as a travesty and a testament that prosperity can not always bring peace.
In this issue of The Economist, Russia was more or less a footnote, half a page buried in the Europe section. It predicted that the biggest problem for Putin was how to control the elections and the Internet. The biggest geopolitical challenge for the US and EU seems to be the rising Chinese power and the rivalry with Washington in economic and political terms. Ukraine is not even mentioned. Of course, it is easy to point fingers retrospectively. But realistically, no one could have predicted the Russian invasion. Russia's war in Ukraine has two significant implications; a real world and a theoretical. In practice it shows that writing off a declined power with tremendous nuclear capabilities is a big mistake. Even if China is the potentially ultimate disruptor of the current world order, focusing all the attention and energies to Beijing, and neglecting the unresolved issues in Europe, provides opportunities for a former superpower to reassert itself in the most dangerous way. In a theoretical context the war demonstrates the limits of predictive powers and says a lot about the failures of the all-encompassing grand theories.
In this sense, when The Economist rolls out annual issue every October/November about the world we are expecting to see the next year, all predictions are solely based on informative and conservative outlooks taken from trends of the previous year. Consequently, the title is fairly misleading because the world ahead is a mystery that will only reveal itself to us when we see it. What The Economist achieves brilliantly is to analyse and summarise the situation of the year that is ending. This is why the title should be The World in 2021 or the The World Behind 2021 (the annual publication changed its name based on the podcast series of the same name and run by Tom Standage, the editor of the current issue). Of course, this wouldn't sell as good.
For all the criticism, The World Ahead 2022 is an incisive and informative collection of articles that present the current political, economic, and social trends from around the world, although from a western perspective. Not all predictions are in vain. The issue's statement about the course of the Covid-19 virus in 2022 designated its relegation from pandemic to that of endemic. So far this corresponds to reality, however bleak the situation can suddenly become in the case of mutation of a deadlier variant. Other issues will persist, such as worries about inflation, the growth of crypto-currencies, the lack of action against climate change, the divisive polarisation in American politics, and the political battle to regulate tech giants. This year will also mark the turning point in history when obese children are going to outnumber the underweight, a very early sign of elimination of poverty and a statement of humanity's propensity for the extremes. Excellent and original articles are about the "cancel culture", Al Weiwei's claim that contemporary arts are detached from spirituality due to their commercial aspects, and Ann Wroe's obituary of coal.
Yes, The Economist didn't see the war in Ukraine coming, which has a variety of tremendous implications to all aspects of our society; from suffering human lives to skyrocketing energy and commodities prices due to Russian sanctions. But neither did anyone else. Brexit, the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine show us how unpredictable the future can be. This doesn't mean we need to give up on taking informative decisions.
P. S. The smell of the magazine is simply outstanding; a testament of the high quality of paper. And no, I don't usually tend to smell my reading material. It just happened that I had a couple of pints of Guinness with my colleagues after work on a Friday evening. The consequence is reading the issue while commuting home.