Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
I think in the long term future, after extreme poverty and its associated ills have been eradicated, and after hopefully solving issues over climate change and sustainability in part through the stabilisation of population numbers, the main concerns will be the impact of neutral or negative economic growth on a national and global scale, the antibiotics crisis or similar, and the depletion of various rare resources.

I suspect by then though, national and global boundaries will be a lot more irrelevant and there will be a lot more of a focus on measures like a Happiness Index.
It's almost inevitable with ongoing peace populations will stabilize but to what level?

The demographic pyramid will be a demographic condom, and this doesn't bode well for progress. The people driving society will be old and this is a dangerous mix not for conflict or war but for stagnation. It's no suprise Japan shifted heavily to the regressive in the last 30 years and it won't be a surprise if Europe does in the next 30. What happens when the political apparatus of democracy facilities only regressive forces within the society. I think democracy is great but if there is a weakness in this organization method, is that it's largely demographics driven.

England is a good example I think of a very regressive shift to the right, the demographics lends itself to the Tories win elections for the 30-40 years straight. Corbyn winning the election is kind of like the Labour party entering a hospice. How can a Labour party win if the demographic is retiring or retired? And I don't see Corbyn with enough support to progress, more a ethical progressive but isolationist, and only token measures for material progress(because the people voting will not support them). I don't see him having the influence or power and mainstream support to stop the class war going in England.