What do you think about this?
-
2 RepliesI think that there is a huge difference between what appears to be the implication of your use of the term "tier 1 economy" and Professor Kaku's use of the term "type 1". Type 1 civilization (in his usage) implies a global integration, borderless availability, and non-localized/regionalized motivation and capabilities. He calls the Internet a "proto-communications network for a civilization on the verge of Type 1 capabilities". Similarly, the EU & NAFTA are both "proto-economies" that are capable of growing/evolving/transitioning into a true Type 1 economy". But neither the EU, NAFTA, nor the Pacific Rim economies are at the level of a Type 1 civilization. If and/or when they all integrate? Then the global economy would be that what Kaku is referring to as a Type 1 civilization. A civilization of that type wouldn't see/treat Europe, the Americas, Asia as anything other than geographic notions. They wouldn't be seen or treated as "different" than "the others". There certainly wouldn't be "tiers" within that economy, culture or civilization. Not to be a true "Type 1". The loss of nationalism, of continentalism, of racism and of culturalism (as "we are different than they") would all disappear in a Type 1 civilization as envisioned and described by the Professor.