dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

>>9581937

Scenarios for the Future of Technology

and International Development

This report was produced by

The Rockefeller Foundation

and Global Business Network.

May 2010

THE SCENARIO NARRATIVES

Lock Step pg.18

LOCK STEP

Scenario

Narratives

A world of tighter top-down government control and more

authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing

citizen pushback

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been

anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s

H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating

from wild geese — was extremely virulent and

deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared

nations were quickly overwhelmed when the

virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly

20 percent of the global population and killing

8 million in just seven months, the majority of

them healthy young adults. The pandemic also

had a deadly effect on economies: international

mobility of both people and goods screeched to

a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and

breaking global supply chains. Even locally,

normally bustling shops and office buildings sat

empty for months, devoid of both employees

and customers.

The pandemic blanketed the planet — though

disproportionate numbers died in Africa,

Southeast Asia, and Central America, where

the virus spread like wildfire in the absence

of official containment protocols. But even

in developed countries, containment was a

challenge. The United States’s initial policy of

“strongly discouraging” citizens from flying

proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the

spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but

across borders. However, a few countries did

fare better — China in particular. The Chinese

government’s quick imposition and enforcement

of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well

as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of

all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping

the spread of the virus far earlier than in other

countries and enabling a swifter postpandemic

recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that

took extreme measures to protect its citizens

from risk and exposure. During the pandemic,

national leaders around the world flexed their

authority and imposed airtight rules and

restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face

masks to body-temperature checks at the entries

to communal spaces like train stations and

supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded,

this more authoritarian control and oversight

of citizens and their activities stuck and even

intensified. In order to protect themselves from

the spread of increasingly global problems — from

pandemics and transnational terrorism to

environmental crises and rising poverty — leaders

around the world took a firmer grip on power.

At first, the notion of a more controlled world

gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens

willingly gave up some of their sovereignty — and

their privacy — to more paternalistic states

in exchange for greater safety and stability.

Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for

top-down direction and oversight, and national

leaders had more latitude to impose order in the

ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this

heightened oversight took many forms: biometric

IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter

regulation of key industries whose stability

was deemed vital to national interests. In many

developed countries, enforced cooperation with a

suite of new regulations and agreements slowly

but steadily restored both order and, importantly,

economic growth.

Across the developing world, however, the

story was different — and much more variable.

Top-down authority took different forms

in different countries, hinging largely on

the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their

leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful

leaders, citizens’ overall economic status

and quality of life increased. In India, for

example, air quality drastically improved after

2016, when the government outlawed highemitting

vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction

of ambitious government programs to improve

basic infrastructure and ensure the availability

of clean water for all her people led to a sharp

decline in water-borne diseases. But more

authoritarian leadership worked less well — and

in some cases tragically — in countries run by

irresponsible elites who used their increased

power to pursue their own interests at the

expense of their citizens.

There were other downsides, as the rise of

virulent nationalism created new hazards:

spectators at the 2018 World Cup, for example,