The 2010s are over. The 2020s are just hours away, full of possibility and expectation.
The decade opened with the unveiling of the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world, and has ended with impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump. A colossal earthquake demolished Haiti that January, just as bushfires have set Australia alight this December. In the UK, one million fewer people live in absolute poverty, and Spain, Germany and France have all won the Football World Cup. It has been a decade of humanity living amidst huge change - as in every decade.
And politics. Where has the decade left us politically? There is an air of having been chewed up and spat out by the 2010s' politics, as we stumble into 2020, hoping for deliverance.
To clarify all this, I've picked out three of the most interesting political and social trends from the last decade, with a short description and analysis of where that leaves us now.
For good or for bad, this is how the 2010s end.
1) The Death of The Political Class
Every year the high and mighty of politics and economics are organised by the World Economic Forum to meet in Davos - a plush Swiss ski resort. There they discuss all matter of gibberish. These people are the political class.
They are mostly liberals, upper middle-class born, believers in rational, intelligent leadership and committed to democracy and their right to lead that democracy. They saw the fall of the Iron Curtain and successful intervention in the 1st Gulf War (1992) early in their careers.
They were shocked by 9/11 and the Second Gulf War (2003) which they believed they would have avoided. They all subscribe to The Economist and the Financial Times. And they have provided woefully little leadership in response to the EU Referendum, the 2016 Presidential Election, the economic growth of Africa and the all-important issue of climate change.
Countries are historically run by leaders with degrees who spend several years in business or the Bar before turning to politics. There they manage traditional political parties and make medium-sized changes to the existing structure of things. At some point they get booted out, so they retire and write memoirs where they manage to be reasonably polite to their former opponents. They do not question democracy, human rights or the rule of law, and they believe in free speech (of course) and have smart people around them that help them out.
But where were those men to challenge Mrs Clinton in the primaries in 2016? Or to lead the Labour Party instead of Mr Corbyn? Where were they when Italy needed a skilled Prime Minister? Or when the United Nations' Secretary-General role needed energy and verve? Where were they hiding when the migrant crisis reared its ugly head?
A whole generation of leaders, now in their mid-fifties, went missing in the late 2010s. Cameron resigned, Obama ran out of time, Angela Merkel became a shadow of her former self. They lost, outmanoeuvred by social media-driven populists with no experience of governance.
After long taking for granted their capability to lead, the political class have lost the momentum to leaders like President Trump, Matteo Salvini and Narenda Modi; dangerous, divisive men who do not have a shared code of conduct and who do not believe in itty-bitty tweaks to the economy where they can rework it with a sledgehammer.
Street protests and populism own the stage. Why have a degree in law to stand in Parliament when you can throw molotov cocktails against that law and create just as much change? The political class seems to have collapsed and chaos has filled the vacuum.
Secondly there is an increasing fragmentation of our identity as humans. Belief in community and inter-generational unity is declining, fuelled by social media. The emphasis on family and community that peaked in the 2000s is waning, as ideas of identity; sexual, moral and physical, among others, have become personal, rather than defined by society.
We see this in social media. The echo chambers that affirm our cosy ideologies mean that we control what we see and hear more than at any other time in living memory. Other people and other ideas are less relevant to our perceptions of the world than what we see on Facebook (in the West) or Whatsapp (in Brazil or India). We are able to make an online identity that has no basis in reality and rejects influence from elsewhere.
We see this in how Generation Z behave. Georgia Gould shows in her book 'Wasted: How Misunderstanding Young Britain Threatens Our Future' that those of us born from the mid-1990s on prioritise ourselves over others. We have more confidence in our own abilities but we see teams and communities as existing just for our own gain. This explains the boom in discussions about identity - no longer do we feel that other people are relevant to how we live and think, as we are the most important opinion we know.
And we see it in the inter-generational conflict that has always been a presence in human society but has now reached new levels, as seen in skewed voting patterns: over 65s are 20% more likely to vote Conservative and 10% less likely to vote Labour compared with 2010, while 18-24 year olds are 20% more likely to vote Labour (Conservative vote share stays the same). The difference in opinion is striking and shows a serious age divide that neither side - inflamed by social media and a reduced community spirit - has a desire to cross.
And so the 2010s have left us with an increasing individuality - that we can make our identity whatever we want it to be - but also a downgrading of the importance of community and generational unity. People are striking out by themselves more confidently, able to reject traditional ideas of family and society as uneccessary.
Let's split the world's most influential countries into several classes. Class 1 is the United States. The world's preeminent exporter of culture, economic influence, currency and hard power.
In Class 2 are China, the UK and France. They combine large military influence with significant economic and diplomatic clout and are primary players in most global issues.
And in Class 3 are (broadly) Canada, India, Italy, Russia, Australia, Japan, Germany, and the EU. These are countries with some influence, and with either a strong economic or military presence rather than both. It is Class 3 that is interesting.
Because it is the Class 3 countries that have become much more prominent this decade.
Countries are historically run by leaders with degrees who spend several years in business or the Bar before turning to politics. There they manage traditional political parties and make medium-sized changes to the existing structure of things. At some point they get booted out, so they retire and write memoirs where they manage to be reasonably polite to their former opponents. They do not question democracy, human rights or the rule of law, and they believe in free speech (of course) and have smart people around them that help them out.
But where were those men to challenge Mrs Clinton in the primaries in 2016? Or to lead the Labour Party instead of Mr Corbyn? Where were they when Italy needed a skilled Prime Minister? Or when the United Nations' Secretary-General role needed energy and verve? Where were they hiding when the migrant crisis reared its ugly head?
A whole generation of leaders, now in their mid-fifties, went missing in the late 2010s. Cameron resigned, Obama ran out of time, Angela Merkel became a shadow of her former self. They lost, outmanoeuvred by social media-driven populists with no experience of governance.
After long taking for granted their capability to lead, the political class have lost the momentum to leaders like President Trump, Matteo Salvini and Narenda Modi; dangerous, divisive men who do not have a shared code of conduct and who do not believe in itty-bitty tweaks to the economy where they can rework it with a sledgehammer.
Street protests and populism own the stage. Why have a degree in law to stand in Parliament when you can throw molotov cocktails against that law and create just as much change? The political class seems to have collapsed and chaos has filled the vacuum.
2) The Individuality Boom
Secondly there is an increasing fragmentation of our identity as humans. Belief in community and inter-generational unity is declining, fuelled by social media. The emphasis on family and community that peaked in the 2000s is waning, as ideas of identity; sexual, moral and physical, among others, have become personal, rather than defined by society.
We see this in social media. The echo chambers that affirm our cosy ideologies mean that we control what we see and hear more than at any other time in living memory. Other people and other ideas are less relevant to our perceptions of the world than what we see on Facebook (in the West) or Whatsapp (in Brazil or India). We are able to make an online identity that has no basis in reality and rejects influence from elsewhere.
We see this in how Generation Z behave. Georgia Gould shows in her book 'Wasted: How Misunderstanding Young Britain Threatens Our Future' that those of us born from the mid-1990s on prioritise ourselves over others. We have more confidence in our own abilities but we see teams and communities as existing just for our own gain. This explains the boom in discussions about identity - no longer do we feel that other people are relevant to how we live and think, as we are the most important opinion we know.
And we see it in the inter-generational conflict that has always been a presence in human society but has now reached new levels, as seen in skewed voting patterns: over 65s are 20% more likely to vote Conservative and 10% less likely to vote Labour compared with 2010, while 18-24 year olds are 20% more likely to vote Labour (Conservative vote share stays the same). The difference in opinion is striking and shows a serious age divide that neither side - inflamed by social media and a reduced community spirit - has a desire to cross.
And so the 2010s have left us with an increasing individuality - that we can make our identity whatever we want it to be - but also a downgrading of the importance of community and generational unity. People are striking out by themselves more confidently, able to reject traditional ideas of family and society as uneccessary.
3) The New Kids on The Block
In Class 2 are China, the UK and France. They combine large military influence with significant economic and diplomatic clout and are primary players in most global issues.
And in Class 3 are (broadly) Canada, India, Italy, Russia, Australia, Japan, Germany, and the EU. These are countries with some influence, and with either a strong economic or military presence rather than both. It is Class 3 that is interesting.
Because it is the Class 3 countries that have become much more prominent this decade.
After years on the wane, Russia stunned the West by invading Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in 2014. India was a relatively bit player in the 2000s but this year has become the fifth largest national economy, and is still growing.
Peaceful Canada has significantly increased its role in foreign affairs, rebuking both Saudi Arabia and China in 2018, while the EU, formerly a quiet regional economy, has led a noisy pushback against global tech firms, slapping $9.5bn on Google since 2017.
Pacifist Japan has been trying to expand its military presence, while Italy has courted with controversial hard-right governance.
Why the sudden change? Continued global economic growth since 2010 means that trade has made countries richer and with increased connections with each other. The result is less dependence on the Class 1 and 2 nations for trade and security. And this is compounded by implicit American withdrawal from international events, leaving space for other countries to make noise.
Maybe this is Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau taking a very active role in global affairs this decade, and criticising President Trump - two things unthinkable for America's smaller neighbour previously. Or Russian President Putin reviving Russia's regional presence, and meddling in several western elections.
And this is also, most interestingly, the European Union becoming a new player. The 2016 British EU referendum result had an adverse affect, as painfully protracted Brexit negotiations have dissuaded disunity. Massive regulation against tech monopolies has set the global standard. There are explicit moves towards a joint defence force. China's inroads in Southern and Eastern Europe are being more openly blocked. The EU is the world's second largest economy and is starting to both realise it, and use that power elsewhere.
The effect of the growing voice of Class 3 nations are hard to judge. But policy and global tone is no longer set by Class 1 or even 2 states; countries have more freedom and more independence, and they're unlikely to let it go in the 2020s.
Who can know what the world will look like in the 2020s? Even the most carefully calculated predictions may not survive on contact with reality. But for saying where we're at now, I hope this is a pretty good attempt. The 2010s have left us with a very clear legacy. We shall see what it turns into.
Have a Happy New Year, and a very Happy Decade.
Theo
Why the sudden change? Continued global economic growth since 2010 means that trade has made countries richer and with increased connections with each other. The result is less dependence on the Class 1 and 2 nations for trade and security. And this is compounded by implicit American withdrawal from international events, leaving space for other countries to make noise.
Maybe this is Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau taking a very active role in global affairs this decade, and criticising President Trump - two things unthinkable for America's smaller neighbour previously. Or Russian President Putin reviving Russia's regional presence, and meddling in several western elections.
And this is also, most interestingly, the European Union becoming a new player. The 2016 British EU referendum result had an adverse affect, as painfully protracted Brexit negotiations have dissuaded disunity. Massive regulation against tech monopolies has set the global standard. There are explicit moves towards a joint defence force. China's inroads in Southern and Eastern Europe are being more openly blocked. The EU is the world's second largest economy and is starting to both realise it, and use that power elsewhere.
The effect of the growing voice of Class 3 nations are hard to judge. But policy and global tone is no longer set by Class 1 or even 2 states; countries have more freedom and more independence, and they're unlikely to let it go in the 2020s.
Who can know what the world will look like in the 2020s? Even the most carefully calculated predictions may not survive on contact with reality. But for saying where we're at now, I hope this is a pretty good attempt. The 2010s have left us with a very clear legacy. We shall see what it turns into.
Have a Happy New Year, and a very Happy Decade.
Theo
