The author, like many people elsewhere, often daydreams about what the world in the future may look like. And as a not-so-well-trained social scientist, he does have certain observational tools to help hi decode the general trends of where humanity is heading toward. There is no definitive, absolute vision of future, of course. There are simply too many factors that will derail any concrete details. In the worst case scenario, Hollywood has already made countless predictions with apocalyptic sci-fi films. Everything from nuclear holocaust to life-ending climate change to alien invasion is definitely possible.
But at the opposite end of the spectrum, the world of the future may very much end up looking something like modern-day Dubai. It is perhaps the most accurate representation of that best case scenario for the obvious and not-so-obvious reasons. Demographics illustrates the obvious. Against a backdrop of orderly, Arabic- and English-littered streets, what is maybe the most diverse group of people inhabit the skyscraper-filled city. Walking into any shop in town, one would not be surprised to find Chinese, Filipinos, Indians, Africans, Arabs, and Europeans all in the same place at the same time.
And it is from this superficial observation of ethnic harmony amid diversity that the more nuanced character of Dubai's society can be seen. The first pertains to just how the city makes diversity work in its favor when there really isn't any obvious numerical majority for any ethnicity. It may be interesting to hear that such functionality make come from a very lack of democracy. This is rational precisely because there is no concept of "minority" here. Socialists will understand. In the past, they found out the hard way that people put national/ethnic allegiance much above that to social class.
This means that if Dubai is a democracy, no political candidate can ever achieve clear majority for any election, with a majority always opposing due to race and nationality issues. Thus, those who are elected into office by slim majorities can never hope to convincingly use fair victories at the ballot box as a source of political legitimacy. Many post-colonial African states built from differing tribes already experience this very issue. So, instead, Dubai's hereditary rulers have resorted to their deeds and projects as a source of continued maintenance of power and popularity among the diverse populace.
And it does work. People of all ethnicity want better infrastructure, lower crime rates, more daily conveniences, and cleaner streets. There are no difference across nationalities for what those projects mean and what they ought to achieve. But it seems that the Dubai government has not found that enough. They resorted to creating a "surveillance state" where the move of every inhabitant is monitored in public spaces. Positively put, it is likely for detection of any slight collective discontent so that they can be immediately addressed and calmed.
The resource-deprived humanity of the future may also resemble a post-oil boom Dubai in its chief means of deriving wealth. Dubai is run with money gained with payments of various "service fees" for bureaucratic procedures ranging from registering a business to paying water bills. It is a "quantity-over-quality" sort of strategy. By making the procedure extremely simple and cheap, the city attracts more businesses and residents, who help to increase the amount of service fees the city can pocket. It allows the city to fund itself without, straightforwardly put, having a hand in producing anything at all.
It is in the author's opinion that both modern-day Dubai and the "best possible scenario" of the future humanity cannot achieve the above-described model without the constant presence of a "Big Brother" figure. It is easy to see how the bureaucracy can fall apart without serious top-down derivation of long-term strategies and controls for issues such as corruption and free-riding. Informants must be present throughout the system to ensure that those who do not follow the rules are booted out the system and remain outside it (in the case of Dubai, "permanent deportation" is the word for foreigners)
Yet, as seemingly intrusive as it is, a system of efficiency achieved under autocracy and constant surveillance need not to be oppressive or anti-individualist. As Dubai has shown, it is really just about making it clear and transparent the limits people should heed as well as the punishments for crossing those lines. And surprisingly and a bit ironically, Dubai managed to create a "vibrant" open culture tolerant of such things as (expensive) alcohol and (multinational) prostitutes despite complete lack of a free press. The world of the future should very much take note.
But at the opposite end of the spectrum, the world of the future may very much end up looking something like modern-day Dubai. It is perhaps the most accurate representation of that best case scenario for the obvious and not-so-obvious reasons. Demographics illustrates the obvious. Against a backdrop of orderly, Arabic- and English-littered streets, what is maybe the most diverse group of people inhabit the skyscraper-filled city. Walking into any shop in town, one would not be surprised to find Chinese, Filipinos, Indians, Africans, Arabs, and Europeans all in the same place at the same time.
And it is from this superficial observation of ethnic harmony amid diversity that the more nuanced character of Dubai's society can be seen. The first pertains to just how the city makes diversity work in its favor when there really isn't any obvious numerical majority for any ethnicity. It may be interesting to hear that such functionality make come from a very lack of democracy. This is rational precisely because there is no concept of "minority" here. Socialists will understand. In the past, they found out the hard way that people put national/ethnic allegiance much above that to social class.
This means that if Dubai is a democracy, no political candidate can ever achieve clear majority for any election, with a majority always opposing due to race and nationality issues. Thus, those who are elected into office by slim majorities can never hope to convincingly use fair victories at the ballot box as a source of political legitimacy. Many post-colonial African states built from differing tribes already experience this very issue. So, instead, Dubai's hereditary rulers have resorted to their deeds and projects as a source of continued maintenance of power and popularity among the diverse populace.
And it does work. People of all ethnicity want better infrastructure, lower crime rates, more daily conveniences, and cleaner streets. There are no difference across nationalities for what those projects mean and what they ought to achieve. But it seems that the Dubai government has not found that enough. They resorted to creating a "surveillance state" where the move of every inhabitant is monitored in public spaces. Positively put, it is likely for detection of any slight collective discontent so that they can be immediately addressed and calmed.
The resource-deprived humanity of the future may also resemble a post-oil boom Dubai in its chief means of deriving wealth. Dubai is run with money gained with payments of various "service fees" for bureaucratic procedures ranging from registering a business to paying water bills. It is a "quantity-over-quality" sort of strategy. By making the procedure extremely simple and cheap, the city attracts more businesses and residents, who help to increase the amount of service fees the city can pocket. It allows the city to fund itself without, straightforwardly put, having a hand in producing anything at all.
It is in the author's opinion that both modern-day Dubai and the "best possible scenario" of the future humanity cannot achieve the above-described model without the constant presence of a "Big Brother" figure. It is easy to see how the bureaucracy can fall apart without serious top-down derivation of long-term strategies and controls for issues such as corruption and free-riding. Informants must be present throughout the system to ensure that those who do not follow the rules are booted out the system and remain outside it (in the case of Dubai, "permanent deportation" is the word for foreigners)
Yet, as seemingly intrusive as it is, a system of efficiency achieved under autocracy and constant surveillance need not to be oppressive or anti-individualist. As Dubai has shown, it is really just about making it clear and transparent the limits people should heed as well as the punishments for crossing those lines. And surprisingly and a bit ironically, Dubai managed to create a "vibrant" open culture tolerant of such things as (expensive) alcohol and (multinational) prostitutes despite complete lack of a free press. The world of the future should very much take note.
Comments
Post a Comment