OP-ED: We should pay attention to history
Lately, I have been thinking about two famous quotes that help explain the importance of history.
Mark Twain is credited with the statement, “History never repeats itself, but it often rhymes.” Philosopher George Santayana more pessimistically wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.”
In today’s world it is easy to ignore history and get overwhelmed by unimportant details. We go down the rabbit hole of repetitive social media or “zombie scrolling” (mindlessly watching one clip after another) and inaccurate “doomscrolling” (which focuses on negative content). News is reported 24/7, in short sound bites or tweets, with minimal background.
We are not encouraged to slow down and consider current events within their historical context. It has become a chore to learn about more complicated topics that may actually affect our longer-term wellbeing.
Becoming numb to the news is a self-protective psychological response to information overload. The last weekend in April provided an excellent case in point.
On Saturday night, two of my favorite professional sports teams (Pittsburgh Penguins, New York Knicks) were each fighting for their playoff lives. Suddenly, an assassin broke into the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner with the president in attendance. The confusing “on again, off again” Iranian peace talks offered no clarity on how the war would end. Over 21 million Americans were in the path of severe weather, including tornadoes that destroyed entire towns. An unusually large number of wildfires continued across the Southeast, burning many homes to the ground.
This commentary will suggest that it is important to back away from the constant barrage of paralyzing news and to consider essential issues important to the fate of modern civilization. It will discuss two potential “doomsday” issues through the lens of recent history. Hopefully we can learn from historical mistakes and successes in an effort to preserve our future.
The first subject was highlighted in a recent piece in the Economist, “How to Avoid World War Three.” The article relied on two recent books to provide background and propose answers for world leaders. “The Coming Storm” by Yale historian Odd Arne Westad examines the threat of the next Great Power war and spells out interventions necessary to avoid it. “The Next World War,” by journalist Peter Apps, makes the case that Russia, China, and the United States are closing in on a large-scale conflict, last seen in 1945. When both books are considered together, the reader is treated to the scholarship of Westad, accompanied by Apps’ timely discussions of the frightening personality traits of those leaders with the biggest nuclear arsenals.
I will paraphrase some of the important findings and conclusions raised by the authors. In many respects, today’s world resembles the international situation before 1914 and the breakout of WWI. Great powers have abandoned globalization and are seeking to dominate their own backyards. Nationalism (state worship with confidence in military power) has replaced reliance on international organizations. Disgruntled citizens are blaming other countries, immigrants and minorities for their problems.
As in 1914, the task of avoiding World War Three falls to a small group of belligerent, overconfident, and often irrational decision makers. Both then and now, these Great Power leaders seem to believe that conflicts they initiate will end quickly, with the instant gratification of strategic success. Instead, history has proven that this thinking leads to drawn-out global conflicts with unexpected results, millions of casualties, and nations reduced to rubble. Both authors point out and history confirms that small wars often become big ones.
Westad provides some solutions for avoiding another world war. In a fast-moving world that leaves little time for diplomacy, leaders must develop instant communications systems and meet in person on a regular basis. Leaders must cooperate on mutually important world issues like climate, pandemics and space exploration. On intractable issues involving spheres of influence and sovereignty, they must agree to disagree and seek acceptable compromise.
The second issue that calls for our attention is the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI). Over the past several months, the competitive race to develop the top model has accelerated. In late April, Anthropic’s “Claude Mythos Preview” AI model, designed for advanced cybersecurity, was breached. This incident highlights the growing risks in the AI supply chain where tools used to enhance security can themselves become “ground zero” for a cyberattack.
In the case of AI there is an historical success story that could be followed to regulate future development and prevent disaster. Here, we should remember the past and repeat it. In the 20th century, nations built international institutions to allow the spread of peaceful nuclear energy, but slowed nuclear weapons proliferation by controlling access to the raw material that underpins it. Today, 32 nations operate nuclear power plants, which collectively provide 10% of the world’s electricity. Only nine countries possess nuclear weapons.
World leaders can do something similar with AI. They can regulate the technology from the ground up by controlling access to the highly specialized chips that are needed to train the world’s most advanced AI models. Governments can establish a regulatory regime where only authorized computing providers are licensed and able to acquire large numbers of advanced chips.
Where historical trends have led to blundering into “Armageddon” world wars, the circumstances must not be repeated. Where past history on proliferation has worked well, it should be duplicated.