The end of Pax Americana: The inevitability of political instability and change
6’ read
It is the mid-1990s… the USSR has collapsed, a new globalised economy is beginning to ramp up and a hunger for political cooperation and possibly integration has taken hold within the European political class. The world has entered a period of relative stability with President Bill Clinton as the trusted figurehead. Fast forward twenty-five years and the scene is quite different, Donald Trump were almost elected for a second term, the global economy has still not fully recovered from the 2008 financial crash and a pandemic is rampaging through much of the world. Politics seems an unstable and uncertain place, and perhaps even democracy is a broken system that is fracturing around the edges. However, while the world may seem more uncertain and unstable than it has ever been, this article will try to explain how instability is a natural cycle within politics that can be used by leaders to forge the change needed for the future.
pecially with a focus on negative news reporting. Although arguably our only comparative experience of the world is the late 90s and early 00s, where a flourishing economy led by competent and moderate politicians and relative stability in the western hemisphere created a sense of direction and certainty. The economy, heavily supported by the expanding financial system ran by ‘Casino Bankers’, accelerated growth and maintained a system that felt fair and stable. Following the financial crash, the system began to fracture with many feeling left behind which culminated in our present uncertainty.
But why does the world seem so uncertain now? Twentyfour-hour news, instantaneous communication and digitalisation have made everything seem more immediate es-
Historically, however, the world has always had cycles of stability and insecurity, fragility and strength. The postWW2 period appeared reasonably stable and calm with
34
BullsEye
