"The War That Ended Peace"

I have been thinking about Margaret Macmillan's book "The War That Ended Peace", which is about a peace lasting many decades but ending in the outbreak of WW1. I am wondering, though, how peaceful could things have really been if they ended in a world war?

I am thinking that a reason WW1 occurred is because the political skills to prevent it did not exist. The world's development and expansion prior to WW1 was such that it outstripped any political and management skills European leaders possessed. And had they acquired the necessary skills and will from the experience of WW1 perhaps WW2 could have been prevented.

I am also thinking that the Middle East does not yet possess the political or management skills necessary to prevent wars, hence the upheaval occurring there today. The intrusion of modernity into its 'old world' has mostly been responsible for this, like it was responsible in starting WW1 in Europe.

The Middle East is now going through a period of enlightenment and self-examination, much like Europe did many years ago.

Networking

The social networking craze, like Facebook and Twitter, started in the West. You could say it's a product of Western thinking. And like many Western social constructs social networking has become a worldwide phenomenon, like democracy and capitalism, two institutions that, matter of factly, have been instrumental in expanding social networking.

Social networking had a start before the Internet. It came about as politics and business activity between individuals grew and expanded. It grew out of peoples' cumulative experiences and the need to cooperate. It grew as a vehicle of communication and the exchange of data and ideas, a back-and-forth (let's not forget science). It grew as a deliberative feedback system in business and politics, as a way of seeking improvement and solutions to problems. It grew as a mechanism of developing social capital and amassing social support. The more Western societies engaged themselves in politics and business, the larger and stronger these exchange networks grew. They grew exponentially, feeding on themselves as a means of facilitating the process. 

By no means have social networks been the exclusivity of the West. Peoples around the world have always engaged in such a manner with trade and commerce. But it is in the West where social networks differed and became all inclusive, secular and pluralistic, crossing multiple cultural differences and transcending social barriers. In the New World it became the glue that bonded the diverse people who came together from all over the world. Social/exchange networks build trust and respect amongst its participants. Without these networks and their cross-breeding it would be impossible to conduct the activities that bind and connect us today. They’ve helped develop our civility and the civil traditions that govern us today.

If comparable social exchange networks existed in the Middle East the region would not be in the turmoil it is today.