There's a difference between globalization in say, 1950 vs. 2000. We're probably heading back toward a 1950 type globalization. We're going to do what is necessary to keep alliances functioning, but no more. A lot of on/near shore production, not searching for the lowest cost. And disruptions in food and energy are going to get worse.

Farmplinker said:

There's a difference between globalization in say, 1950 vs. 2000. We're probably heading back toward a 1950 type globalization. We're going to do what is necessary to keep alliances functioning, but no more. A lot of on/near shore production, not searching for the lowest cost. And disruptions in food and energy are going to get worse

I agree, we're likely to see a lot re-shoring / near-shoring / regionalism / 'freedom trade' where trade is done primarily within allied blocks. 

But Zeihans end state thesis is basically the US is going to withdraw from the world and source almost all of its goods from within the NAFTA zone, withdraw militarilly from the mid east/nato/asia...and then sea based shipping will collapse as state sponsored piracy returns after an oil crisis.

From one of his books, he predicts that after the US leaves the mid-east, a war between saudi and iran will kick off, destroying much of the regions oil supply. Then the remaining oil tankers will become targets of state piracy from any country with a navy as they head towards china, with India and Japan especially getting in on the piracy. Whereuppon Asia will descend into famine and war, and the global overall cost and supply of petrolleum will lead to societal collapses for most countries. France will renew colonialism in africa to secure its oil supplies, while Germany will consider a 4th Reich...

Its not as outrageous as George Friedmans theory that by 2050 the US will be at war with Japan, after Japan knocks out US Space based assets with stealth coated moon rocks from the covert jap base on the moon. (yes, this is a thing:

https://www.amazon.com/Next-100-Years-Forecast-Century/dp/0767923057/

But overall I think Zeihans end state thesis is unlikely to come about. We're going to see disruptions in supply chains and movement in global manufacturing hubs. But the US's goal of containing china ironically prevents the very anarchic collapse of china that he predicts. 

Overall I'd say Zeihans 5-10yr predictions are pretty solid, and his day to day analysis on his twitter are excellent. But I'm leery of his (or anyones) predictions beyond 10yrs. 

"Overall I'd say Zeihans 5-10 yr predictions are pretty solid..."

But, now he's starting to say China will collapse within 10 years. So in 20 years will we be able to purchase "Pistols Of The 21st Century Warlords" from Headstamp Publishing?;)

Another interesting presentation from Zeihan, posted on YouTube (perhaps appropriately) on May Day.

YouTube

China Is Not Russia and Taiwan Is Not Ukraine | Peter Zeihan

Russia's invasion of Ukraine - the most consequential military conflict Europe has witnessed since the Second World War - has riveted the attention of the wo...

The best place to follow Zeihan is on his Twitter (one of the only Twitters redeeming the platform). He post 'unlisted' youtube clips of his generally a few weeks to a month before they appear on youtube, as well as lots of relevant little articles with commentary on todays events and how they will impact the future:

https://twitter.com/PeterZeihan

In terms of Zeihan, its impressive how accurate many of his 2010 predictions are. 

His China predictions were off (and I think he's consistently underestimating them) but i'd say 2/3-4/5 of the predictions from 2010 have come to pass

https://archive.ph/XJfPP

One segment was especially prescient:

In what way(s) do you think Zeihan is underestimating the Chinese?

I have a whole essay I wrote on it when the subject came up on another forum a few months ago. But I think his core tenant of 'dont worry about China, they're going to collapse on their own' is deeply flawed.

I'll spare you the essay, and heres just the conclusion. 

Zeihan argues that The Global Order is a byproduct of the Cold War, and has been on autopilot post 1991. And now without a Cold War, the US is steadily withdrawing from the world and its allies. 

And once the US withdraws, Asia is going to descend into state sponsored piracy, and China will collapse when its delicate supply chains are interrupted, as its system is already so precarious due to demographics and unsustainable economics.

This is the most glaring flaw in the analysis, because the US is entering Cold War 2, and rather then withdrawing from the world, it is re-engaging.

Russia is back, and there is broad bipartisan support for the US to 'pivot to Asia' in order to Contain China. AUKUS, QUAD, and more to come. #1 question I see on Amazon products is "is this made in China?" Pretty much everyone outside of Wall Street wants the US to put its boot on Chinas neck; Chuck Shumers only praise for Trump was his tough line on China, to give a sense of how bipartisan this is becoming.

Hence a core irony. The US will remain in Asia to Contain China...paradoxically providing the US Naval / Security / Trade presence in Asia that prevents Asia from descending into Piracy and China collapsing into a series of warring states as Zeihan predicts.

gatnerd said:

In terms of Zeihan, its impressive how accurate many of his 2010 predictions are.

Interesting.  If Zeihan's prediction in this video is accurate, things are going to get even more interesting in the near future.

"And so we're going to be in this weird situation of the French asking the Germans to invade Poland, to fight the Russians."

YouTube

Peter Zeihan Says Putin In Total Disbelief As Russian Army Is Capitulating Fast Russia Is Doomed

Peter Zeihan Says Putin In Total Disbelief As Russian Army Is Capitulating Fast Russia Is Doomed

Worth noting is that this video was released recently, but appears that its actually about ~8 years old / 2015 time frame of analysis. 

Ukraines current performance vis a vis Russia I think changes the game as far as Russian predictions goes, at least for the foreseable future.

We also know now that Russias equipment - despite the Modernization - is just not survivable in the face of modern NATO systems. I think that will color any predictions going forward.