A majority of the world will speak English by the end of the century. This will create a new global identity. It will be the triumph of the Anywheres.
Why? Because the same mechanic happened in the past.
Here's what happened and what will happen next 🧵
Up to the 1500s, languages were not differentiated like today. In places like Europe, there were vernacular gradients, from Wallonia to Lisbon, from London to Vienna.
That's because most ppl didn't communicate with those far away from their village.
The only ones who did communicate across Europe were the Catholic Church, who could do that because they had a single language, Latin.
Then came the printing press, printed in the local vernacular of the biggest cities. As more and more ppl read that vernacular, more and more ppl read it.
By the time the 19th and 20th century broadcasting systems appear, that movement accelerates: newspapers, radio, TV, education create one language to rule them all—within a nation-state.
Let's summarize: the predominant vernacular became the lingua franca of a nation-state, because of network effects: +ppl speak it, so +ppl write in it, so +ppl read it... And this process happened nation-states emerged.
Now, which is the vernacular of the 21st century globalized world?
Which is the vernacular that most non-natives are learning?
Which is the vernacular that most non-natives are learning, representing this unstoppable force of worldwide language spread?
Which is, as a result, the language that's growing the fastest?
So let's summarize:
Printing press ➡️ spreads local vernaculars that become national languages and create national sentiment as a side-effect
Internet ➡️ spreads English that becomes global language and creates a global identity.
What it means is:
- Unstoppable spread of English
- More international fraternalism
- Fewer international conflicts (but maybe more fraternal ones, based on ideas rather than geographies)
- More exchange of ideas
- More economic growth
And in depth in the examples of the printing press and broadcasting media here
Follow and subscribe as I develop these themes. Coming next: how specifically the nation-state will be undermined, the impact of automation, technologies of violence, and more
Why did 🇮🇱Israel strike 🇮🇷Iran now, and not months or years ago or in the future?
A unique combination of a dozen factors converged to make the moment unique for 🇮🇱Israel: 🧵 1. No Hamas to its southwest 2. No Hezbollah to its north 3. No Assad threat to the northeast
4...
4. No more Syrian army to attack 🇮🇱Israel's planes: As the new forces of HTS took over Syria, Israel bombed all the existing Syrian military. No more fighter jets or surface-to-air missiles to threaten 🇮🇱Israel
5. Ability to fly over Syria to refuel
This is critical, because 🇮🇷Iran is ~600-1000 miles away from 🇮🇱Israel, so 1200-2000 miles round trip
The range of Israel’s stealth F35 is only about 1,350 mi
To operate inside 🇮🇷Iran, 🇮🇱Israel needed refueling over Syria
1. From Feb 2025 to Jun 2025, it increased its amount of enriched uranium by 50% 2. It now had 400kg of highly enriched uranium, enough for 9-10 bombs 3. This is 60% enriched uranium. Fuel only requires 5% enrichment.
4... 🧵
4. It's easy to go from 60% to 90% (weapons grade), it only takes weeks 5. The only country on Earth with such enriched uranium and without a bomb is 🇮🇷Iran 6. The IAEA (nuclear watchdog) found 3 secret nuclear sites
7. When 🇮🇷Iran didn't respond to this accusation, the IAEA censured it 8. 🇮🇷Iran responded to the censoring by saying it would open a 3rd enrichment site in a secret spot
Now that the 🇺🇸US has bombed 3 of 🇮🇷Iran's nuclear sites, where will the war go from here?
It depends on 🇮🇱Israel: 🧵
🇮🇷Iran never wanted the war, and its forces are being decimated. Its ability to send missiles to 🇮🇱Israel is being degraded every day. If it could sign a ceasefire while saving face, it would
Meanwhile, 🇮🇱Israel has kept striking Iran non stop. Its daily airstrikes didn't go down substantially in the first few days. Its ability to keep striking 🇮🇷Iran remains unabated
Can there be an invasion of Iran? Hardly. Two maps explain why, and also why Iran is the way it is today, whether its regime will fall, what other superpowers will do, and in general why Iran is the way it is today
The only truly exposed area is the southwestern corner of Khuzestan, which is a swamp
The biggest superpowers lie to the west, and there the very broad Zagros make it really hard to conquer Iran. The mountain range is tall and wide, making logistics similar to Afghanistan. Very hard.
Iraq learned it the hard way when it tried to attack there in 1980
Listening to the debate, it looks like 🇮🇱Israel & the 🇺🇸US intelligence community disagreed, but that's not really the case!
Both thought Iran was weeks to months away from being able to develop the bomb
So what's the disagreement?
Here are more facts:
• Tehran had just announced a 3rd enrichment site in an undisclosed place
• The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had recently produced a report censoring Iran for the 1st time in 20y
• It accused Iran of 3 undisclosed nuclear sites
• It claimed Iran had enough enriched uranium for 9-10 nuclear bombs
• All the other countries in the world who have enriched uranium at the same level also have nuclear weapons. Iran is the only country that doesn't have these weapons yet enriches uranium as much
Nuclear is the best source of energy across nearly all the factors that matter. It's the safest, cleanest, densest, most sustainable, geopolitically stable, predictable, dispatchable, and can be cheap.
1. SAFEST
It kills 1000x less than coal
Living close to a nuclear power plant for one year gives you less radiation than eating a banana (graph is logarithmic)
2. CLEANEST
Accounting for all the lifecycle of all energies, it's the one that emits the least CO2