(Note：this letter is sent on June 22nd, 2008 by a reader by the name of Qing Song to show the opinions of a web-friend after the latter read my book)
My evaluation on this book - 2008/06/22 17:00 It is a nice book, the author is very serious and has devoted great attempts and hard works for this book, which is the first impression after I read through this book. The book is comprehensive, covering subjects of chronometer, geography, natural sciences and social ones, almost all the things relating to the existence of human beings. In addition, it has the preciseness of a scholastic book and the simplicity of common readings, so it benefits us a lot after reading.
As for the opinions of the author, I fully agree with the analysis in the first half of this book, but am suspicious to the feasibility and validity of the detailed methods of "saving human beings" in last half of the book.
It is easy to say but unpractical to carry out or implement the elimination of the states and found a universal regime. No national leaders can be willing to give up their rights and transfer to named "universal leaders" of other nations. Even if there are some individual leaders willing to give up their rights and to subordinate to the leadership of universal government for the sake of ambition and great ideas which the author expects, their ruled people are not sure to agree with him, for common people have no such long-range ambitions. What they want is "never permit our own nation and country to be ruled and led by the people of another nation or country." If there are some leaders daring enough to transfer his own country to universal government, they are sure to become criminals and enemies of their nation and country. I'm sure nobody would be willing to take such risks.
Furthermore, even if the countries are all eliminated and the universal government is founded, can these really change human nature, competition and combat among people and limit the developments of science and technology so as to prevent human beings from elimination? I don't think so. There are no experiences of managing the universal government before, so the management of the universal government would be a mess and difficult to guarantee the absolute equity, so each organization would fight more fights for the sake of benefits. Can universal government have abilities to limit the developments of eliminating science and technology? I don't think so. Even if a universal government is founded, each nation and each organization will have its own plans and precautions. They are sure to develop the science and technology sneakily, so universal government would have a hard time using an effective method to prevent each scientist from engaging actions of science and technology, and the eliminating weapons will be sure to produce. So human beings would be eliminated surely.
So is annihilation of human beings inevitable? No other choice to save? Same as the author, I'm pessimistic toward the future of human beings, but I think there are still measures to save it, which is to let science and technology develop as they like without any measures. According to the opinion of the author, if we let science and technology develop as it likes, the eliminating weapons are sure to be used someday intentionally or unintentionally, but I think that destructive weapons would be used before eliminating ones. The destructive weapons may eliminate 1/3, 1/2 or more of whole human beings. Most people would die but I think they would be reborn. The current greatest problem of human beings is overpopulation and relative limited resources, which results in wars and battles and late scientific and technologic developments and production of extreme weapons. If the present population reduces by 2/3 or more, the remaining people will live rich lives with current resources without developments of sciences and technologies and wars would surely become less. If sciences and technologies never develop, the eliminating weapons are never produced. So human beings have no danger of elimination in a long time.
So no action is the best action. Destruction of human beings can avoid elimination of human beings. Human beings will be destructed rather than eliminated in the latter of 500 years.