There is a consensus in negation, namely, that a linear continuation of previously existing developmental tendencies and experiences has become impossible. At the same time, there is an obvious vacuum with regard to a new definition for development (“progress”). In the end, all models are reduced to a continuation of previous experience, except that many people advocate that Western-like development should become “more sensible,” “more equitable,” “more united,” “more democratic,” “more ecological,” “more humane.” The vicious circle is evident, as is the difficulty (or perhaps inability) of formulating as yet unthought-of alternatives. How does it happen that we have limited the alternatives for “reasonable” development, i.e., development that can guarantee the survival of humanity under livable conditions, to the two possibilities of capitalism and socialism? Have we any idea how many alternatives world history under Western and European hegemony has lost through the destruction or deformation of other cultures and civilizations? How great is the danger that, to the long chain of “lost moments of history” (Hugh Trevor-Roper, 1988), there will be added another – the last one? If global history creates more awareness of this threat, it will have achieved one of its most important tasks. And if global history is to have any deeper meaning, it will lie in its ability to lead to practical action through a new consciousness.
