The new world will not "arrive"; it will only be discovered to have already happened! We are used to imagining the "new order" as a clear moment: the old system collapsing, revolution erupting, declarations being issued, and the world turning a new page. But if you are truly in the midst of history, most of the time it’s not like that. The new world almost never appears under the name of "new world."

1. The real switch is rarely a "complete overthrow," but rather a "failure." Ordinary people in history often do not feel the shock of standing at the threshold of an era. More often, they sense that: rules become unstable, commitments become short-term, reliable things require backup plans. Authority remains, but its explanatory power diminishes. It’s not "a new era has begun," but rather—the old world is becoming increasingly impractical.

2. If you wait until the old system is completely unfixable, you often won’t see the new world. This is a less romantic but very realistic judgment. History shows us: civilizations are more about "ruptures" than "upgrades." When order completely collapses, what arrives first is often chaos, not reconstruction. So, a truly feasible new order cannot be born from the ruins; it can only quietly embed, coexist, and grow before the old system is entirely dead.

3. The switch to a new order is fragmented, with no ceremony. The changes we are experiencing today are rarely as dramatic as revolutions; they are broken into countless small, everyday, almost imperceptible shifts: identities change from "citizen" to "account," work shifts from "profession" to "project," currency transforms from "money" to "interface," the state shifts from "dependence object" to "optional service." Each of these alone is not enough to be called a "paradigm shift." But when combined, they have already triggered a change in order.

4. The new world will not be supported by a single logic. Whether it’s the state, traditional credit anchors, or emerging technological credit systems, any attempt to explain and support the entire world with one logic will ultimately fail amid the complexity of reality. Reality requires: multi-layer coexistence, mutual checks and balances, maintaining operation amid imperfection, rather than the complete victory of one logic.

5. What truly determines the direction of order is the foundation, not slogans. More important than narratives are some rarely romanticized aspects: whether energy is sustainable and distributable, whether production can continue amid local failures, whether infrastructure allows for substitution and migration. If these do not change, any imagination of a "new world" is merely an overdrawn promise.

6. People in history are often "unaware." We expect a clear turning point because post-event narratives are always neat, linear, and summarizable. But in reality, the experience is closer to: some old things are no longer worth taking seriously; some new abilities quietly become irreplaceable. More options mean more choices, but security does not grow in tandem. History is not declared; it is adapted.

7. Perhaps there is no "day." Perhaps there will never be a moment when someone can clearly say: "The old world is over, the new world has begun." More likely, one day looking back, we will realize: the objects we rely on have changed, the sources of trust have shifted, survival strategies have evolved, and at that time, people just think: "It seems like this is the only way to live now."

The new world is not a launch event; it is more like a slow, imperceptible, but irreversible migration. It will not ask you to choose sides; it will quietly淘汰 those ways of living that can only survive within a single narrative. When we truly become aware of its existence, we are often already in it.