this is largely due to the failure of idealism as a philosophical framework to set up any type of enduring political, economic or secular social structure. the blame lies on hegel or perhaps marx's interpretation of hegel getting stuck in praxis quagmires. which is why the turn towards asia and the new age movement which emerges from it in the early 1900s is essentially anti-science. the spiritual successor of communism is the idea of fusing the east and west traditions to form the new enlightened human, who sees no race, religion or gender but simply behaves as the universal light and creator. it has largely been a failure, as folding china into the world community has been against the pragmatic self-interest of various sensitive american industries - weapons, space, communication, high finance, which can exert sufficient power on the american leadership structures to avoid any type of idealism about world peace. there are no more enemies or allies just competitive co-morbidity, actors fraying the ropes they are tugging on until something breaks, like the ussr in the 80s.
it's only a problem if you think humans are equal. if you shift the view that humans are unequal and life is deeply unfair, then it's normal to see the next 100 years as a struggle for dominance between superstition and science, between a world led by north america or eurasia, between the new dominoes of fascist nationalism and disinterested international capitalism. it's a hot peace, which will end up with one temporary victor, possibly colonizing mars - or just landing there and coming back, before a new power emerges to challenge the old empire. i would argue that this is a bi-product of the 'correct' interpretation of hegel, the one that isn't taught directly in schools, the master and slave dialectic.