The year 2000 opened with Russian president Boris Yeltsin stepping down before his term ended. A Post editorial on January 1 wondered whether his successor, Vladimir Putin, would manipulate the media and government agencies to his advantage — “or will he seek to extend the brighter strands of Mr Yeltsin’s legacy and find strength in true democracy and rule of law?”

Twenty-five years later, much has changed. The relative peace and prosperity of the 1990s turned out to be a short-lived break from history, not the end of it. The new millennium brought the September 11 attacks, misadventures in Iraq, the 2008-09 Great Recession and the Covid-19 pandemic. Few anticipated the extent to which Mr Putin would plunge his country into totalitarianism as he sought to rebuild the Soviet empire, including with a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The forward march of globalisation and democracy that seemed inevitable a quarter-century ago now appears anything but. Rather than integrating with the rules-based international system, China is challenging that order — and, increasingly, the United States appears willing to undermine the global institutions it created. Assumptions that liberal democratic capitalism creates inexorable progress have been supplanted by a new movement that advocates “degrowth” and reflects a pervasive dread that things can only get worse.

A new year offers occasion for reflection on the past and resolutions for the future. It’s striking how few analysts foresaw the most consequential events that followed the dawn of the new century. As 2015 began, halfway through the 2010s, no one anticipated that Donald Trump would, within months, come to dominate and redefine American politics for a generation. Halfway through the 2020s, what aren’t we anticipating?

Humans don’t like unpredictability and crave certitude, even though most forecasts tend to be wrong. But reality can surprise on the upside as well as the down. If, in 2000, many were too rosy in their predictions, in 2025 many might be too dire. So, our new year’s resolution for 2025 is to embrace uncertainty. In a pessimistic age, society should welcome the unknown because the future might be better than the past.

Wisdom requires humility. Just a few weeks ago, we drafted an editorial previewing the upcoming battle for Damascus. Before we could publish the piece, the regime of former president Bashar al-Assad fell. That’s the nature of daily journalism, but we’re taking it as a reminder to expect the unexpected and allow for the widest range of possible outcomes. That’s the nature of journalism, too — or should be.

Also important is admitting mistakes and learning from them. The Editorial Board was wrong to assume that Russia sabotaged the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline. It turns out, as the Post has reported, that the likeliest scenario is that Ukrainians, hoping to lessen European dependence on Russian gas, were behind the attack. That doesn’t mean Washington should cut off Kyiv, but it is important to call out allies as well as adversaries when they err.

The United States is entering a stretch that we assume will be chaotic and tumultuous, but we must allow for the possibility that the next phase of history will surprise in that respect, too. That doesn’t require ignoring reality, such as the crushing national debt, climate change or president-elect Donald Trump’s record. Still less does it call for discounting the lessons of history, such as the dangers of isolationism and protectionism. What it does demand is acknowledging that not every plausible negative outcome will be borne out.

There is a fascinating interplay between alarmism and complacency, between catastrophising about the future and idealising the past. A little fear is necessary to spur action; too much becomes paralysing. Millions of Americans have stopped following the news, many because they’re so certain it will be bad news that they’re tuning out. They’re missing out. It’s easy to lose sight of the reality that there has never been a better time to be alive. The poorest Americans have access to better medical care than the richest royals did a century ago. The country has been far more divided than it is now, yet it endured.

How different will the world look on January 1, 2050? Or 2075? Or 2100? A new guard of leaders will emerge at home. But Russia will also almost certainly be without Mr Putin, now 72. Will what follows be better for the Russian people and for global stability? We hope so, but no one can say for sure. Rather than assume the worst, let’s resolve to do everything we can to help engineer the best possible outcome for the world.