sestdiena, 2025. gada 4. janvāris

On the Dangers and Challenges of the approaching Era

 

«The old world is dying, the new world is fighting for birth.

This is the time of monsters»

Antonio Gramsci




      I would like to present you with a very substantive, common-sense analysis of the current geopolitical situation, which correlates directly with the ideas and proposals made in the book "How to Get rid of the shackles of totalitarianism. The challenge of overcoming political innocence" https://www.amazon.com/HOW-GET-RID-SHACKLES-TOTALITARIANISM-ebook/

  As well as demonstrating the impartiality of the author's vision of the world, give confidence in the relevance of the problems raised here and the vital need to solve them in today's situation. Also gives the sense that I'm not alone in my life position and beliefs though.

      Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the “Jabloko” party, from positions of humanism (however, the specifics of Russia's position must not be forgotten either!) not only defines and specifies the causes of the crisis in modern civilisation, but formulates and offers real solutions to overcome the crisis. Their constructive evaluation and thoughtful implementation in life can now become a guarantor of the survival of modern civilisation and a prerequisite for human progress established in humanism.

    The question remains open: do the able-bodied people, and above all the political leaders of the democracies, perceive, and yet will be able to take adequate action to prevent the sinister apocalypse of the world order?!!

(The original Article can be read at https://www.yavlinsky.ru/article/titanic/

https://www.facebook.com/reel/571874555599855

The accents made in the Article are mine.  


FECI, QUOD POTUI, FACIANT MELIORA POTENTES



 

POLITICAL GAP

On the Dangers and Challenges of the  Approaching Era

Grigory Yavlinsky     

23.12.2024.

     The world order, which emerged after the end of World War II  and has existed for nearly 80 years, is quitting - the earliest era   is over, but the new one has yet to come. From the processes  we're watching, in big politics: existing political leaders, as well as those close to them, seem to have no real idea of the new world order or the new time.

And it's the most dangerous and challenging historical moment  to find a path to a positive outlook. At the end of 2024, for the  first time in many decades, we realistically ended up on the   brink of a large- scale military clash using, if not nuclear weapons (even though  it is entirely possible), then by its destructiveness - comparable to them. Escalation progresses and takes effect almost daily. These are no abstract threats, no bluff, no blackmail. In fact, the risks are very high in the assessment of professional experts (1).

There are virtually no effective deterrent international structures, institutions, instruments left in global policy. After decades of operation by the United Nations (UN), the UN Security Council,  the OSCE is losing its former role. The issue of setting up new   institutions or reforming existing ones at a high political level is not even seriously discussed, there is a lack of understanding of fastmoving objective processes. The world is in a geopolitical vacuum, with no working international political institutions, no deterrence agreements, no effective diplomacy. And it comes at a time when civilization is under threat from deadly dangerous weapons and the military conflict with the direct and indirect involvement of nuclear powers is in a hot phase.

We didn't end up in one moment in that situation. The processes that led to this began around 35 years ago, demonstrating  themselves in shocking events. These were shocks for Russia,  which had a huge impact on people's consciousness and perceptions: The collapse of the Soviet Union, which erupted     after failed economic and political reforms of the 1990 s, a        bloody war in Chechnya.

Changes in Russia, the severe economic situation and the deep  political crisis led to a temporary weakening of Moscow's          positions on the world stage, which undeniably influenced        American political mentality - the US became the leader of the single polar world for a while. Unitary, as was thought at the time, not only because of one country's apparent economic and military superiority over all others, but also because of its dominance in choosing landmarks on the way to a freer, fairer, more democratic and safer world for all of us. But how did the world's elite take advantage of open opportunities?

After the end of the cold War and the abandonment of the arms race, huge sums freed up in the Western economy that needed to be channelled towards the development of socalled third world nations - education, healthcare, business development. But instead, the billions saved were invested in financial pyramids. The result didn't take long to wait: the rapidly growing divide between the rich west and poor third world countries became one of the main preconditions for the terrorist attacks in the US on 11 September 2001. The follow-up was the failed American military campaigns in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Sirijs. The United States has not achieved what it wants in these operations and has thrown these regions into chaos. Moreover, in the 1990 s, the funds invested in financial   pyramids dissolved in history during the biggest economic crisis of 2007-2008. The consequences of this crisis have been catastrophic     and are still being felt in many parts of the world.

All these major upheavals of the past three and a half        decades have become one of the factors behind global change.  The peculiarity of the situation, however, is that in those same   years, in the absence of positive qualitative changes in the         global situation, significant qualitative shifts of a different         nature began to develop - completely unexpected and with         virtually unpredictable consequences.

Populism has always been, to a greater or lesser extent,     part of political life. However, modern populism is special in    world politics. Its qualitative difference from previous marginal forms is that modern populism has become an almost             absolute political dominance, expressing and enforcing       ochlocracy, which in turn forms and strengthens in the mentally informative space through digital technologies, the internet, social networks. Such political populism accepts     qualitatively different shapes   and scales than before.

As you know, ochlocracy (literally mob domination) is the decline of democracy, to the point of indulgence the immediate desires of the masses. It's the emotions and passions that   prevail over the mind, it's a general lack of understanding of reality and an inability to adequately assess the threat. In today's circumstances it is this trend that prevails, and in practice is       realised through political populism. Let's call it            ochlopopulism.

Since social networks turned from popular internet activity into a global social phenomenon in the late 2000 s, the internet crowd has taken on a dominant role in politics. Human values,  national interests, understanding of the global and regional        perspective all stopped being a determining factor in            political decisionmaking. Politicians-ohlopopulists are now guided by sentiments on social networks, indulging in an absurd and often selfish logic of internet communities. Moreover, the            influence and role of once authoritative world class traditional media continues to fall. While outward  ochlopopulists tend to conform to the sentiments and preferences built on social networks, in reality they often pursue the interests of narrow, closed and principled anti-democratic groups. And thus there is an esential crash of  democracy, with its external visibility and form still remaining for now. Today's digital technologies give populists virtually limitless opportunities. The world is sinking into chaos.

It's not hard to notice that the world's leading politicians,   especially in western countries, are discussing anything in the    context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and arguing their observations with anything,  but only not from the position of preserving human life the main value in that discourse is far from number one.

The consequences of flushing human values away from    politics and the growing divide with reality are obvious: in the   end, populists are unable to live up to their unrealistic promises  to voters, and in an effort to justify their failures are beginning to engage in a search for enemies - internal or external. So         domestic politics puts basic stone to authoritarianism,                 totalitarianism to fascism. And in foreign policy, as we well       know, looking for enemies is the way to war.

The crucial instrumental practical role in the ambitious     political implementation of the ochlocracy, namely meeting     mob aspirations and domineering ambitions in a populist way     leading to illegality and violence and domination, belongs to the internet and social networks. The basis for the flow of                information is now based on emotions and opinions that             dominate the internet, not actual events. The current filing and   hierarchy of reports no longer works: a blogger diletent rating  with a million subscribers proves more influential than a            scientist-expert analysis and arguments. Prejudice is seen as the norm these days. Reports of facts without prejudicial interpretation of  them are generally irrelevant. This leads to a parallel flow of information that is only formally linked to reality. “This opens up huge opportunities to manipulate the information agenda and through it politics to purposefully achieve an  ambitious redistribution of economic but also, in      perspective, political  power,” I wrote about it in my article, “The ochlocracy of information” (2), as early as 2020.

These tendencies are particularly vivid in American          politics. On socnetworking's role in the US presidential election in 2016, 2020 and 2024, it says and writes a jot: manipulating    public opinion through social networks blamed both Democrats and Republicans. But there are other examples. Thus, in            December 2024, Romania's Constitutional Court annulled the    results of the country's presidential election because one of the   candidates used “aggressive propaganda during the pre-election campaign, over exploiting the algorithms of social networking platforms” and    thus disinfecting Romanian voters (3). The court argued that the candidate manipulated voter votes through digital technology and artificial intelligence.

The growing danger these days is that the ochlocracy,        through new information and digital technologies, leads to the   power of populists and selfish manipulators, who  will eventually turn the absolute majority of citizens into some  kind of modern slaves. And it's far from an exaggeration, nor a  fantastic scenario of a distant future.

The information chaos opens up broad perspectives for     manipulating people's consciousness and opinion:           modern technology, by its capabilities and                      consequences,  has long outperformed classic                  censorship of print editions and proved      far more effective than the usual propaganda-based “brainwashing.” And really, you don't need to flush your  brain anymor human consciousness now forms through socnets.

For a long time, there was the illusion that the internet was an alternative to traditional television, that access to vast           amounts of information resources without obvious restrictions   of censorship would contribute to the development of                  independence of thought. Only now comes the recognition that  this vision is misguided. Perhaps in an attempt to reverse           dangerous trends, most recently the Australian Parliament took  the decision to ban access to social networks for children and     adolescents under 16 (4). However, a direct ban is unlikely to be effective, plus, the open question is what to do with misleading those over 16?!

Remarkably, in early December 2024, the Oxford             University publishing house named brain ROT- as the name of  the year in the English speaking world. The publishing house says the word has become particularly popular on social networks in the past year and is  firmly used in the lexicon of bloggers (5).

Such a combination of words probably best describes       what's happening in the heads of not just socnet rank and file users, but internet-crowd-focused politicians - populists.

The tendency to push high quality news media out of the information field has been intensifying in the world for several years. Replacing news with mass user generated informational messages is no longer an independent phenomenon: media audiences and socnetworks deliberately extort news content from their platforms (in Canada, for example, Facebook and Instagram are absolutely officially blocking links to posts).

Research into trends in the information space today shows that, at a time when audiences are increasingly tired of political news and making choices in favor of entertainment content, the flow of information continues to grow rapidly and is virtually no longer structured and formatted. The Economist's recent assessment confirms that there will be a dominance of opinion over facts in the information stream over the next four years.            Moreover, the more extreme the direction these views will take, the better they will spread. Neither existing media platforms nor current political leaders (6) will likely be able to cope with this  flow anymore. Already today, we can watch ochlopopulism       become one of the causes of political crises in Germany, France, South Korea. The dangers of ochlopopulism are reminded to us of the dramatic consequences of four year old Brexit in Britain.

In the future, we are expected to see even more complex and     unpredictable phenomena associated with the introduction of     artificial intelligence - AI (7) into public political reality. But   even that's not all yet! For now, a hypothetical but already     developed artificial superintelligence (ASI) era is coming - a      system with intellectual capabilities that transcends human      ones and is able to generate ideas that go far beyond anything  humans can do or even imagine. A particular issue today,        therefore, is how to overcome the chaos of intrusive              internet networks, how to  preserve  democratic politics,   how to cut it off from ochlocracy and populism, i.e. from hysterical form and inherently  inadequate  mob demands. This should become a key challenge in building a new global facility. This task should not be  postponed for  longer. Because it may     miss a moment when you can still realistically change the deadlocked, destructive course and save civilization from chaos.

And the chaos is already there. The global turmoil of the late-21 st century, combined with modern digital technologies, has led to the globalisation of political entropy and disorder. The     world has entered an era of ochlocracy and aggressive political  populism, lost sight of the future in the shape of the concept of  human development.

The situation in the world is increasingly reminiscent of the eve of the 1914 disaster, when politicians and large state elites, without wanting war in principle, moved ever closer to it and came to a global military conflict with the participation of 38 countries in which the deaths occurred, by various             estimates, 15 to 22 million people (8). It should be noted that     even then, at the beginning of the 19 th century, humanity underwent a strong technological revolution: a phone, a telegraph, planes, internal combustion engines, cars, principled new types of armaments (chemical weapons) appeared. All of this              overshadowed the real danger and threat that was one of the       decisive factors for the launch of the absurd world war (as a       result, including the coup d' état in Russia in 1917). Today, too, as 110 years ago, new inventions and modern technologies,         ahead of human consciousness, energize negative emotions in    humans and once again lead humanity to the development of     very dangerous events.

A post war European installation based on human rights and the priority of human life has actually become obsolete and is no     longer the basis and central point of modern politics. The Russia-Ukraine conflict overshadowed the apparent socio-political crisis in the European Union. This irresistibly leads to serious economic and social problems and therefore contributes to the strengthening of radical forces both right wing and left-wing in many European countries.

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ERA - DONALD TRUMP

Donald Trump won a convincing victory in the US presidential election. Thanks to the peculiarities of his character, the specific manners of his behavior and the experience of an aggressive American businessman, Tramp, better than no other, realizes populism in politics at the highest level in its contemporary appearance, expressing the will of the crowd, the ohlusa, or, as  they sometimes say, the “ordinary people.”

Because what does Tramp's promise? Faster satisfaction of the interests of the least deprived sections of the population: tax      cuts, significant deregulation (a reduction in public oversight in    the private business), a trade tariff raising customs duties on    importers (including importers from the EU) to 10-20% (almost 60% for Chinese goods), mass deportation of illegal migrants, abandoning the climate change agenda. All focusing instead on energy and mining (using hydraulic fracturing technology to intensify extraction). What  steps specifically Tramp will take to deliver on all those promises is unclear for  now. Just as there are no answers to questions to do about such  a policy with a dramatic increase in public debt and a critically increasing budget deficit. But agiotage is already very noticeable  in markets and the press.

On Tramp foreign policy guided by both what the President elect himself and his close circle have said over the past four  years and what was published on the political media, it can be said that American foreign policy will be based on a simple       principle: The US will only guard its national interests and only look after security threats in North America. Washington no       longer needs to be responsible for maintaining the order of the   broad world, nor does it need to engage in a fight with countries that do not directly threaten the United States itself (regardless  of the dangers and threats these countries bring to their regions).

Under Tramp's foreign policy doctrine, the US is determined to maintain unparalleled military strength, but only to defend itself. Americans are no longer going to the risks of a military clash with Russia, either because of Ukraine or the Baltic States. Nor does the US need a confrontation with China because of Taiwan. Why should the Pentagon protect against the Hussites in the Red Sea China's trade with Europe?! For whom does Washington have any alliances with Europeans or Asians?! Let Eurasians deal with Eurasia! Trampe is counting on the geographic isolation of the United States, his nuclear arsenal, his ability to control parts of the North Pacific and Atlantic to keep potential aggressors   away. The Tramp's concept also seeks to diminish the importance of international law and the role of already virtually non working international organizations such as the UN, the UN Security Council, the WTO, etc. It will be an attempt to weaken the restrictions the legal and institutional ones that the “liberal order of the world” imposes on American power. Tramp believes that this will reduce Washington's confrontation with  Beijing, with Moscow and even with Tehran, because then         violations of these international norms can be ignored. Likewise, one can no longer worry about the fate of democracy in some    small countries thousands of kilometres beyond America's         borders.

However, in the event of a strong political interest Tramp may also make exceptions in his foreign policy. Already during his first term as President, the US facilitated the conclusion of the  Abraham Treaty, a Treaty to normalise Israel's relations with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan. Similarly, during Trampe's tenure through the US, Serbia and Kosovo agreed to normalize  economic relations, while Egypt, along with Persijs Gulf States, settled the conflict with Qatar. In addition, in February 2020, the United States struck a peace deal with the Taliban that               essentially allowed the deaths of Americans in hostilities in          Afghanistan to be prevented in the last year of the Tramp's           administration's rule.

Still, the peacekeeper's mission is far from central to Tramp. Of course, if there are any peace initiatives for councillors, then  why not realise them. But here, when it comes to trade issues and economic interests, then any friction and conflict is: for example, when China threatens Taiwan's semiconductor industry - the world's largest chip maker, on which the U.S. economy also depends. Or if US citizens fall victim to Iranian attacks in these cases, Tramp also ready to act  thousands of kilometres off the US coast.

But in general America First, i.e.America is above everything” is the defining direction in Donald Trump's politics. And it must be understood that this will have disruptive consequences for global stability in the future. World history, especially until 1945, leaves virtually no hope that the current global political crisis will peacefully settle itself. Moreover, compared to its competitors, the United States is far less powerful now than it was in 1945 or even 1991.

The modern world machine can collapse at a shocking rate. The US's abandonment of protecting the global economy will only reinforce mercantilism and protectionism. All that was seen as the norm in recent decades - free trade, unhindered passage of continents and oceans, the inadmissibility of conquering other countries - it will all turn out to be a thing of the past. The peculiarity and tragedy of Tramp's isolationist conception - which is essentially the product of a political ochlocracy that has emerged in the US - is that such policies only yield the desired fruit in the short term. In time, Americans will be forced to regret their choice of “America is above everything.” Yes, chaos and anarchy will come first to other countries, but sooner or later global catastrophic change will also come down to the US. Still, analysts around Tramp are responding to it roughly as one of the characters in Mikhail Sholochov's novel “Silent Don” put it - “die You Tonight, I Tomorrow!”

That Tramp's first term is not a coincidence, a departure from the usual norm, but the formation of a new norm the same ochlopopulism - was understandable, if not in 2016, then already in 2020 certainly. And after Joe Biden's coming to power had to seek a solution to the problem. However, the new worrying trends in US politics were never so identified, and Trampe's defeat in last election turned into his triumphal victory on November 5, 2024.

I wrote about these dangerous phenomena in the November 2020 publication “Trampe's victory”: «… the Internet and new digital technologies, along with the deformity of political competition, have led to the fact that the quality and professionalism of politicians as statesmen is no longer decisive. Policy requires organization, implementation and enforcement control. In fact, it also needs managers - competent, energetic, orderly and adequately motivated. But today we're seeing a very different picture... the real point of this election is not that Tramp has lost, but Democrats have won. The point is that a weak and untalented politician has suffered defeat while his party has significantly strengthened its positions in every other branch of power. And it's the perfect situation for an able bodied far right nationalist - a populist who will run for President in 2024..." (9). And two months later, in January 2021, in an article  “Put Your House in Order,” I pointed out that Tramp has succeeded in making the point: 'He has shifted the frames and prepared the next coming to power of the autocrat and populist in the US... and in this situation it is important not to go wrong. In the near term, populism will arm itself with respect strategies to look solemn, not marginal, and thus be a prospective political direction. This populism would turn away from those of its followers who are vulgar putting their feet on the table of the Speaker of the US House of representatives of Congress. We will witness how populism, along with the collapse of institutions, will become an alternative “modern development trend...” (10)

Tramp's victory in the 2016 election and his presence in power during the first term has, by its very nature, allowed many moral and professional restrictions in politics to be removed, not just for supporters of the Republican leader but for his opponents. Populist manipulative techniques are firmly entrenched in big politics, the substantive agenda of the day has gone to the fore, giving space for external forms and effective statements. A stark example is the much repeated and endlessly debated Republican candidate's pledge during the pre election campaign to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. And Tramp return to the White House is just one aspect of the victory of ochlopopulism (imperious political populism) as the dominant vector in world politics.

To repeat, it's not simply about some unique personality, it's about modern information technology creating the conditions for a sustained presence in power by far right populists, nationalists, iselessists prone to authoritarian methods of leadership and manipulation of mass consciousness. It is a prolonged multi-factor crisis in the global political system (see page “Political Entropy” (11) and “The New World Mess” (12).

The distinctive feature of this crisis is the overall shift in politics towards populism and the principled abandonment of the human centric content of politics. It's important to note that Trump has already gone far beyond the boundaries of Republican supporters in the US. A month before the election, the Economist published an article titled “Trampling American Politics” (13). The newspaper pointed out that the Democratic and Republican candidate's pre election programs differ little with each other, and that Tramp “transformed American politics by his image and likeness.” But indeed, before the election, Tramp vowed to bomb Mexico and deport illegals, called opposition politicians “internal enemies” and claimed migrants were “poisoning blood” of the nation. And despite all this - or perhaps even thanks to it, Tramp won nearly 50% of the electoral vote. So it comes out that all these slogans and appeals are no longer just a marginal position, but actually the views of half the US population in the 21 st century.

Perhaps particularly influential in U.S. domestic and foreign policy will now be a group of business billionaires technocrats from silicon Valley. First, it's about figures like the all known Ilona Musk and the lesser known Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal and Palantir (A U.S. data analysis software developer company whose main principals are military structures and special services - such as the Pentagon and the CIA, investment banks and hedge funds). And if Musk's role in Trampe's victory is quite direct - the SpaceX founder has spent $277 million on the Republican last campaign (14), then Thiel's participation wasn't as trivial: U.S. Vice President elect Jei di Vance found himself in that position thanks largely to Thiel's advancement. And it's with Vance, rather than simply with Tramp, that they associate their long term plans with technocrats billionaires who have cracked down on big politics. Their main future bet is artificial intelligence (AI), but their whole ideology, for the most part, is that human value and social problems no longer matter much. That the country, as a democratic institute in contemporary realities, is low-performing and merely stifles technical progress by trying to regulate AI and hindering the development of the cryptocurrency industry. According to technocrats - billionaires, the state should be managed as a business company. They believe digital technologies combined with authoritarian administration will solve all problems (15).

Judging by Tramp's nominated personalities after his election, his government will be made up entirely of people obedient  to  him and dependent on himones who will only say yes   on all    issues and in all cases. According to authoritative Western media, “Tramp's return proclaims a new golden age of money  in US politics and diplomacy” and that, apparently, “he is about to start with the billionaire cabinet.” (16)

The result of this election is not just Tramp personal merit, not just an individual phenomenon. Tramp return is another important testament to the end of the post war world machine era and the result of the rise of a global disorder  and political entropy. Trend, symbolized by Tramp, is gaining victory in many countries around the world. Therefore, this phenomenon should not be narrowed down to “trampism.” Tramp is neither the creator nor ideologue of this political direction, he has only been adept at “saddling the wave” and has become the brightest and most powerful representative of ochlocratic populism in world politics. Incidentally, even if  he had lost in the last election, the trend would surely continue   to grow in both the US and the world. 

OCHLOPOPULISM - A CELEBRATION ON “TITANIC”

A stark demonstration of the inability of world politicians to understand and confront today's challenges is the now                 increasingly obvious tragic political and diplomatic impasse in which all parties involved, one way or another, in the Russia-Ukraine conflict have found themselves. The political                diplomatic impasse is different from the military. The military   deadlock reflects the objective position of opposing forces given their potential capabilities. While the political diplomatic           impasse is the consequence of reducing the level of                    professionalism in global politics and diplomacy, abandoning     fundamental values and guiding principles.

Modern politicians work in the context of overarching populism and therefore often find themselves at a dead end: they are unable to understand and correctly assess the perspective.           Extremely sad, but no wonder they were never able to see a      window of opportunity to stop the bloodshed that opened            between autumn 2022 and winter 2023. Now known politologist Ivan Krastev out in his recent publication the Financial Times: “the special operation failed in September 2022. What we have been seeing since then is a proxy war against NATO taking        place on Ukrainian soil." (17) Right. Just what price has been       paid for these past two years and what else lies ahead?!              Somehow nobody talks about it at all.

I've been talking about the threat of a direct Russian clash with NATO on Ukrainian soil as early as summer 2021 (see “It will   be a war not with Ukraine but with the entire Western world”     (18). But that was not what Russia or the West wanted to hear    then. It wasn't until late 2021 that some in Europe and America began to realize just how real the threat of a military conflict    was, but in Russia's so-called opposition environment, it was also unable to understand anything until the start of the special military operation.

In November 2022, my letter on the need for a ceasefire             agreement and a window of opportunity opened to it was passed through the Vatican Embassy in Moscow to Pope Francis of      Rome. But neither could his voice be heard. On the other hand, in early February 2023, “Novaya Gazeta” was published as a call to stop the fire (19). Even then, however, virtually no one understood everyone expected a fictional “battlefield win.” And the moment was missed. For more than a thousand days now, the world's leading politicians have been deliberately abandoning any business like diplomatic attempt to stop the deaths of people and the destruction of an entire country. This is one of the key mistakes  throughout Western diplomacy and very much in the Bayden administration as well.

To repeat, the state of such things in global politics is defined not so much by the personal qualities of individual decision makers as by piecemeal and gradual, but perhaps irreversible, decay of the country and even the most important spheres of activity of society as a whole. And that's then the consequence of losing the value guide and replacing it thanks to socnets, with cynical post-modernist populism.

At the same time, it is also one of the main reasons for a             consistent deepening of the Middle East crisis. Israel continues  the war because neither the international bodies (UN), the US,    the European Union, nor the powerful Arab States, either            individually or together, can only put into practice, but can't          even offer any clear long term plan for ensuring security in theory. There is a deep and growing gap between declarations and even decisions taken at UN level and the possibility of implementing them in today's circumstances.

Such a global machine is a world of political entropy and chaos, namely the collapse and disorganization of global social and political processes. For example, for Russia, with its vast            territory and shrinking population, such a world is particularly   dangerous. And it has to resist. But overcoming political entropy will require principled new solutions. While as time goes on,     there is less and less reason to expect American and European   political systems to cope successfully with a crisis of increasing magnitude. It is very likely that at current political trends, the    example of the Western model of prosperity will no longer be   workable in countries such as Russia. Political processes in the West, as well as Western politicians themselves, are increasingly distancing themselves from the role models of democratic and   liberal values, generally from mainstream human values.

Understanding these threats, coupled with the real concern for the future, suggests that you will have to count first and              foremost on your own forces, not only within your own country but also in international relations. The main crisis of our era is   not so much in geopolitical confrontation as in seamless, but in  an ever increasing loss of human values and meaning in global politics, coupled with a lack of understanding of the problem. That's the essence of what's going on! Neither economic success nor strengthening military capabilities outweigh the deficit of these ideas. During this time, the area of political primary                    responsibility is to move towards key meaningful meanings,      values and goals such as saving people's lives, ensuring their       freedom, dignity and realizing opportunities for growth.

It is important to emphasise and historical experience shows that in politics, if we miss the moment, the real opportunities to       change things are lost for a very long time, and in some cases     forever. And humanity has to pay dearly for it.

The post-1945 global facility is in deep crisis. It looks like the departure  of this previous model is already irreversible. The peculiarity of modern global change is that current politicians in charge of decision-making do not have an adequate understanding of what is happening, nor any promising view of the outlook. This determines the occurrence and further expansion of chaos.

Increasingly, the observed penchant for adapting to current        conditions can be compared to the desire of “Titanic” passengers to find a more comfortable cabin on board, indelibly                  approaching a catastrophic collision with the iceberg. So, for      example, the prevailing thrill of Tramp's shocking return to the  White House, ignoring the meaning of this cambec context, is    like a triumph on “Titanic.” Because overall, what's happening,  including Trampe's victory, is a process that threatens an            ambitious but perhaps towering defeat for all the ship's               passengers, no matter what class of cabins they have.

There should be no hope of finding a comfortable and safe place in the current circumstances. It is necessary to do something differentto start designing, constructing and harmonising high quality new international security systems as quickly as possible, and at the same time to build new national institutions in principle. Both must be built on fundamental values of humanism, which can be called European, Christian or              mainstream human.

I am convinced that the most important thing for the future is the identification, understanding and acceptance by all the system of universal human values as a common central guide for the development of a multipolar world, as well as a firm commitment to institutionalize these values.

That is to say, the establishment of a programme for the       practical implementation of values, including the entire system of international and national public bodies and institutes.

Fundamentally and very importantly, all of this is realistically protected (which is a big but not yet solved task) from the distorting effects of the latest digital technologies and rapidly developing artificial intelligence.

In other words, there must be a readiness to implement reforms  that will ensure that new technologies, the country itself, with its institutes and, in general, the entire world facility, serve the human being, not the other way around.


Nav komentāru:

Ierakstīt komentāru