When I took this photo of an angry chicken in Stockholm the other day, it reminded me of someone and I knew it would come in handy. I didn't realise it would be used so soon, but given the events of the last couple days in the US, I think it is pretty fitting for now! Who would have thought even a few months ago that the US would be openly siding with one of the most vicious dictators in the world?
There is a lot to unpack there which I am not going to get into, but what is clear is that unfortunately war is likely to expand, and Europe is going to have to handle its own security. This might seem obvious, but after World War 2, the formation of NATO was a barely concealed concerted effort by the US to demilitarise Europe and increase its own power over the rest of the world, which it achieved successfully and it generated a massive amount of wealth for the US, and continues to do so. The escalation of fear of Russia has meant that countries are again buying up huge amounts of weapons to expand their military, and the major winner of those contracts is of course, the US. Nothing is as good for the weapons industry as war - or even the threat of war.
So, Europe is again going to weaponize, and has been over the last few years.
However, in the past there was an "agreement" with the US that weapons would be bought from them, in exchange for reliable protection, much like racketeering by the mafia. But, with the current US government no longer seen as a reliable military partner, nor as a reliable trade partner, the rest of the world really should be looking to decouple from reliance and instead build their own military supply chains to provide for themselves. Again, this is unfortunate, because ideally, the world would be spending money and resources on things that actually matter, like wellbeing of humanity - but instead we are spending to protect humanity from inhumanity.
The US spends 40% of military spending in the world to maintain its military, but it is also the largest seller of military equipment, selling just under 400 billion worth in 2024. That is about 45% of the total expenditure the US makes on its military, which is just over 900 billion a year. Total global military spending was in the range of about 2.5 trillion in 2023.
War generates business activity.
And really, that is what all the war is about anyway, despite idealistic claims. It is about control and power, and money is the facilitator. The US has been able to successfully leverage its economy to drive a huge amount of its income into the military to control the world and be able to offer "protection" for its allies and now, threat of removal of that protection if countries don't give it what it wants - like mining rights. Or rebuilding rights. Or whatever it can get to make more money from the war, than it put into it.
That is business.
And this business has hopefully been made painfully clear to the world now, where the "leader of the free world" (a highly ironic term) is willing to align with whoever is going to give the best monetary deal, even if it puts the world at greater risk. Paying for peace is a losing game, because greed of the peace supplier will keep increasing and the cost will become too high. Paying with natural resources is a losing game also, because once the country is depleted, the supplier moves on, leaving it even weaker than before.
While the average person spends their resources and fills their time with being entertained, our safety and security as a species is in a highly precarious situation. If there is someone playing with the threat of World War 3 at the moment, it is the US president, because they are forcing the world into a corner, and once backed in, they are forced to fight fiercely and at any cost. They have no choice.
So now Europe is going to have to weaponize, but rather than continuing buying from the US, it should be ramping up its own production capabilities in order to be self-reliant. The EU population is 1.5x the size of the US and it has production and skill capabilities in many areas. This could be good for the European economy, but let's face it - it is bad for global progress.
We really do seem doomed to repeat the past and rather than putting our minds, skills and resources to work to advance wellbeing, we will keep infighting, like spoiled rich children, trying to score points for bragging rights against the other, causing lifelong rifts between groups that should be working together, and benefiting together.
It is pathetic.
The sooner decentralisation of the economy happens, the better, because then the tax money of citizens can't be used to build wealth and power in the hands of the few, to have more control over the freedoms of those who financed the system. Us. Politics is a shambles in so many ways and has fallen s far that there is not even the guise of civility, trying to hide the true intentions. And, all of us are at an increasing risk, no matter where we live in the world, or how much wealth we have. But a select few are willing for us to pay that cost, if it gives them access to just a little bit more.
We have come so far as technologically, yet barely moved as a species.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
I understand that you have a negative view of US in regards to the NATO. I am not sure that purpose of NATO was to disarm Europe. I think purpose of NATO was to oppose Soviet Union.
The Trump administration is different from anything that we had in the past. US is becoming what you are calling it. That is what happens when you elect a convicted criminal and a liar as your president.
This was the open purpose, but there were ulterior motives. There is a very good article on it and I will try to find it a bit later for you.
And it is the start of even worse in the future I suspect.
I respect your perspective and understand that for many the initial purpose of NATO was to contain the Soviet Union during the Cold War. However, it is also valid to look at how this alliance has evolved over time, especially in terms of military dependence and spending. On the role of the current government, I believe that policy decisions should not be reduced solely to individual figures; they reflect broader, structural dynamics. In any case, it is a complex issue that requires looking beyond simplifications or personal judgements. Thank you for sharing your point of view. Think if you had been President of the US, what would your aptitude be?
Very good comparison. I thought this as well. Do you think a ten thousand year from now humanity will learn from its mistakes or that we will destroy ourselves long before that could happen?
I think we will destroy ourselves before that. I give us a few more hundred at this rate, and it isn't going to be pretty.
Also yesterday I invited a facebook friend to Hive. He is a digital artist so I thought that he may find his place here. I knew that he is sceptical about crypto but I gave it a shot anyway. So far no response. Shame. It feels like I just wasted my time writing a message...I believe that Hive has potential to change the world for the better but people are just not willing to try it. I wonder why we consider ourselves to be the smartest species...
Hive can take some handholding. The learning curve is a bit steeper, and people are accustomed to getting immediate validation or dopamine on legacy social media.
Posted using Political Hive
Yes you a right.
Dear @tarazkp, I agree that the current situation reflects a growing uncertainty about the role of the US as a global ally. European dependence on US weaponry has historically been an ambiguous arrangement, but with the loss of confidence, it is logical for Europe to seek greater military self-sufficiency. However, this path could deepen global tensions. It is worrying how economic and geopolitical interests prioritise conflict over human welfare. Decentralising economic power seems a reasonable solution to reduce inequalities and foster global cooperation, although it remains a complex challenge. Even so, we must be aware that the media and social networks are given to the task of creating uncertainty; they only publish their yellowish truth.
Great analytical work here.The enraged fowl is an ideal analogy for the present state of world events.The requirement for Europe to be self-sufficient in military goods is obvious,dependence on the US has serious effects.
It is normal for Europe to strengthen its defense capabilities, but I think the real tragedy is that instead of investing in human progress, we remain stuck in a permanent state of readiness for destruction.
Relations between countries continue as long as it serves their interests. During this relation, some countries might be used by their big brothers.
The presence of the US is both reassuring and frightening. Previous presidents were more moderate, the current president is crazy. He runs the state like he runs a small company. He has no respect for statesmen, he can harass them.
It would be good if the US lost some of its power, but what if the others get worse...
This whole thing has clearly been a staged event on the highest level. It became pretty clear with the one "press conference" that there was a planned agenda going into the meeting. It wasn't even believable on any level. The markets did exactly what they wanted, they bought and now they are boosting the markets. Just like the $50m long that was placed. Clearly and inside job. We're all sitting here playing checkers and they are playing chess and we are letting them.
Awesome pic and title! 😉😁👊 It made me chuckle..
and yea.. the USA.. selling weapons like Tony Stark..
I'm sure it's all about protecting this and that and the other and saving lives and nothing whatrsoever to do with money.
I think "normal"/"average" people struggle to accept or even acknowledge the existence of the fact that their lives only matter to those that they matter to and that most people in positions of power would discard them without a thought (never mind second ones) if it meant they could grab that aforementioned insignificant bit more for themselves.
I also think a lot of the "spoilt", "lazy" and "entitled" kids also realise this on some level which is why they have such atrociously non-existent work ethic.
having said that my kids and the other people there go above and beyond at the not-for-profit centre we work for, though there are many times we question whether head office is worth that effort as they sometimes seem to forget that they're not-for-profit, and as far as I can tell my daughter puts in her best effort at the for-profit corporation she works for
On the bright side there is a shift, I don't think it can happen too much faster than it's going at the moment but I hope it's enough.