It is a tired story about how the USA constantly took under protection from the implacable enemy, Russia, those countries that it assessed as being threatened, if not by that 'civilizational terrorist', then by authoritarian governments: Iraq (famous deadly weapons), Afghanistan (religious fundamentalism), Venezuela (supposedly authoritarian leftist regime).
The case of Syria and now Greenland, or even the whole of Europe, shows that it is completely the opposite: the USA, therefore, always protects and defends its interests, while as for East Asian despotism, it seems that it will only start to collect what it considers, like the USA, its own, especially China, which will certainly not remain 'short-sleeved' in the new world order and redistribution of the world.
Every autocratic government that is in its agonizing decline rests on the same principle, creating a far-fetched story about an internal enemy whose existence calls for patriotic hegemonism in order to defend the country from traitors and foreign mercenaries, potential destroyers of the country, etc.
We are informed in the media that, for the most part, Tramp subtly declared war on Europe, from Davos Emanuel Macron stated that Europe has "very powerful" tools at its disposal in trade matters and that they should be used, because in the event that the US introduces economic tariffs on the EU, it would be a trade "bazooka" (something like that was missing from the private messages that the French president, without an original outfit in which sunglasses stand out, sent to Trump, calling him a friend with whom great things can be done regarding Syria, while he does not understand why he created the whole situation related to Greenland now. Maybe because it is about mineral resources and the creation of military bases?; maybe because international law no longer exists and we have a policy of an aggressive Republican administration in which force dictates the rules?; maybe because globalization as we know it is significantly changing the architecture in which Europe is less and less asked for anything, although at the level of statements it is ready, as he says, to stop flattering Trump and take a position of strong resistance in the protection of its own interests?).
However, before going to Davos where the powerful from politics and business meet (Katy Perry has, for example, attracted media attention (the most influential media write), Trump reiterated that Greenland must be annexed to America, to which the Russians reacted by welcoming this Republican aspiration to annex the largest ice island, since we now see what the US policy actually is, with all the 'postcard' on which Trump, accompanied by his deputy, JD Vance He is planting an American flag in Greenlandic soil. This is what independent media analysts and political scientists, carefully nuanced in their comments, call 'the international community's nitpicking', which is an unbearable euphemism for the "politics" of the rampage of the US, because Trumpism is circling the planet collecting tribute!
This, of course, does not end the madness that rules the world or has undisguised tendencies for it, so anyone who would ask what is wrong with Alexander Dugin Before that, one should ask what is wrong with him, and he asks something like that, considering that the Kremlin philosopher and ideologue (or 'Putin's brain' as he is called, even though he only met Putin once) made a bombastic statement according to which the sovereignty of six countries - Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan - should not be recognized, since "all territories that we do not put under our control will not be neutral". Let's stop for a moment and check the logic of the philosopher, according to whom, therefore, if the countries listed not under control Russia, they cease to be neutral! - Isn't Dugin in philosophy what Trump is in politics: someone who would ban biology as an atheistic science, thus abolishing gender politics as a plague that attacks the basic cell of society or the 'portrait of an American family.'
Power beyond politics and democracy
We wrote about how the triumph of democracy would also mean the end of politics and therefore the 'end of history', as announced after the fall of the Wall. Francis Fukuyama and, in fact, he did not fail in his forecast as much as neo-Marxists and woke phenomena who prefer to move on the margins, avoiding any contact with the mainstream media, attribute to him.
The USA is showing that politics is dead and is being replaced by pure power, which is governed by the force of the stronger, and Macron has spoken openly about this, while von der Leyen advocated the view that Europe must finally protect itself because things have gone too far. So: instead of democracy that would put an end to politics, we got a power that simultaneously announced the end of democracy and politics..
No matter how the situation with Greenland develops, and it is certain that it will not be the way the Greenlanders want, NATO will not attack the USA or Europe, but the question is whether Europe has the strength to create EuropaArmyBecause it is, indeed, necessary now.
Kenan Malik defines post-politics as, on the one hand, the cynicism of citizens towards politics, and on the other, the cynicism of politicians towards democracy. This is because our approach to politics is not serious enough, which results in the disappearance of democracy, which is still only invoked by local populists, but since in globalism the local is global, and vice versa, there is no difference between Balkan populist politics and that which takes place on the world stage. With the negligible difference that in Davos the power is adorned by celebrity figures who are icons of pop art.
What must be very worrying is the fact that the leaders of Europe's most developed countries have only now realized how megalomaniac Trump's appetites are, that there is no longer any right but only the application of brute force, and that the world has found itself in a situation that could literally bring about the end of the world.
Does this mean, then, that at one point Trump 'got out of control' (such was the case with Hitler which they had long taken very lightly), suddenly deciding that the US must dominate the Western Hemisphere, thinking within the narrow framework of militaristic power where it sees that "two horse teams cannot defend themselves against Russia and China" (referring to Greenland which is then preventively taken under protection, however, in order to immediately begin exploiting resources and setting up military bases, which then makes the island a legitimate target for Russia or perhaps China in the near future). - Or: Greenland, like Venezuela, will not lose its territorial neutrality until it is under US control?
Film Fargo is inspired by a true story in which only the names have been changed out of respect for the victims, thus a tragic story is presented as a comedy, in which a pregnant policewoman solves a case in the backwoods of North Dakota, ultimately not understanding why someone would kill for a little money and end up in prison for life. The current world situation, the most brutal division of the world into three parts, needs to be told in exactly the way the brothers managed to do it Koen: this mixture of tragedy and farce, in which we constantly wonder whether it is even possible to talk about the future from a common sense perspective, should be told in a comical way that will have undisguised elements of absurdity, given that Trump and Putin are both quite reserved and difficult to decipher Si Ji Ping, a trio that has managed to introduce us to the so-called 'interesting times', which are characterized by being completely uncertain on every level.
Bonus video:
